DiabloFans

What is this, god-damned League of Legends!?

At least you could make bank by slashing the grass in Zelda...

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.

I don't see why this has to be a court case between PvP'ers and PvM'ers, especially since Diablo is a PvE-centric game. If you haven't accepted that it's a PvE game, good luck to you.

No game in history without PvP in its release has ever become an E-Sport, period.

Quote from Rizh

You lot should be downright gratefull to blizzard for including some kind of PvP in Diablo 3, Since it's first and foremost a player(s) vs envoirment game.

Iam not saying screw PvP but iam not saying that they should make the PvP aspect of the game an priority either, Iam just happy that they add that and I see it as an extra, and TBH if you buy D3 for the sole reason of PvP'ing, You WILL get dissapointed.

If Diablo 3 doesn't even have Dueling or world PvP, then you're basically being grateful to Blizzard for them taking this epic series two steps backwards. Hell, if they cut even more than they cut already, you would be practically moonwalking.

They can return all of them for all I care. There aren't many boring creatures in Diablo 2, maybe Diablo 1 for sure.

This thread is just filled with players that want to remove unique creatures because they presented interesting challenges.

We haven't played the game yet, but I'm curious to know what kind of parameters we will have to deal with while killing bosses solo and in groups. Let's do some theorycrafting and share some opinions. Maybe you guys saw a blue post discussing this topic already. I don't think I have yet.

I'm wondering if Blizzard will be taking the old school console route when it comes to boss battles (similar to games like Mega Man) or if they will be taking a more new school route similar to boss encounters in games like WoW.

Option 1 -

Diablo 3 bosses would be similar to the Skeleton King, like other old school games and other console games where the Boss does not regenerate health and executes specific moves or attacks, possibly in patterns. Killing the boss will require the player to dodge patterned attacks, while counter-attacking at the right moments.

Knowledge is power, meaning that knowing the fight then mastering patterns will determine if you move through content faster.

Option 2 -

Diablo 3 bosses will be similar to like how most raid bosses are in WoW with timers or they will just have them have set or variable based regeneration rates. Some bosses in WoW had an "enrage timer" where you had to kill the boss within a set amount of time, such as 6 minutes, before the boss goes insane and starts hitting you for lethal amounts of damage. This is implemented to force the players to take down the boss within a set amount of time, by having a good mix of sufficient damage, while also having other utility like tanks, healers, or support classes. They could also have the bosses either regenerate a set amount of health, or even varying levels of health regen, throughout the whole fight or during certain phases. This would also encourage a group to bring a sufficient amount of DPS in order to end the fight quicker. When facing bosses with more players, regeneration levels could be tweaked higher or other parameters could be made harder.

This path makes it so gear and levels have more influence then knowledge of the encounters. This means boss encounters will "Gear Check" the players and encourage them to farm before upcoming encounters.

Option 3 -

Encounters would have boss fights that don't have timers/regen and other more important fights where they do and the players would need sufficient gear to advance past those points. Knowing all of the bosses and content in the game would speed up a playthrough, whereas more important boss fights will "Gear Check" the player and expect them to farm better gear to move on, creating a pacing mechanic that would slow a player's playthrough.

---

What kind of boss fights you think Diablo 3 will have?

I already talked about this in another thread where someone posted his rant about Battle.net II on another website. I think that thread was deleted, either because the OP posted a link to another site or because I talked about insider info on how Blizzard first wanted Battle.net II to be something you would pay money for.

I don't feel like typing all of that out again. lol

EDIT - The bottom line is that after Blizzard failed to make Battle.net II into something you paid for, they decided to give you the bare minimum as an online service, while quietly titling it just plain old Battle.net again. Posting about it won't make any changes.

Who friggen cares. Then again I don't really think the OP is being serious, but I'll bite.

It's a god damned single player game. Nobody cares how long anybody takes to finish the game and it's nowhere near being a game that will ever be in the competitive scene. The closest you'll get to seeing "Pro Diablo 3 players" will be you watching a recording-breaking speedrun of a Diablo 3 run on a speed demo site.

If it is slightly harder, then that just means you're getting more for your money. Harder game + set amount of content = More hours played.

I really don't see how this "fixes the flaws of D2 or WoW" tbh. While It's an interesting mechanic in concept and in design, it just seems... I don't know...

