-The items in inferno were probably items that would have been in hell.
You don't know that for sure. Yes, they're spending development time in Inferno, but it's probably a lot more quality time than D2 devs did in Nightmare and Hell. It should be if they want to get this right.
If inferno wasn't around, hell would have been the standing "end game" (in an item definition).
More like the "last boss of the last act" by himself would be the "end game". Maybe add 2-3 other small bosses (worth it) who are so easy to kill it's almost like "farmville".
My point here is that instead of playing the same content 3 times leveling into end game, all they apparently did was make the best of the best items drop after you're already level 60 in the same environment you've already been playing in the entire time while leveling up. It may very well be more difficult, it's supposed to be, but that's not my point. All I'm saying is while this beats farming specific bosses over and over, it's going to be extremely tedious all the same playing through the same zones from start to finish as well- period.
Still, I'd rather finish it once to see if it is indeed a "different difficulty" and then decide "ok, since I can farm good gear and runes from start to finish, I think I'll do it in act 2, which was the most challenging one.. maybe when I'm not in the mood of fighting 'x' set of monsters (which are harder to kill for my spec/build) I'll go to act 3 which is a lot more fun and less demanding.. and when I'm kind of tired from 'y' theme of jungles I'll go to act 4 fight Diablo again for variety's sake". All that presuming we can get good drops from start to finish and presuming also that difficulty is "somewhat even" among all 4 acts.
Now think about it. Being able to choose that instead of being forced into 1 boss should make it a lot more enjoyable.
Personally I do agree with you that anything PvP related would make the game just better instead of detracting from it (and would add to "my" end-game), but that's me and I'm somewhat ok with the "Diablo is PvE" mentality, as long as they get that right.
People, generally, are still going to go with the path of least resistance for the greatest possible reward. If there is a single area in inferno where the player can just crush through quickly with the same drops as other areas, these areas will be pinpointed and run routinely. Looking back at diablo 2 this is true for boss farming, leveling areas (such as shenk runs and arcane sanct runs for xp). No real point here, but just worth mentioning that a lot of players will try and label the majority of inferno "useless" ultimately for these reasons.
And yeah I don't know that about the items being in hell otherwise, I was just trying to make a comparison between inferno and hell, versus a comparison between any of the other difficulties.
Kodachii, totally agree that there will grow to be a consensus of what is the best area to run for easy gear. The path of least resistance isn't a new thing and will be monumentally difficult to curtail. That said for those who enjoy the content and stuff this will be great.
Now I'm going to relate this to my time playing Borderlands. See I play that game even with my uber decked out toons mainly to hang out with friends. Life is so busy and we just don't get to stop by a lot so this could give us something of a challenge while at the same letting us chat about life. I do expect to gear myself up till it is trivial but that is fun to me and also better prepares me for the patched content, which I'm hoping will expect a certain gear level.
Personally, I think that any Me Vs AI style of game WILL come to an end eventually.(Even if it takes years to gain the best items/use all builds etc) Adding ubers, dclone, cow level etc are very fun and do add a bit of time to the game but even after you've beaten those 1 or more times, you're still back to your original complaint of not having a "goal". For all we know, Inferno could play drastically different as far as monsters go(the abilities they use AND the monsters you face, hell, they might even have inferno only quests/monsters/levels etc which will make it completely different than the previous difficulties) Obviously PvP would be the long term for the majority of players. The AI obviously will eventually not be able to keep up.
With expansions and such within the next few years of release, I have no doubt that this game will last quite some time with even just inferno as its "end game". Anything Nonpvp could technically be considered a "filler".
I would disagree. There are plenty of games (Diablo 2, Mass Effect and its sequel, the Elder Scrolls games, among others) that mostly contain PvE/PvM combat, but they easily last a very long time. If the story is interesting enough, and there are enough reasons to replay the game, it can continue on for as long as you want to keep playing it. Especially considering Blizzard seems to be hinting at post-release content, I don't see the games focus on PvE making it last any shorter than it would if it focused on PvP.
I would disagree. There are plenty of games (Diablo 2, Mass Effect and its sequel, the Elder Scrolls games, among others) that mostly contain PvE/PvM combat, but they easily last a very long time. If the story is interesting enough, and there are enough reasons to replay the game, it can continue on for as long as you want to keep playing it. Especially considering Blizzard seems to be hinting at post-release content, I don't see the games focus on PvE making it last any shorter than it would if it focused on PvP.
I guess I should clarify a bit more, I think PvE PvM w/e can last for a long time. The length I played d2 shows that, been playing since its release and only about two years also had PvP involved. I still have a few characters currently. I've played baldurs gate/bg2/throne of bhaal several times through and I'm still playing that as well. My argument was more for the casual gamer who doesn't feel the need to test out every build or put together the perfect set of items. I kinda took this whole discussion as what will keep players interested that aren't naturally inclined to play out every exact detail. For example, I'll probably have 30+ characters just for PvM if I'm given the room.
