Undergeared not really, low level I guess that depends on how you view it.
I'd play through on solo and by the time I reached Hell there was at least one occurrence like that.
To me I think you should be able to make a solid play through on single player in order for it to be balanced. Sure there will be some parts you may die 8+ times or more attempting but it shouldn't be to where I have to get rid of the monster by reloading the game to get through.
Of course that's my opinion though.
But I mean, a lot of single player roleplaying games have all kinds of challenging elements, whereas Diablo doesnt and cant as a hack n' slash.
I really dont think most of you are sitting down and looking at the fact the only real difficulty in Diablo were the enemies. Its not like you had to deal with horrible difficulty in every part of the entire acts. It was just, on occasion, some mobs would be too hard to take down, and, with that, an instant remedy - to level - was given. I don't think that really merits saying Diablo 2's difficulty system was messed up, or monsters shouldnt be immune. I do agree there can be other systems rather than just pure immunity, but, I mean, difficulty isnt supposed to change gameplay... Its just making the monsters "harder" by adding more layers on defense/protection onto them. If you stray too far, you end up having a different game with each difficulty.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"When men are most sure and arrogant, they are commonly the most mistaken, and have then given views to passion, without that proper deliberation and suspense which can alone secure them from the grossest absurdities"
I loved it how d2 at times was insanely hard, like maybe 1 in every 50 baal runs the throne would just be covered in unique souls that shoot you from 2 screen away and kill most players in 1 hit lol. It actually made it challenging, most people would cry and leave the game but I would just take them on. Another one of those crazy 1 hitters are those little Stygian dolls i think they're called where they're very small and hard to see and run almost as fast as you teleport lol.
If anything I hope d3 is even harder, because d2 got to the point for me where pvm was a joke (kill hell baal full game in like 3 seconds) and the only challenge for me that kept me playing was pvping and trying to get all perfect pvp gear.
EDIT: I do realise however it did basically come down to gear in d2 and how long a person plays so i know this most likely won't happen but it would be neat if they release a difficulty after hell that is insanely hard, even with perfect gear you will need to work with other players and stack skills and work effectively as a team to have a chance of surviving. idk lol
I enjoyed the insane immunities and what not(mainly because i was a necro and could get passed almost anything) but i think the main reason they made the immunities like that so people playing on battle.net even with insane equipment had to have help from other ppl in order to get through. I have to agree being a sorc in hell by yourself was extremelly unfair. I played single player for a long time and the only player i managed to kill baal on hell difficulty was the necro. You'd think it would be the hammerdin but u need good equip to do good damage and the merc died all the time (also i hated using the hammerdin) sorc was fun (until i hit hell) couldnt even get past act 1. Really anything that did any elemental damage or just physical couldnt get through much of hell by itself. I think that if they do use immunities that they should have two types of elements at your disposal.
As a ice sorc, before patch 1.10, I played avidly. She had full tal'rashas and some other stuff I cant remember now and she was level 88...
In hell difficulty, with the freezing orb, I never had any problems.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"When men are most sure and arrogant, they are commonly the most mistaken, and have then given views to passion, without that proper deliberation and suspense which can alone secure them from the grossest absurdities"
Correct me if I'm wrong, as its been a few years since I've played... But...
I remember blasting away and even killing cold immune monsters, it just took longer... So...
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"When men are most sure and arrogant, they are commonly the most mistaken, and have then given views to passion, without that proper deliberation and suspense which can alone secure them from the grossest absurdities"
Cold Immune monsters? No way you could do that with a cold spell.
Which I think is why it was imbalance in some aspects. If you're a cold sorc, you're done for. You could multiskill of course but you'll end up a bit weaker and monsters CAN spawn with two immunes I believe.
Correct me if I'm wrong, as its been a few years since I've played... But...
I remember blasting away and even killing cold immune monsters, it just took longer... So...
I actually never made an ice sorc so i'm not 100% positive on this but doesn't the skill Cold Mastery lower enemy cold resists resulting in breaking most cold immunes? Plus if you have facets etc that also adds to lowering the enemy resists. I remember reading somewhere (however have forgotten the actual specific numbers) that for e.g. monster #1 has 130 cold res (aka cold immune) and then once you take into account all immune lowering skills/items monster #1's cold res is now 75 and is therefore not a full immunity and can still be damaged, however, its only slight dmg and can take a while to kill him. which i think explains why you could still kill cold immunes.