I wouldn't say its unnecessary but it doesn't seem like it's really needed either. If someone likes playing a build, they will stick to that build through thick and thin. Are people really switching builds that often while testing in-house? Why discourage more hardcore players from mix/maxing builds and switching between them in the first place? If Blizzard wants to discourage specing, why not just tack on a flat percentage gold fee or have time limitations on respeccing? I guess they want to throw casual players a bone by giving them this valor buff, for some reason?

With regards to the point they made about why they designed the valor buff...

- How does the valor buff make "Every" skill build more viable or interesting? Doesn't that sort of thing fall under skill design? If a certain build sucks, the Valor buff won't make that skill build any better.

- It doesn't affect players or discourage them from running specific 3 minute-chunks of the game either. Loot tables do.

- It doesn't affect whether or not you decide to kill "Bosses" if the buff is given to you after killing champion or rare packs of mobs. Are they saying that they would like you to stick with your skill build at all times, because certain skill builds are just better at killing final act bosses? Will skill builds honestly make that much of a difference in boss killing? Isn't that what grouping with others is for?

Just seems confusing to me and it's almost as if they are trying to sell a decent mechanic to us for the wrong reasons?

If you haven't played SWTOR you probably won't see the genius in having followers in a SP/MP hybrid video game.

Feels good knowing that the dev team swallowed their pride and finally upped the difficulty after the fans cried out about the game being too easy. They reacted pretty negatively and laughed at the fans when the fans told them the game was too bright, right before they finally went and made the game darker.

Typical old school arms warrior versus fury warrior argument. Instead of "If you're AP is over this amount, go Fury", it's now "Your vitality must be this high to get on the 'Nerves of Steel' ride!"

Quote from okrane

wow you really are desperate...

If you don't have a nerd story like the OP had to tell, you probably haven't lived life. lol

It's either one of three scenarios.

1. Blizzard have already allocated a certain number of copies to every retailers selling the CE, so it was technically "sold out" from their perspective.

2. It wasn't sold out when you pre-ordered on the day of release, but was sold out shortly after.

3. Blizzard is just throwing out a line out there that it's sold out (Even though it might not be) to hype the game.

Ok, so here's a no bullshit answer. Short version is that Diablo 1 is basically skippable and the best storyline and gameplay is in Diablo 2. You should start with Diablo 2.

Diablo 1 was a solid game, but it will be hard to get into since it's dated now. You can skip it, BUT if you decide to play it, play through it as a mage, or maybe a rogue. Not a warrior. Warrior might take longer or two playthroughs to reach the end. The game doesn't require a cd key though. The only major plot point that D1 reveals is that the town's elder/major is Deckard Cain. He gives you a through background story or history to a handful of things you encounter and he later reveals that he's the last of the Horadrim. The ending is that you kill Diablo and your character jams his soulstone in their head to try and contain him.

Diablo 2 is a lot less skippable. It's a good game and also easier to get into. The soundscape is timeless and the great artistic direction makes it playable even today. It would be easier to play through it. The cinematics are pretty damn good and tell the story well alongside your playthrough. The story is good, even though it feels like it drags on a little bit in Act 3 and Act 4 is short. Vanilla Diablo 3's ending ends on a bit of an exciting twist the sets uthings up for the expansion. Act 5 is pretty good and the expansion ends things on a bit of a soft-cliffhanger.

Without spoiling too much, the world is supposedly "reset" but then there's now a gap of 20 years between then and Diablo 3, so currently it doesn't make much sense now. Same stuff happened with Starcraft's storyline. Kerrigan basically wins then there's a 4 year gap and her dominance isn't really reflected well ssince she disappeared for 4 years for no good reason.

Quote from KageKaze

That is not game changing. Charms in no way changed how you play the game, they did not give you new abilities or change how your current abilites worked. They were flat damage or defensive increases that could have been given to players in the form of other items.

Charms not game changing? I'm guessing the game ended for you at Baal Runs then? lol



Is it just me, or do i see abilities in there!? OH SNAP!

As for the OP, I feel like they are going to go with this game plan:

Dumb the game down in some aspects and hope that new boss fights and other content will compensate... on top of gutting entire aspects of the game like PvP and save them for future releases.