Yeah except diablo 2 is over a decade old and the pvp system, even back then, was more hardcore than it will be during launch. I understand that some people can infinitely grind items for the sake of having more/better items (and no other reason), that's why I brought up the farmville comparison. I'm not one of those players. I'll play the content up until I have a reasonably well geared character of each class and have a good feel for the game, and if I'm bored I'll move on to a game that better suits my tastes. But who's to say there won't be a good patch somewhere down the line after launch. I'm not saying it's necessary for blizzard to add ranked pvp/more pvp features to make the game successful, I'm just saying there really isn't a world in which doing so can hurt the net gain of the game, in fact logic dictates the game would be better off if blizzard could simply cater to both or all main parties in the fan base.
I understand the importance of gear in an RPG, but I'm not particularly looking forward to having the best items, especially with how mainstream buying power and how pvp is being treated as an afterthought. Right now I'm looking more forwards to mashing things and tinkering around with the new skills/runes and seeing how they feel. I really couldn't care less about the items given the circumstances.
You might have wanted to create a new thread rather than revive one 7 months old.
To your points, however, "End Game" means different things to different people. There was even a post in this thread that mentioned games like Devil May Cry where the game is not "new and fresh" once you beat it, it's just harder. Some people like that. Diablo 2 lasted a long time on not adding new end game content because people liked the challenge and finding loot in general. Besides, the end game you describe is pretty much an MMO only trope as most single player games don't offer new content without DLC or expansion.
You are certainly welcome to your opinion, but it sounds like this genre just may not be suited to you. That's perfectly fine, as no game or system is going to please 100% of the people 100% of the time.
I think Inferno is great, but then having it makes Nightmare or Hell less important or filler. So I see the net result as worse, not better. If more was better, then we might as well have 7 difficulties. Hell would thank us in the morning.
Just my opinion though.
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!
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
More like the "last boss of the last act" by himself would be the "end game". Maybe add 2-3 other small bosses (worth it) who are so easy to kill it's almost like "farmville".
Still, I'd rather finish it once to see if it is indeed a "different difficulty" and then decide "ok, since I can farm good gear and runes from start to finish, I think I'll do it in act 2, which was the most challenging one.. maybe when I'm not in the mood of fighting 'x' set of monsters (which are harder to kill for my spec/build) I'll go to act 3 which is a lot more fun and less demanding.. and when I'm kind of tired from 'y' theme of jungles I'll go to act 4 fight Diablo again for variety's sake". All that presuming we can get good drops from start to finish and presuming also that difficulty is "somewhat even" among all 4 acts.
Now think about it. Being able to choose that instead of being forced into 1 boss should make it a lot more enjoyable.
Personally I do agree with you that anything PvP related would make the game just better instead of detracting from it (and would add to "my" end-game), but that's me and I'm somewhat ok with the "Diablo is PvE" mentality, as long as they get that right.
And yeah I don't know that about the items being in hell otherwise, I was just trying to make a comparison between inferno and hell, versus a comparison between any of the other difficulties.
Now I'm going to relate this to my time playing Borderlands. See I play that game even with my uber decked out toons mainly to hang out with friends. Life is so busy and we just don't get to stop by a lot so this could give us something of a challenge while at the same letting us chat about life. I do expect to gear myself up till it is trivial but that is fun to me and also better prepares me for the patched content, which I'm hoping will expect a certain gear level.
With expansions and such within the next few years of release, I have no doubt that this game will last quite some time with even just inferno as its "end game". Anything Nonpvp could technically be considered a "filler".
Find any Diablo news? Contact me or anyone else on the news team.
DiabloFans: Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Live Chat
I guess I should clarify a bit more, I think PvE PvM w/e can last for a long time. The length I played d2 shows that, been playing since its release and only about two years also had PvP involved. I still have a few characters currently. I've played baldurs gate/bg2/throne of bhaal several times through and I'm still playing that as well. My argument was more for the casual gamer who doesn't feel the need to test out every build or put together the perfect set of items. I kinda took this whole discussion as what will keep players interested that aren't naturally inclined to play out every exact detail. For example, I'll probably have 30+ characters just for PvM if I'm given the room.
I understand the importance of gear in an RPG, but I'm not particularly looking forward to having the best items, especially with how mainstream buying power and how pvp is being treated as an afterthought. Right now I'm looking more forwards to mashing things and tinkering around with the new skills/runes and seeing how they feel. I really couldn't care less about the items given the circumstances.
You might have wanted to create a new thread rather than revive one 7 months old.
To your points, however, "End Game" means different things to different people. There was even a post in this thread that mentioned games like Devil May Cry where the game is not "new and fresh" once you beat it, it's just harder. Some people like that. Diablo 2 lasted a long time on not adding new end game content because people liked the challenge and finding loot in general. Besides, the end game you describe is pretty much an MMO only trope as most single player games don't offer new content without DLC or expansion.
You are certainly welcome to your opinion, but it sounds like this genre just may not be suited to you. That's perfectly fine, as no game or system is going to please 100% of the people 100% of the time.
Just my opinion though.