Although there's probably a hundred videos on YouTube that attest to feats of extraordinary gear planning and strategy, Jack112 posted a video today (shown below) showcasing the toughest of the tough in Diablo III's beta, the Skeleton King, being beaten by every character class in the game. At level one.
While Blizzard representatives have stated on multiple occasions that Normal
Further statement in a recent interview with Lead Systems Designer Jason bender on VG24/7 may raise even more concern.
In response to a question about the difficult of higher-level play modes, Jason said, "Nightmare’s very playable. After you’ve gone all the way through normal, you should have the practice and chops you need to handle Nightmare. We don’t think there’s really a wall there."
That kind of takes the nightmare out of Nightmare.
So, with Normal mode being nothing more than an elaborate, testing-the-waters, tutorial-like difficulty, and with Nightmare being little more than a slope to Hell mode, what can we expect from Hell? Jason continued: "On Hell [difficulty], there is a bit of a wall. We don’t expect everybody to play that effectively in Hell. It might be beyond some players’ abilities."
If Hell mode is anything like Diablo II's Hell mode, then we're certain to have our hands full for a while. It's likely that without the mass availability of cheap gear--mostly due to duping and botting--Hell would have been even more challenging. Just imagine trying to beat Hell mode without that Enigma, Call to Arms, or Infinity. Many of us can admit that such a version of the game would require significantly different strategies than the Teleport-and-spam-Traps/Hammers/Lightning/Fireballs/insert-your-skill-here that many players are so accustomed to.
However, if the first couple hours of gameplay, specifically the first major boss in the game, can be beaten by a level one character, what does that say about the rest of the game? Will we see players creaming Nightmare with level fifteen's and Hell with level twenty-five's?
"And, you know, it’s funny," Jason continued, "because – as casual as it seems – we don’t try to handcraft Diablo so that everyone can beat it all the way through to Inferno."
With the possible exception of Hell, it's sure sounding quite the contrary. For the full interview from VG24/7, see its posted article. A special thanks goes to Jack112 (as well as some applause!) for posting his brilliant footage. CherubDown also posted a thread specifically about the interview here, if you're interested in more discussion about the VG24/7 article.
I apologize for any undue amount of negativity that this post conveys. I highly value your feedback and will do my best to improve my approach to writing content that you read in the future. No, no one asked me to say this. I say this because I care about the community that's been gathering here since 2006. When you're not happy, I'm not happy.
-Magistrate
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.
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.
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.
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!
I agree except for one thing. Playing solo is much harder than playing co-op with the exception of certain builds on certain classes. I would like the game to be somewhere between the challenge of co-op and Solo for both co-op and solo(ie no impossible mobs but decent strategy required). I think it will be near this goal as you get into the latter 2 difficulties and signs of this will show as early as the middle of Nightmare. Now I feel I can get the Story I want in normal and the challenge I want later so long as Blizzard does not disappoint.