Auction House Online: The Game (Diablo 3) is a MASSIVE decline

[shihonage]

You missed the point. Andariel, which you previously mentioned, is the the boss that doesn't fit against the SK.

Blood Raven does, and she's tougher than SK.

The rest of the comparison is also fairly irrelevant, if only because you're comparing a game with 3 different difficulty levels to a game with 4 (which you are yet to experience) under a 1:1 comparison.

"Normal" is "Normal", and it is required before being able to unlock other difficulties, is it not? I've repeated myself twice in this post by now.

Oh and you didn't need to be a twink at all, the use of potions is enough. I really can't understand how you find Blood Raven to require twinking to beat, it's not like at level 4 you have a decent amount of skills/stats to employ. The fight can be summarized as a spank and chug potions affair. Like most of Diablo 2, unfortunately. You don't even need to bother dodging shit before nightmare.

I don't find Blood Raven to "require twinking to beat". I never actually said that. But I'm not going to repeat my words again, because your misquoting is not result of poor reading comprehension. It is result of you not having a leg to stand on.

I am fairly disappointed in so many people applying the same kind of intellectually dishonest defenses toward Diablo3, as Bethsoft fans did toward Fallout 3. Both games are a clear and obvious decline of the franchise, in many directions at once, and yet here we are, debating what the meaning of "is" is.

 

[pocahaunted]

Right. I haven't ever claimed that D3 is a step up from D2, or otherwise, you're just projecting. There are plenty of flaws to the game, which I've mentioned, but apparently this counts as a rabid defense.

What I've been trying to say is that you're extrapolating on the difficulty of the game, and comparing it to its predecessor as if the same scale was applicable, before having access to the actual content. As per the devs, the difficulty is not even intended to be similar (regardless of whether this is good or bad), your premise hinging on this shoehorned parallel is completely incorrect.

Normal is normal only in so much as both have been named the same. The game isn't a carbon copy, the difficulty scale isn't comparable and any kind of linear extrapolation is likely a misinterpretation, resulting in flawed conclusions.

 

[Takeda Kenshi]

Right. I haven't ever claimed that D3 is a step up from D2, or otherwise, you're just projecting. There are plenty of flaws to the game, which I've mentioned, but apparently this counts as a rabid defense.

What I've been trying to say is that you're extrapolating on the difficulty of the game, and comparing it to its predecessor as if the same scale was applicable, before having access to the actual content. As per the devs, the difficulty is not even intended to be similar (regardless of whether this is good or bad), your premise hinging on this shoehorned parallel is completely incorrect.

Normal is normal only in so much as both have been named the same. The game isn't a carbon copy, the difficulty scale isn't comparable and any kind of linear extrapolation is likely a misinterpretation, resulting in flawed conclusions.

Your logic is blinding my eyes, please revert to Ad Hominem post haste. Thank you.

 

[shihonage]

Right. I haven't ever claimed that D3 is a step up from D2, or otherwise, you're just projecting. There are plenty of flaws to the game, which I've mentioned, but apparently this counts as a rabid defense.

What I've been trying to say is that you're extrapolating on the difficulty of the game, and comparing it to its predecessor as if the same scale was applicable, before having access to the actual content. As per the devs, the difficulty is not even intended to be similar (regardless of whether this is good or bad), your premise hinging on this shoehorned parallel is completely incorrect.

Normal is normal only in so much as both have been named the same. The game isn't a carbon copy, the difficulty scale isn't comparable and any kind of linear extrapolation is likely a misinterpretation, resulting in flawed conclusions.

This logic would've had some merit if players were allowed to select the "real Normal" difficulty at the start of Diablo 3, thus people expecting "normal" difficulty would actually get what they want.

As for the devs... who cares what they said or meant?

I'm not measuring Diablo3 up to Diablo2.

Diablo2 difficulty in that starting area just conveniently happens to match any sane person' expectations of a reasonable difficulty curve (i.e. you can't bash your way through everything by holding LMB, without a single trace of thought, without potions or risk of dying).

Diablo3 difficulty curve falls flat in that regard. Pun intended. If developers say they meant for something to suck, does it somehow make it suck less? No, it just shows their contempt toward player base.

 

[LeStryfe79]

Goddamn. I know my drunken posting has gotten out of hand when I wake up and discover I have posted on a Diablo thread. Fuck me.

 

[pocahaunted]

Your logic is blinding my eyes, please revert to Ad Hominem post haste. Thank you.

Shut the fuck up, way to say absolutely nothing.

This logic would've had some merit if players were allowed to select the "real Normal" difficulty at the start of Diablo 3, thus people expecting "normal" difficulty would actually get what they want.

As for the devs... who cares what they said or meant?

I'm not measuring Diablo3 up to Diablo2.

