1. My least favorite part is the lack of passive skills. With all of the typical customization abilities gone (stats are autoed and no more skill pts), passive skills is really the only way to give your character a nice identity. Unfortunately some classes only have like 15 to choose from... need more = more customization (off the top of my head heres one: metal skin= grants 200% increased defense but lightning damage you take is magnified by 300%). Im sure they could easily come up with at least 40 per class; and 40 choose 3 means ALOT of variablity between chars.
2. I will toggle off the flying damage numbers
3. My favorite part is all the stuff you can destroy! pretty neato!
4. I wont get a beta invite and express myself in the beta forums.
Escaping melee enemies and then shooting them down sort of sounds like the demon hunter functionality. Although I guess You could make a melee resistant DH. I Personally would be more concerned with skill SYNERGY. As in is making builds going to involve smart combos of skills and gear so 1+1>2? or are they going the independent-skill route of "insert best skills into your bar"
im pretty sure SYNERGY has been removed because we dont have the skill trees.
it gonna have the wow system where you unlock new spells at a higher lvl but the spells you have scale up so that they can still be used at the high lvles when you have other higher skills
The kind of synergy Im talking about isn't a skill tree. What I mean is: say I got two skills, seperatley they are relatively weak, but when I use one after another... then together they provide a powerful kick. One way to make this work would be skills with on-condition secondary effects: skill 1 does 20 damage and causes 5 seconds of poison. Skill 2 does 25 damage but an extra 75 damage if target is poisoned.
The secondary effects could even be randomly in-grained in skill runes (instead of putting +attributes on the runes). I would just like to see some form of synergy or method to create synergy between skills so it doesn't feel like the skill bar is simply a collection of independent skills rather it should be a cohesive group of uniquely picked skills that work together to define your character's build.
Escaping melee enemies and then shooting them down sort of sounds like the demon hunter functionality. Although I guess You could make a melee resistant DH. I Personally would be more concerned with skill SYNERGY. As in is making builds going to involve smart combos of skills and gear so 1+1>2? or are they going the independent-skill route of "insert best skills into your bar"
I want to see just how dynamic the skill system is. It would be hard since there are no runes in beta but Id still like to see if skill "builds" is a suitable term for this game.
For Blizzard to say Inferno is "end-game" does sorta seem like a cheap cop-out. There are literally tons of end-game ideas out there yet they implemented none of them and instead are just adjusting monsters to lvl 61... seems sort of lazy to me.
To me end-game content should be a sort of fun or challenging competitive Test! You shouldn't be still building your character in an end-game, you should be putting your character and skills to the Ultimate Test - Whether it be against other players, a never-ending horde, or an uber boss- it should still push your character to the limit and hopefully, over the limit.
using wow as a comparison because everyone (but mostly about sixen) considers it end game. and in wow "end game" you are still building your character, honing your skills and getting the best gear exactly how inferno is. so i don't see how that point makes inferno not end game when its comparable to heroics and raids like I've pointed out.
Um I didn't say anything about WoW. In fact, I am pretty sure Diablo is Not WoW. I simply defined what an end-game is and said adding a 4th difficulty does not constitute as an end-game. I mean heck! how can Inferno BE the end-game when you have to beat the game all over again. Its like saying the final level in pacman is actually the end-game.
end-game = content after game has ended. Inferno is still the same game.
i didn't say you did mention wow. i was using that as an example for my argument. everyone just thinks about the fact that its another play through it removes any notion that its end game. but thats completely false. but the fact that you have to be MAX level and fairly skilled / geared to get through it, makes it so it IS an end game, if you were still leveling up in inferno, then of course it wouldn't be. but your not, the game is over after your 60 and kill whoever the end boss is in hell, then INFERNO is added as end game for an extra challenge and extra super gear. so in the end, its end-game material. maybe its not the BEST choice but it still is end-game regardless
Im sorry but your logic is flawed. Your saying that because your level 60, Inferno is end-game...that's just terrible logic. You can technically be level 60 when you start hell that doesn't make hell an end-game. And likewise you may not still be leveling up but you are still gaining in power/gear. School analogy: If your taking a nursing class, Inferno is just the final exam of the class its not the next nursing course or nursing internship/job. No matter what, Inferno IS the game just a little bit harder. If you have to play through and beat the game it Cannot also be an end-game. Game and end-game are two different things they aren't supposed to be the same. So sorry, Inferno is still part of the game, just another difficulty.
For Blizzard to say Inferno is "end-game" does sorta seem like a cheap cop-out. There are literally tons of end-game ideas out there yet they implemented none of them and instead are just adjusting monsters to lvl 61... seems sort of lazy to me.
To me end-game content should be a sort of fun or challenging competitive Test! You shouldn't be still building your character in an end-game, you should be putting your character and skills to the Ultimate Test - Whether it be against other players, a never-ending horde, or an uber boss- it should still push your character to the limit and hopefully, over the limit.
using wow as a comparison because everyone (but mostly about sixen) considers it end game. and in wow "end game" you are still building your character, honing your skills and getting the best gear exactly how inferno is. so i don't see how that point makes inferno not end game when its comparable to heroics and raids like I've pointed out.
