I don't know. Ask the thousands of players every day that do
There's not really a way to know what is and isn't duped and what is and isn't farmed by bots. Once it's in the economy, it's part of the completely legitimate trading game. Should we deny ourselves trading opportunities?
Well I'd personally deny myself the trading opportunity if I was going for a completionist kind of gameplay (which I usually do). If I'm just going to have fun I'll gladly respec characters whichever way I want and then obtain tons of crazy gear just to see how it feels. But when I'm completing the game I prefer to do it the right way and I can't understand why any real Diablo enthusiast would try and cheat in such a way. As far as I'm concerned an item I have botted, duped or traded isn't mine because I didn't earn it, it is an unfair advantage and ruins the feel of the game.
I guess some people never learn but mostly I and surely many others have already discovered that cheating isn't fun. I cheated throught several single player games and playing them just wasn't fun anymore when all the options were unlocked, everything was possible and any goal was within my reach. There's no fun without challenge and the best thing about Diablo is the endless hunt for the best item you could get. If you just buy, dupe or bot it then any appeal that Diablo has goes out the window. Just looking at youtube videos with characters head to toes garbed in the best items possible makes me go
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A soft answer turneth away wrath. Once wrath is looking the other way, shoot it in the head!
People look at difficulty the wrong way. Difficulty should scale well with two factors--player skill and character power (gear and level). This scaling should be nice and smooth so that the game remains fun for everyone.
I don't have time for a graph, but in words, every player should be able to progress without hitting a brick wall if putting enough time (or sadly money) into gearing up.... Up to the point where player skill becomes the absolute limiting factor (e.g. in best possible gear a player of that skill can't every beat that level). So basically, up to your skill ceiling, putting in time to gain better gear (and levels) can allow a bad player to suceed; a good player will just succeed faster.
A bad game would have roadblocks where the game is suddenly too hard and require way too much farming of earlier levels for that stage in the game, or worse, a discontinuity where a player fails and is forced to quit when if past that point they could continue on fine.
--
In terms of the original post, the character power (gear plus level) is actually not that bad for the "Level 1s" in question. It might be a bit alarming if a naked level 1 suceeded, but even then its so early in the game who cares?
And I got through most of hell mode with a naked sorceress in Diablo 2 and I'm not even that great a player....but I had to play very differently than I normally would; I wouldn't conclude Diablo 2 was way too easy....
I'm very tempted to beat the countess in D2 with a tweaked level 1 character just to prove how silly this "OMG the game is easy in the first 10 minutes" - debate is..
I was thinking the exact same thing.
It wouldn't take much to make the game look really easy.
So,.. people are beating the beta "boss" which isn't even an ACT boss in the real game, not to mention it's possibly the first "strong" monster you encounter in the game with a tweaked out character with potions and is calling the entire game simple and easy?...
You know, I remember when I thought Hogger was the strongest mob in the game, but that doesn't mean Kel'Thuzad in 40man Naxx was a push over....
But if people want to think it is a fair representation, sure lol.
There's no need to apologize for your post, Magistrate. The writings on the wall and nobody's going to blame you for posting about a video and an interview talking about the game being too easy. You've been waiting for this game for an entire decade, you're entitled to your opinion. This dev team isn't the same team that brought you D1 and D2, even though those same old timers later made games that were big flops.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Some people tell me I'm going to hell. I just let them know that I've already packed my bags!
Actually, Hogger isn't even a fair representation. You got a quest to kill him at the last quest hub in the zone. A more accurate mob would be that gold digging candle lover in the mines. GG.
Basing our opinion of D3's overall difficulty on 1/3 of 1/4 of 1/4 of the game (that's 1/48th of the game) is obviously unwise. I would also argue that basing our opinion of D3's overall difficulty on out-of-context quotes is also unwise.
He said there will be a wall in Hell difficulty, and that it will be beyond the abilities of some players. That's all I need to know, because there's an entire other difficulty level to get through.
But the bigger issue is this: The replayability of D3 is not inextricably linked to its difficulty. It is, however, inextricably linked to being fun, fresh-feeling, and challenging. If a game is too insanely difficult, where luck and co-ordination become more important than skill.. and if most players hit the limits of their abilities before they get to Inferno and can farm for end-game gear, the game will have far LESS replayability than the scenario described in the interview.
If some players hit their limits in Nightmare, and a lot of players hit their limits in Hell, then D3 will fail. Challenging is one thing. But WoW end-game raid caliber difficulty, with insanely unforgiving co-ordination and wipe mechanics, has no place in the Diablo universe, imo.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions."