Diablo2 difficulty in that starting area just conveniently happens to match any sane person' expectations of a reasonable difficulty curve (i.e. you can't bash your way through everything by holding LMB, without a single trace of thought, without potions or risk of dying).

Diablo3 difficulty curve falls flat in that regard. Pun intended. If developers say they meant for something to suck, does it somehow make it suck less? No, it just shows their contempt toward player base.

I have agreed that the tutorial mode, if it persists all throughout normal, is immensely retarded. Why even bring it up again?

What they said is relevant in so much as that's the only guiding stick for the portions of the game that we haven't seen yet. It might end up being totally irrelevant, but for now it's the only information we have on post-beta content.

While it's true that what we've seen of D3's difficulty portrays a very flat experience, we also need to account that potions in D2 were a central part of the gameplay (unfortunately). Setting them aside only reflects artificial difficulty. Even then, I don't find D2 to be hard at all and what we've seen of D3, while certainly easier, doesn't mean that the game as a whole will be easier.

I'm not claiming that D3 isn't easier, just that we don't have enough information as of now to claim that it is so and, therefore, it cannot be known whether it's a valid gripe to have with the game. For all we know you might actually be right, but you're just assuming. That said, I'm not claiming that their decisions regarding normal difficulty are at all justifiable.

 

[Takeda Kenshi]

I was actually agreeing with what you said, but way to be a cocksucker.

 

[pocahaunted]

I was actually agreeing with what you said, but way to be a cocksucker.

Since when is "blinding logic", a mostly sarcastic remark, and a call to revert to a logical fallacy, implying that I had done it before, an agreement?

Meh, if I misinterpreted you, I apologize.

 

[Takeda Kenshi]

Much <3 bro. Keep fighting the good fight.

 

[ScottishMartialArts]

Blood Raven is pretty much Skeleton King-level, and the comparison is perfect. Your "wand attack" comment must apply to an alternate-world version of Diablo2, possibly using twinked characters, that I'm not privy to.

And if Diablo3 normal mode is now "retard mode", it is possibly the worst single game design decision of all time. Nobody should be forced to play through the game twice just to experience it properly once (after everything has already been spoiled, no less).

Eh, I finished up Act I Normal as a Sorceress the other day, and both Blood Raven and Andariel were piss easy. Of the two, Blood Raven was actually harder since she had the massive mob of undead getting in the way of my firebolts. Regardless, neither was hard at all, and in Andariel's case I didn't even have to drink a potion -- I just kited and launched fireballs.

 

[abija]

This logic would've had some merit if players were allowed to select the "real Normal" difficulty at the start of Diablo 3, thus people expecting "normal" difficulty would actually get what they want.

As for the devs... who cares what they said or meant?

I'm not measuring Diablo3 up to Diablo2.

Diablo2 difficulty in that starting area just conveniently happens to match any sane person' expectations of a reasonable difficulty curve (i.e. you can't bash your way through everything by holding LMB, without a single trace of thought, without potions or risk of dying).

Diablo3 difficulty curve falls flat in that regard. Pun intended. If developers say they meant for something to suck, does it somehow make it suck less? No, it just shows their contempt toward player base.

You should hue change that avatar of yours to turn yellowish into pink: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=N7gEcEnBxKc#t=85s
Mighty fucking raven, didn't even clear the 2 previous zones or I would have 3+ levels and some more items and would be even more of a joke. SK is a Dark Souls boss compared to this shit. Only used M1 and at most 2 mini hp pots until there, never even close to dying. It's easy, really fucking easy for the same reason D3 beta was.

 

[aris]

So the part that corresponds to diablo 2 leading up to blood raven on normal difficulty is slightly easier in diablo 3 you say? If that argument has merit, I would still say that's a big meh.

 

[DwarvenFood]

Goddamn. I know my drunken posting has gotten out of hand when I wake up and discover I have posted on a Diablo thread. Fuck me.

We will not let this pass as lightly as you might think, LeChuck

 

[DraQ]

Diablo2 difficulty in that starting area just conveniently happens to match any sane person' expectations of a reasonable difficulty curve

TBH D1 was much better in this regard.
Aside from novice players facing major bosses there is little, if any challenge in normal SP in D2.
Gets better if you \players #, but being able to just continue after dying doesn't really help.

In D1 there were plenty of spots where you had to invent various desperate tactics to progress, because just going in swinging/shooting/casting got you killed awfully fast.

 

[sser]

Blood Raven was infinitely easier than SK and if you ever died to her... that little lightning goblin before the stone portals is the hardest part of the game for a long time, IMO. D2 could/can be beat on normal with dumbfuck builds. Judging D3's difficulty by half an act is kinda dumb.

 

[Jasede]

Wait, you are telling my I can't judge a game's difficulty based on its tutorial!?

Dark Souls, easiest game ever made!