Dont quote me on this tho like i said ive never made a cold sorc, i only ever used chars that didnt really have any trouble regarding immunities like hdins, nova infinity sorcs, psn, bone and summoner necros and smiters lol
I actually never made an ice sorc so i'm not 100% positive on this but doesn't the skill Cold Mastery lower enemy cold resists resulting in breaking most cold immunes?
No it does not. It can't lower it enough. It lowers resists, but it can't break a cold immune.
Anyway sure if you're level 97 with items given to you everything is fine and dandy, but I'm talking about a single player playthrough. When you reach hell what level would you be? 60ish?
I always managed to run into a monster that would break gameplay. Sure I can reload and it'll be gone or I can go back and grind, but I'm still having to avoid that monster by exiting the game.
No it does not. It can't lower it enough. It lowers resists, but it can't break a cold immune.
Anyway sure if you're level 97 with items given to you everything is fine and dandy, but I'm talking about a single player playthrough. When you reach hell what level would you be? 60ish?
I always managed to run into a monster that would break gameplay. Sure I can reload and it'll be gone or I can go back and grind, but I'm still having to avoid that monster by exiting the game.
ah k, i wasn't too sure about that one.
To me diablo was always a multiplayer game. I agree with you that single player is much much harder than bnet play simply due to the shortage of items available to you and also you dont have other players helping you. i still wouldnt mind seeing immunes just perhaps they can find a way where they dont have them on single player (or 1 player bnet games), however, when playing in a game with multiple players then they can start bringing some in which will then mean that you need to actually work as a team. Just my opinion tho. I also liked the fact how on bnet with more players in the game the more harder the monsters got and better chance of drops. that was possible in single player aswell if you type in /player 8 or something, dont remember.
Every difficulty was the same exact stuff, just even harder... How are they supposed to increase difficulty without putting more immunities and whatnot on monsters? Without that, it'd be very plain to just go from normal to hell difficulty with the monsters a bit stronger and nothing else.
What did you guys expect, though? It is "HELL" Difficulty. If the game isnt giving you "HELL" when you play it, then its a poor title for a difficulty... Lots of hell in Diablo, eh?
Also, about how difficult all the immune monsters were... You dont have to play on the Hell difficulty to get the full game, really. So I don't think that is a valid point.
The game of Diablo and Diablo 2 are entirely about gaining levels. And via those levels, your character becomes much stronger to combat the burning legions. Without a higher level character, I'm sure Hell difficulty will always remain a "pain" in the ass... Or... A Hell in the ass?
Even having a lvl 99 fber, you still cant kill the fire immune monsters, because they're immune to fire. For immunes, your lvl doesnt really matter, you still cant kill it, unless you wanna try and telek it to death, which in my experience, takes a long time.
Im not against getting rid of the immunities, I liked them. I thought it was fun. But I understand how other people might dislike them if they didnt have internet and were forced to play single player.
i still wouldnt mind seeing immunes just perhaps they can find a way where they dont have them on single player (or 1 player bnet games), however, when playing in a game with multiple players then they can start bringing some in which will then mean that you need to actually work as a team.
Yeah that doesn't sound too bad, nor impossible to implement. I think that would be a good idea.
I mainly played as a necro, and I've played all types, boner, summon, curse, and my favorite melee necro.
The reason I played as a melee necro was because it made the game that much harder for myself. I would put no points into spear, spirit, teeth, skellies or revives. This makes the first act normal quite difficult with no abilities until lvl 6. And this would force me to use golems and poison dagger. Sure it was impossible in parts of hell, but I made it that way so that it would be harder through the rest of the game as well. But if they removed the immunes from hell, I would have been able to play through all difficulties and actually finish hell. Plus, the melee necro got so much respect when I would pvp a sorc or barb and win. I just want to be able to play every single class as either melee or ranged, depending on the player's choice. For those who might ask, I didn't play as the general melee character, the Barb because 1, my younger brother played as the barb,;) and 2, I just found him more boring.