-Thomas Jefferson
Basing our opinion of D3's overall difficulty on 1/3 of 1/4 of 1/4 of the game (that's 1/48th of the game) is obviously unwise. Basing our opinion of D3's overall difficulty on out-of-context quotes is also unwise.
He said there will be a wall in Hell difficulty, and that it will be beyond the abilities of some players. That's all I need to know, because there's an entire other difficulty level to get through.
But the bigger issue is this: The replayability of D3 is not inextricably linked to its difficulty. It is, however, inextricably linked to being fun, fresh-feeling, and challenging. If a game is too insanely difficult, where luck and co-ordination become more important than skill.. and if most players hit the limits of their abilities before they get to Inferno and can farm for end-game gear, the game will have far LESS replayability than the scenario described in the the interview.
If some players hit their limits in Nightmare, and a lot of players hit their limits in Hell, then D3 will fail. Challenging is one thing. But WoW end-game raid caliber difficulty, with insanely unforgiving co-ordination and wipe mechanics, has no place in the Diablo universe, imo.
Hard should be hard.
If you are not able to play through hard then either put the effort in or don't and stay in normal/nightmare.
I'm really okay with normal being easy and nightmare being normal but hell should be hard and inferno very hard.
No challenge is what kills replayability, because it shorten it's first playthrough. I'm not saying only 0.01% of player should be able to play without issue but it should feel hard at a certain point for even the good players.
I am in complete agreement with you guys. You should not be able to complete Hell unless you are very skilled and very diligent, and have farmed for the gear necessary to complete Hell. Hell should weed out the casuals.
Inferno should be even more difficult. Inferno should be crazy hard.
However, my original point is twofold, and doesn't treat the topic of "how hard is hard?"
Point 1. If difficulty is the only replay mechanic that extends the life of the game, then Blizzard has designed a game with very poor replay value.
Point 2. At no point in the interview did I extrapolate the idea that Hell would be only sorta hard, and Inferno quite hard. If The 2nd hardest difficulty is already weeding people out, and the final difficulty is more difficult than that, that's all the challenge that is needed for me.
Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the article thoroughly, and I love Mag's passion. Just providing some counterpoint for discussion.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions."
-Thomas Jefferson
I am in complete agreement with you guys. You should not be able to complete Hell unless you are very skilled and very diligent, and have farmed for the gear necessary to complete Hell. Hell should weed out the casuals.
Inferno should be even more difficult. Inferno should be crazy hard.
However, my original point is twofold, and doesn't treat the topic of "how hard is hard?"
Point 1. If difficulty is the only replay mechanic that extends the life of the game, then Blizzard has designed a game with very poor replay value.
Point 2. At no point in the interview did I extrapolate the idea that Hell would be only sorta hard, and Inferno quite hard. If The 2nd hardest difficulty is already weeding people out, and the final difficulty is more difficult than that, that's all the challenge that is needed for me.
Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the article thoroughly, and I love Mag's passion. Just providing some counterpoint for discussion.
Yeah of course if something is stupidly hard that it is in fact broken both solo and with 2,3,4 people (like no way to go through without buying items at the RMAH which are available later in the game or very very very rare) then yes it's poor design. Still I don't believe that's the case, it wasn't in D2 which I believe is a more broken game than D3 will be, I believe careful planning and skill will make your way through Hell (inferno might be a bit different) at least and if something is too hard solo or multi it will be doable multi or solo.
The replay value in such a game should be that it is fun in two ways:
- the lore, gameplay, ambience etc should be good enough that playing the game feels great
- for people that feel challenge = fun, don't twink
- If you just want an easier replay through, then twink. In fact the first character is always the hardest.
thats wut im wondering...is how did he get to that point without doing ANY QUEST or kill ONE monster inorder to get there...i dont get it how did he become lvl 1 TO the skelly king......that would seem harder to do then kill the skelly king at lvl 1
You don't need to plan skill, you can swap them all the time infinitely
planning is not equal to plan skill duh.
planning is about having a plan.
having a plan in D3 is : having good skill combination (knowing them) for what is to come, having the good runes for it, knowing the right balance between dps and survival stats etc. etc.
it's the opposite of screwing around not knowing what you do.
No offense Magistrate, but you really come across here as not knowing what you're talking about. You claim characters should be level 11-13 when they fight the skeleton king? Try 6-7. The only reason anyone higher than that is fighting him in the beta is cause there's nothing else to do.
And yes, a level 1 character wearing level 13 gear is going to outclass a level 7 fight. Duh. The only thing opened up by levels now is different skills to use, and a fight this simple requires no more strategy than "run away when he's gonna spin". Gear is everything.
Here's how I see it, keeping it nice and simple for us all to think about.