Um I didn't say anything about WoW. In fact, I am pretty sure Diablo is Not WoW. I simply defined what an end-game is and said adding a 4th difficulty does not constitute as an end-game. I mean heck! how can Inferno BE the end-game when you have to beat the game all over again. Its like saying the final level in pacman is actually the end-game.
end-game = content after game has ended. Inferno is still the same game.
Wow Blizzard continues to surprise me! perfectionist complex, procrastination, unnecessary secrecy, and now this. Rather than painting a giant Diablo pic (in Germany nonetheless) and dressing up in retarded furry costumes they could have explained more Diablo content.
For Blizzard to say Inferno is "end-game" does sorta seem like a cheap cop-out. There are literally tons of end-game ideas out there yet they implemented none of them and instead are just adjusting monsters to lvl 61... seems sort of lazy to me.
To me end-game content should be a sort of fun or challenging competitive Test! You shouldn't be still building your character in an end-game, you should be putting your character and skills to the Ultimate Test - Whether it be against other players, a never-ending horde, or an uber boss- it should still push your character to the limit and hopefully, over the limit.
CORRECTION: Id like to state that from what I can remember horde mode was in Left 4 Dead Before it was in Gears of War. It was called SURVIVOR mode in l4d
Hate to break it to you but I dont think Skyrim has won any awards yet. Plus the elder scrolls series is played by more of a select group of dedicated players than the casual gamer. I would say D3's competition for Game of the Year is actually Guild Wars 2. Coincidentally GW2 won Gamescom 2010 while D3 won Gamescom 2011. Personally I still think some of the systems in GW2 still top their counterparts in D3.
Guild Wars is not an Action RPG, just an FYI.
Im just talking general PC Game of the Year award not saying the 2 games are similar but they are both highly anticipated giants. Anyways in my opinion its a toss up between GW2 and D3 if they come out the same year (GW2 is actually scheduled for late 2011). Skyrim is much lower on the list, it may win XBOX GOTY but not PC GOTY.
CORRECTION: Id like to state that from what I can remember horde mode was in Left 4 Dead Before it was in Gears of War. It was called SURVIVOR mode in l4d
0
I forgot where, but additonally other datamined information shows "PVP" version of weapons which would indicate some kind of NPC involvment in pvp
0
0
0
0
2. I will toggle off the flying damage numbers
3. My favorite part is all the stuff you can destroy! pretty neato!
4. I wont get a beta invite and express myself in the beta forums.
0
The kind of synergy Im talking about isn't a skill tree. What I mean is: say I got two skills, seperatley they are relatively weak, but when I use one after another... then together they provide a powerful kick. One way to make this work would be skills with on-condition secondary effects: skill 1 does 20 damage and causes 5 seconds of poison. Skill 2 does 25 damage but an extra 75 damage if target is poisoned.
The secondary effects could even be randomly in-grained in skill runes (instead of putting +attributes on the runes). I would just like to see some form of synergy or method to create synergy between skills so it doesn't feel like the skill bar is simply a collection of independent skills rather it should be a cohesive group of uniquely picked skills that work together to define your character's build.
0
0
0
0
Im sorry but your logic is flawed. Your saying that because your level 60, Inferno is end-game...that's just terrible logic. You can technically be level 60 when you start hell that doesn't make hell an end-game. And likewise you may not still be leveling up but you are still gaining in power/gear. School analogy: If your taking a nursing class, Inferno is just the final exam of the class its not the next nursing course or nursing internship/job. No matter what, Inferno IS the game just a little bit harder. If you have to play through and beat the game it Cannot also be an end-game. Game and end-game are two different things they aren't supposed to be the same. So sorry, Inferno is still part of the game, just another difficulty.
0
Um I didn't say anything about WoW. In fact, I am pretty sure Diablo is Not WoW. I simply defined what an end-game is and said adding a 4th difficulty does not constitute as an end-game. I mean heck! how can Inferno BE the end-game when you have to beat the game all over again. Its like saying the final level in pacman is actually the end-game.
end-game = content after game has ended. Inferno is still the same game.
0
Extremely Disappointed.
0
To me end-game content should be a sort of fun or challenging competitive Test! You shouldn't be still building your character in an end-game, you should be putting your character and skills to the Ultimate Test - Whether it be against other players, a never-ending horde, or an uber boss- it should still push your character to the limit and hopefully, over the limit.
0
0
Im just talking general PC Game of the Year award not saying the 2 games are similar but they are both highly anticipated giants. Anyways in my opinion its a toss up between GW2 and D3 if they come out the same year (GW2 is actually scheduled for late 2011). Skyrim is much lower on the list, it may win XBOX GOTY but not PC GOTY.