Did anyone else handicap their player on purpose by using an incredibly uncommon build?
I liked the difficulty ramp we had in D2 but I can understand some kind of characters had more troubles with immune and/or some kind of nasty aura/skill combo in Hell.
Mostly this affected single players (i played mainly sp) so could be a good idea tho fix this problem.
But I still loved the game and rarely had to exit and reload to avoid a peculiar enemy.
I still say keep immunities. in d2 there were still ways to get passed immunities, although they were generally quite expensive. the runeword infinity helped heaps, as did socketed facets and also just a merc with nice gear was easily able to take them all down for you in hell mode.
I still like my idea how in 1 player games there should be no immunities, but when more players join the game then start bringing immunities in along with making the monsters harder, more hit points etc.
Element characters were always highly powered so immunitieis added at least a negative side to it. melee chars have to get in close, dont do as much dmg, take longer and then they have attack rating to worry about. Element chars can deal out 40k dmg etc (lite sorcs) and shoot from 2 screens away with no chance of missing due to attack rating. So immunities are a good thing imo lol.
I seriously want a VERY difficult level. I mean, I plan on seriously comitting to my character online. I want to have the feeling that improving my character will feel worthwhile even if I manage to reach max level. If the game becomes easy, it will be boring to continue. Repetitive "boss runs" for loot becomes boring very quickly. An insane difficulty level where player teams are basically a necessity (and where rewards come thereafter) would only enhance the fun. If we can just plow through all the mobs there will ultimately be little fun.
And, yes, Diablo 2 was way too easy at all difficulty levels.
haha yep i agree fully. something beyond hell mode. like uber tristram and the organset lvl style difficulty but even harder. that would be the best
i thinkit would be good if they added on another very small act for something like in heaven an angel has gone corrupt and you have to go kill him i duno but like a extra bonus for defeating it on hell but obviously the act would be 99%impossible
i think each char should not be able to kill every monster in the game... forces people to play together and diversify builds.... big deal you can't kill 3 mobs in hell its suppose to be that hard
The original Diablo was what I myself considered a breeze, something that could be beaten in a matter of hours. Diablo 2 was made with more difficulty, and more monsters, bosses, areas, etc. It only makes sense if Diablo 3 is more difficult than the last, because you're factoring in a lot of new classes, and fighting styles, not to mention the new 'interaction' with the environment around you. It sounds promising, and I hope it to live up to it's reputation. I myself have played the entire Diablo series for over...8 years now in total, and I never get tired of it. Diablo 3 has been long awaited by many fans who have loyally followed it, and I think they are also wanting it to be more challenging than the last. What's the point in making it easier?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"From the smallest necessity to the highest religious abstraction, from the wheel to the skyscraper, everything we are and everything we have comes from one attribute of man - the function of his reasoning mind." ~ Ayn Rand
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
But I mean, a lot of single player roleplaying games have all kinds of challenging elements, whereas Diablo doesnt and cant as a hack n' slash.
I really dont think most of you are sitting down and looking at the fact the only real difficulty in Diablo were the enemies. Its not like you had to deal with horrible difficulty in every part of the entire acts. It was just, on occasion, some mobs would be too hard to take down, and, with that, an instant remedy - to level - was given. I don't think that really merits saying Diablo 2's difficulty system was messed up, or monsters shouldnt be immune. I do agree there can be other systems rather than just pure immunity, but, I mean, difficulty isnt supposed to change gameplay... Its just making the monsters "harder" by adding more layers on defense/protection onto them. If you stray too far, you end up having a different game with each difficulty.
If anything I hope d3 is even harder, because d2 got to the point for me where pvm was a joke (kill hell baal full game in like 3 seconds) and the only challenge for me that kept me playing was pvping and trying to get all perfect pvp gear.
EDIT: I do realise however it did basically come down to gear in d2 and how long a person plays so i know this most likely won't happen but it would be neat if they release a difficulty after hell that is insanely hard, even with perfect gear you will need to work with other players and stack skills and work effectively as a team to have a chance of surviving. idk lol
Just if your worse, you will spend more time grinding than if you are better... simple as that.
As a ice sorc, before patch 1.10, I played avidly. She had full tal'rashas and some other stuff I cant remember now and she was level 88...