Beta = not the complete game. They release it to test things out before release. Once they see what needs work, they fix it before the release. That's why it's called Diablo 3 beta.
I don't quite understand how easily people can forget that. They have been working on it for so long, you know they are gonna get it right, just have faith.
I do, however, completely agree with Magistrate's point.
We have to realize that yes, we are hearing more and more AWESOME news about this game as the weeks go by, but it is still a few months away at least. We must stop acting like they only have 2 weeks to tweak every little bit of the game.
Quite honestly, I am glad I haven't won a beta key (that's a lie, but hear me out). Those (un)fortunate souls who have been (cursed)blessed with the opportunity to play the beta have only been given a tip of the iceberg to tease to think they got a taste of what Diablo 3 is going to be like. With so many decisions to be made about skills, other systems, and the storyline/lore to be discovered, trust me: we have no idea what the game is going to be like.
Be patient, you must.
They are not waiting for the game to be ready for release; they are waiting for the world to be ready for the game to release.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Does anybody really know what time it is?
Does anybody really care?
I'm also kind of shocked people are worried about the difficulty of a game that is a sequel to a game that wasn't extremely difficult in the first place.
For all of you who are acting like you are easily going to beat this game, did you find Diablo 2 incredibly challenging?
A group of three friends and I just ran through normal, nightmare and hell together without farming loot or really doing any runs at all... we just went from A1 normal to A5 hell. One person ended up dying in A5 to gloams and the other two lived.
Diablo isn't meant to be some super challenging game. Sure, it's nice to have things that are very difficult in the game and I'm sure there will be. But Diablo 1 and Diablo 2 both weren't super challenging video games. You guys act like they are dumbing something down that comes from a long line of super challenging games or something.
I hope the difficulty level is right around where Diablo 2 was. I thought that was great.
No offense Magistrate, but you really come across here as not knowing what you're talking about. You claim characters should be level 11-13 when they fight the skeleton king? Try 6-7. The only reason anyone higher than that is fighting him in the beta is cause there's nothing else to do.
And yes, a level 1 character wearing level 13 gear is going to outclass a level 7 fight. Duh. The only thing opened up by levels now is different skills to use, and a fight this simple requires no more strategy than "run away when he's gonna spin". Gear is everything.
None taken Yes, all of that has been pointed out to me. Thanks for your response!
My feedback is that this was a well written article that rightfully questions the difficulty of the game. A freaking level 1 of each class can defeat the Skeleton KING? That's a bit ridiculous in my mind; forget being easy, that is just a downright gift.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I guess some people never learn but mostly I and surely many others have already discovered that cheating isn't fun. I cheated throught several single player games and playing them just wasn't fun anymore when all the options were unlocked, everything was possible and any goal was within my reach. There's no fun without challenge and the best thing about Diablo is the endless hunt for the best item you could get. If you just buy, dupe or bot it then any appeal that Diablo has goes out the window. Just looking at youtube videos with characters head to toes garbed in the best items possible makes me go
I don't have time for a graph, but in words, every player should be able to progress without hitting a brick wall if putting enough time (or sadly money) into gearing up.... Up to the point where player skill becomes the absolute limiting factor (e.g. in best possible gear a player of that skill can't every beat that level). So basically, up to your skill ceiling, putting in time to gain better gear (and levels) can allow a bad player to suceed; a good player will just succeed faster.
A bad game would have roadblocks where the game is suddenly too hard and require way too much farming of earlier levels for that stage in the game, or worse, a discontinuity where a player fails and is forced to quit when if past that point they could continue on fine.
--
In terms of the original post, the character power (gear plus level) is actually not that bad for the "Level 1s" in question. It might be a bit alarming if a naked level 1 suceeded, but even then its so early in the game who cares?
And I got through most of hell mode with a naked sorceress in Diablo 2 and I'm not even that great a player....but I had to play very differently than I normally would; I wouldn't conclude Diablo 2 was way too easy....
Come on, D2 Act 1 normal without /players 8 was just for noobs and D3 is going to be the same.
Most of us know about this game but any new player shall get used to it.
Blizz will just try to give noobs a nice introduction, they can't scare people away or they'll lose customers.
I just hope difficulty increases exponentially after Normal.
I was thinking the exact same thing.
It wouldn't take much to make the game look really easy.
You know, I remember when I thought Hogger was the strongest mob in the game, but that doesn't mean Kel'Thuzad in 40man Naxx was a push over....
But if people want to think it is a fair representation, sure lol.
He said there will be a wall in Hell difficulty, and that it will be beyond the abilities of some players. That's all I need to know, because there's an entire other difficulty level to get through.
