How hard will the game be? - Page 20

On May 04 2012 17:48 NeoLearner wrote:

Hmmm, I don't think we will see Stygian Dolls or Burning Souls (Gloams, right?) in D3. The reason I think this is because the "chance to hit" was removed and changed into damage reduction.

In D2, adding armour made it so you were less likely to get hit, but when you did get hit, the amount of HP you lost was the same all round. So there was a real risk of getting one hit killed. Now that we have some amount of damage reduction, I hope this means we also got rid of 1 hit kills. Because I did not consider those things as best design practices

AusGamers: Just the level of challenge that comes up, especially with cooperative play.

Jay: I guess your question is, is the game going to get more challenging? I can say, unequivocally... and I don’t like to firmly stamp my foot down on things -- because that almost always comes back to bite me -- but I can honestly say, that the end-game of Diablo III is way more challenging than Diablo II; way more.

There’s none of the... because we’ve added Inferno -- the max-level difficulty -- there’s no case where you had in Diablo II, where you simply out-levelled and out-geared the content. The content stays relevant. So it takes... when you get into Inferno for the first time, if you haven’t spent time in Hell, just farming for gear, you will get crushed.

We die... we have encounters in the Inferno mode, where we will die a dozen times trying to take a rare down. And I mean, that rare, not only do they have a host of different abilities that we don’t even have earlier in the game -- things like the ability to create walls in front of me and enemies; the ability to do all different kinds of spells and effects that control area around the player and dish out damage.

Just being able to make creatures that are faster than the player, which you don’t really see in the earlier difficulties very often -- we can make any kind of common creature faster. And you take all that, and we also have enraged timers, where if you don’t kill the monsters in a certain amount of time, they enrage and then they do massive damage.

You take all those things together, and it creates an experience that’s a lot more challenging.

Jay: We don’t believe that there’s a place where you can play the game at the maximum level and it will be easy. We think it will always be challenging. I say “we think”, because players surprise us, and the level of difficulty on Inferno is so high that a lot of people on the dev team can’t test it very effectively. So we’ve actually had to use a specialty group within... we always run into this problem, you know game developers are never as good as the players, because we don’t have the time to play that the players do.

So we have groups internally -- and a few exceptions to that case -- and we formed a specific strike-team, just for end-game. And their goal was to tell us that this was a challenging and compelling experience. So they spent just as long working on the game as our kind of normal difficulty strike-team did -- which is unusual. For most of our games... World of Warcraft does have a kind of raid group that they have dedicated, but most of our games have just a regular strike-team. They don’t have, like, an end-game, hard-mode strike-team like we’ve created.

On May 05 2012 03:00 MrTortoise wrote:
so what they are saying is that the game will be a piece of piss.

But then it will suddenly scale to being impossible.

so how long will it stay fun to play hard?

On May 05 2012 02:19 skyR wrote:
Enrage timers were sort of a given. So I guess they went back on their word of having mobs capable of dropping everything, now we're going to go back to grinding the last act for the best gear...?

On May 05 2012 03:14 skyR wrote:
Good job twisting my words. I never said enrage timers = guaranteed best loot. Enrage timers adds a DPS requirement which is one of the simplest ways to make an encounter harder, this isn't exactly rocket science lol...

On May 05 2012 02:19 skyR wrote:
Enrage timers were sort of a given. So I guess they went back on their word of having mobs capable of dropping everything, now we're going to go back to grinding the last act for the best gear...?

On May 05 2012 03:32 Klockan3 wrote:

What? that doesn't follow at all.

On May 05 2012 03:39 skyR wrote:
Seriously if I'm dumb and don't understand the interviews properly than explain it for me.

They said that any item has a chance to drop anywhere: http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/4254464832?page=12#227 and I'm sure there are countless other posts about this stance.

Now in the latest interview with atomic, they're saying that each act has a respective tier of gear that can only be dropped in that act.

And there's a very low chance that tier 3 will be better than tier 5 so please don't start that stupid argument.

On May 05 2012 03:42 Alpino wrote:
First they went back on their word of having mobs capable of dropping everything (even if they aren't high-end mobs they can drop high-end gear.)

And there are items that ONLY drop at level 61, at level 62 and so on; and they're not small number! There's a whole tier of armour in each one.

So even to be able to play viably in Inferno, you're going to have to play and fight in Hell for a little while, to get your items up to the quality so that you'll be able to fight through. And then to move from Act to Act you'll need to do that.

On May 05 2012 03:58 Two_DoWn wrote:
http://diablo.incgamers.com/blog/comments/jay-wilson-interview-atomic-pc

He says each act has different gear.

On May 05 2012 03:58 skyR wrote:




We're seriously going to start this argument of whether the Act 1 tier will be better than Act 5 tier???