In hell difficulty, with the freezing orb, I never had any problems.
What about a monster with cold immunity? :confused:
I always hated finding a element immune.
I remember blasting away and even killing cold immune monsters, it just took longer... So...
Which I think is why it was imbalance in some aspects. If you're a cold sorc, you're done for. You could multiskill of course but you'll end up a bit weaker and monsters CAN spawn with two immunes I believe.
I actually never made an ice sorc so i'm not 100% positive on this but doesn't the skill Cold Mastery lower enemy cold resists resulting in breaking most cold immunes? Plus if you have facets etc that also adds to lowering the enemy resists. I remember reading somewhere (however have forgotten the actual specific numbers) that for e.g. monster #1 has 130 cold res (aka cold immune) and then once you take into account all immune lowering skills/items monster #1's cold res is now 75 and is therefore not a full immunity and can still be damaged, however, its only slight dmg and can take a while to kill him. which i think explains why you could still kill cold immunes.
Dont quote me on this tho like i said ive never made a cold sorc, i only ever used chars that didnt really have any trouble regarding immunities like hdins, nova infinity sorcs, psn, bone and summoner necros and smiters lol
No it does not. It can't lower it enough. It lowers resists, but it can't break a cold immune.
Anyway sure if you're level 97 with items given to you everything is fine and dandy, but I'm talking about a single player playthrough. When you reach hell what level would you be? 60ish?
I always managed to run into a monster that would break gameplay. Sure I can reload and it'll be gone or I can go back and grind, but I'm still having to avoid that monster by exiting the game.
ah k, i wasn't too sure about that one.
To me diablo was always a multiplayer game. I agree with you that single player is much much harder than bnet play simply due to the shortage of items available to you and also you dont have other players helping you. i still wouldnt mind seeing immunes just perhaps they can find a way where they dont have them on single player (or 1 player bnet games), however, when playing in a game with multiple players then they can start bringing some in which will then mean that you need to actually work as a team. Just my opinion tho. I also liked the fact how on bnet with more players in the game the more harder the monsters got and better chance of drops. that was possible in single player aswell if you type in /player 8 or something, dont remember.
Even having a lvl 99 fber, you still cant kill the fire immune monsters, because they're immune to fire. For immunes, your lvl doesnt really matter, you still cant kill it, unless you wanna try and telek it to death, which in my experience, takes a long time.
Im not against getting rid of the immunities, I liked them. I thought it was fun. But I understand how other people might dislike them if they didnt have internet and were forced to play single player.
Yeah that doesn't sound too bad, nor impossible to implement. I think that would be a good idea.
I mainly played as a necro, and I've played all types, boner, summon, curse, and my favorite melee necro.
The reason I played as a melee necro was because it made the game that much harder for myself. I would put no points into spear, spirit, teeth, skellies or revives. This makes the first act normal quite difficult with no abilities until lvl 6. And this would force me to use golems and poison dagger. Sure it was impossible in parts of hell, but I made it that way so that it would be harder through the rest of the game as well. But if they removed the immunes from hell, I would have been able to play through all difficulties and actually finish hell. Plus, the melee necro got so much respect when I would pvp a sorc or barb and win. I just want to be able to play every single class as either melee or ranged, depending on the player's choice. For those who might ask, I didn't play as the general melee character, the Barb because 1, my younger brother played as the barb,;) and 2, I just found him more boring.
Did anyone else handicap their player on purpose by using an incredibly uncommon build?
Mostly this affected single players (i played mainly sp) so could be a good idea tho fix this problem.
But I still loved the game and rarely had to exit and reload to avoid a peculiar enemy.
I was also used to die often
I still like my idea how in 1 player games there should be no immunities, but when more players join the game then start bringing immunities in along with making the monsters harder, more hit points etc.
Element characters were always highly powered so immunitieis added at least a negative side to it. melee chars have to get in close, dont do as much dmg, take longer and then they have attack rating to worry about. Element chars can deal out 40k dmg etc (lite sorcs) and shoot from 2 screens away with no chance of missing due to attack rating. So immunities are a good thing imo lol.
haha yep i agree fully. something beyond hell mode. like uber tristram and the organset lvl style difficulty but even harder. that would be the best