But the bigger issue is this: The replayability of D3 is not inextricably linked to its difficulty. It is, however, inextricably linked to being fun, fresh-feeling, and challenging. If a game is too insanely difficult, where luck and co-ordination become more important than skill.. and if most players hit the limits of their abilities before they get to Inferno and can farm for end-game gear, the game will have far LESS replayability than the scenario described in the interview.
If some players hit their limits in Nightmare, and a lot of players hit their limits in Hell, then D3 will fail. Challenging is one thing. But WoW end-game raid caliber difficulty, with insanely unforgiving co-ordination and wipe mechanics, has no place in the Diablo universe, imo.
-Thomas Jefferson
Hard should be hard.
If you are not able to play through hard then either put the effort in or don't and stay in normal/nightmare.
I'm really okay with normal being easy and nightmare being normal but hell should be hard and inferno very hard.
No challenge is what kills replayability, because it shorten it's first playthrough. I'm not saying only 0.01% of player should be able to play without issue but it should feel hard at a certain point for even the good players.
I am in complete agreement with you guys. You should not be able to complete Hell unless you are very skilled and very diligent, and have farmed for the gear necessary to complete Hell. Hell should weed out the casuals.
Inferno should be even more difficult. Inferno should be crazy hard.
However, my original point is twofold, and doesn't treat the topic of "how hard is hard?"
Point 1. If difficulty is the only replay mechanic that extends the life of the game, then Blizzard has designed a game with very poor replay value.
Point 2. At no point in the interview did I extrapolate the idea that Hell would be only sorta hard, and Inferno quite hard. If The 2nd hardest difficulty is already weeding people out, and the final difficulty is more difficult than that, that's all the challenge that is needed for me.
Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the article thoroughly, and I love Mag's passion. Just providing some counterpoint for discussion.
-Thomas Jefferson
Yeah of course if something is stupidly hard that it is in fact broken both solo and with 2,3,4 people (like no way to go through without buying items at the RMAH which are available later in the game or very very very rare) then yes it's poor design. Still I don't believe that's the case, it wasn't in D2 which I believe is a more broken game than D3 will be, I believe careful planning and skill will make your way through Hell (inferno might be a bit different) at least and if something is too hard solo or multi it will be doable multi or solo.
The replay value in such a game should be that it is fun in two ways:
- the lore, gameplay, ambience etc should be good enough that playing the game feels great
- for people that feel challenge = fun, don't twink
- If you just want an easier replay through, then twink. In fact the first character is always the hardest.
You don't need to plan skill, you can swap them all the time infinitely
planning is not equal to plan skill duh.
planning is about having a plan.
having a plan in D3 is : having good skill combination (knowing them) for what is to come, having the good runes for it, knowing the right balance between dps and survival stats etc. etc.
it's the opposite of screwing around not knowing what you do.
And yes, a level 1 character wearing level 13 gear is going to outclass a level 7 fight. Duh. The only thing opened up by levels now is different skills to use, and a fight this simple requires no more strategy than "run away when he's gonna spin". Gear is everything.
Beta = not the complete game. They release it to test things out before release. Once they see what needs work, they fix it before the release. That's why it's called Diablo 3 beta.
I don't quite understand how easily people can forget that. They have been working on it for so long, you know they are gonna get it right, just have faith.
I do, however, completely agree with Magistrate's point.
We have to realize that yes, we are hearing more and more AWESOME news about this game as the weeks go by, but it is still a few months away at least. We must stop acting like they only have 2 weeks to tweak every little bit of the game.
Quite honestly, I am glad I haven't won a beta key (that's a lie, but hear me out). Those (un)fortunate souls who have been (cursed)blessed with the opportunity to play the beta have only been given a tip of the iceberg to tease to think they got a taste of what Diablo 3 is going to be like. With so many decisions to be made about skills, other systems, and the storyline/lore to be discovered, trust me: we have no idea what the game is going to be like.
Be patient, you must.
They are not waiting for the game to be ready for release; they are waiting for the world to be ready for the game to release.
Does anybody really care?
For all of you who are acting like you are easily going to beat this game, did you find Diablo 2 incredibly challenging?
A group of three friends and I just ran through normal, nightmare and hell together without farming loot or really doing any runs at all... we just went from A1 normal to A5 hell. One person ended up dying in A5 to gloams and the other two lived.
Diablo isn't meant to be some super challenging game. Sure, it's nice to have things that are very difficult in the game and I'm sure there will be. But Diablo 1 and Diablo 2 both weren't super challenging video games. You guys act like they are dumbing something down that comes from a long line of super challenging games or something.
I hope the difficulty level is right around where Diablo 2 was. I thought that was great.
None taken Yes, all of that has been pointed out to me. Thanks for your response!