 

[Stabwound]

D2 beta was everything up until Blood Raven so it's pretty comparable. I don't know who would say that section of D2 is difficult, but okay.

I'm sure D3 normal isn't going to be a super challenge, though. It seems that their intention is to increase difficulty as you go through the difficulty levels by adding new AI, monster skills, etc. Judging by most of the interviews I've read, they intentionally setup Normal as a "complete" game for casual players to go through and be done with, while Nightmare+ gets much harder.

Blizzard also added the 4th difficulty, "Inferno" to D3 where every monster outlevels out even if you're at the max level starting from Act 1. In D2 you could surmount any challenge with enough grinding to outlevel monsters, but not in Inferno D3.

 

[sser]

D2 also had potions substituting for player/ability skills. I think people are underestimating how big of a change that will be for D3's difficulty.

 

[Stabwound]

Yeah, there's that too, which is a major one. Potions are now a last resort kind of thing and you definitely can't rely on a huge stack of them spammed like in D2. Removing potion spam is a pretty huge move and I'm glad they did it.

I think they've removed just about every cheap Diablo 2 hardcore tactic there was, as well. No potion spam, no running away from bosses, no town portals in bosses, no alt+f4 to escape death (people had this botted automatically too) etc. I think hardcore mode is going to be great.

 

[Jasede]

Potion spam was so stupid. I think I am with Stabwound on this, say what you will.

 

[shihonage]

Blood Raven is pretty much Skeleton King-level, and the comparison is perfect. Your "wand attack" comment must apply to an alternate-world version of Diablo2, possibly using twinked characters, that I'm not privy to.

And if Diablo3 normal mode is now "retard mode", it is possibly the worst single game design decision of all time. Nobody should be forced to play through the game twice just to experience it properly once (after everything has already been spoiled, no less).

Eh, I finished up Act I Normal as a Sorceress the other day, and both Blood Raven and Andariel were piss easy. Of the two, Blood Raven was actually harder since she had the massive mob of undead getting in the way of my firebolts. Regardless, neither was hard at all, and in Andariel's case I didn't even have to drink a potion -- I just kited and launched fireballs.

This may actually explain a lot of other claims about Blood Raven's difficulty.

That's not the Diablo2 I am referring to - abandoned corpse of a game, ravaged by ill-conceived patches.

Diablo 2 has been rebalanced numerous times since launch, and indeed, when I tried to play it a couple of years ago, I breezed through Act 1 because it was ridiculous - Diablo 3 level - easy. Killing Andariel was anti-climactic and disappointing.

However that is not Diablo 2 I am referring to, but the game as I remember it in its prime. From launch, for the next few years, before it died. When diabloii.net was still popular. Before they reduced the Diablo patch team to 1 person (it's true - that happened sometime around 2005). Pre - synergies and "reorganization" of internal data structures that happened around that time. When the difficulty curve wasn't broken all to shit.

Blood Raven at that time could very well kill someone in your average, non-twinked player group. Andariel, as well. And killing Andariel felt like an accomplishment - the way it was initially meant.

 

[aris]

Memories are extremely deceptive, especially those 12 years old. How can you know that it was harder, and simply did not feel that way at the time or that you have come to feel that way later? I remember diablo 2 at launch as pretty hard, especially andariel, but then again, I was 14 years old at the time, and didn't know what the fuck I was doing. Were I born 12 years earlier, I'm guessing I would not find it extremely challenging. Now, the part leading up to the skeleton king of diablo 3 is sleep inducingly easy, I agree, but it hardly matters if you can breeze through that content in an hour and then find more challenging content later. We don't know yet how difficult it is beyond the skeleton king.

 

[Stabwound]

Yeah, I can't remember at all how hard Blood Raven was at launch and I'd be surprised if anyone else can accurately remember either. I don't think it was ever an immense challenge and I don't think the early game challenge changed that much over time. You reach BR so early that skill synergies or anything else changed really doesn't mean much.

Talking about anything else is meaningless, because we have no idea what the difficulty is like for anything post Skeleton King, the D3 equivalent of Blood Raven.

 

[shihonage]

1) In 2000 I was 23 years old. I finished Fallout a couple of times before Diablo 2 came out.

2) Not "at launch", but through several years after launch. It wasn't exactly an isolated experience, I played the game a lot, and do not seem to suffer from the curious affliction of selective senility as you both do.

3) "Talking about anything else is meaningless" is a cute argument in a thread centered around educated speculation on the data we currently have. You may as well say this thread shouldn't exist until Diablo 3 comes out, because hey, you could be wrong, I could be wrong, everyone could be wrong!

 

[Black]

That's amusing since I vaguely remember playing D2 classic when it came out, then 1.09 LoD, 1.10 and 1.13 not long ago.
Blood Raven was never anything more than hold-lmb-to-kill on normal, then or now.