Who all is in for Diablo III at launch?

[Kamakazie]

I beat the game on Nightmare last night and with that, I think I'm done for a while.

[Rush]

Just to satisfy this morbid curiosity about this game, I'll be picking up a copy of it tomorrow at my regular gameshop. Seriously, all this hoopla over this game in the various forums I go has really piqued my interest.....this is NOT my kind of game, I'm an FPS gamer I am!

Were you a huge fan of Diablo 2? If not, you'll like this game a lot more.

To me, as a former major D2 addict, D3 is a massive letdown. They went away from the design of D2 in almost every area possible. It's a beautiful game, and leveling from 1-60 is fun, but the "endgame" content just blows. Item hunting, progressing through inferno, etc. It's just not fun.

I beat the game on Nightmare last night and with that, I think I'm done for a while.

I don't blame you. There's just no hook to this game.

[Timman_24]

I beat the game on Nightmare last night and with that, I think I'm done for a while.

I'm almost through ACT III on nightmare and am having a great time. I think by playing for only 1-2 hours at a time I'm not burning myself out. Its great to listen to podcasts while playing

[Kamakazie]

I'm almost through ACT III on nightmare and am having a great time. I think by playing for only 1-2 hours at a time I'm not burning myself out. Its great to listen to podcasts while playing

Throughout most of Act 3 and 4 I had a window open on my other screen streaming TV series from Netflix. XD

[ImaNihilist]

Were you a huge fan of Diablo 2? If not, you'll like this game a lot more.

To me, as a former major D2 addict, D3 is a massive letdown. They went away from the design of D2 in almost every area possible. It's a beautiful game, and leveling from 1-60 is fun, but the "endgame" content just blows. Item hunting, progressing through inferno, etc. It's just not fun.

"End game" in D2 sucked as well. The fact that there were addicts who played the game for years was an anomaly and always kind of odd. There was a half-assed PvP system that really had no point. People basically made up end game. It wasn't really engineered.

Diablo has always been a dungeon crawling RPG. It was meant to be played through over and over with different characters, not treated like an MMORPG. Maybe they'll add PvP to D3 and it will extend the game a bit, but the reality is that it's not, and never has been, the kind of game that has an end game. Maybe with the PvP update people can once again invent some kind of "end game" and a reason to keep playing the same character.

The term "end game" didn't even really exist until MMOs had been out for a while, and yet people are talking about this in D2. The concept didnt even exist when D2 came out. The first time I can remember people talking about end game was in DAoC, because they actually engineered a main RPG element, and a post-60 PvP element. Before that I'm not sure that there was such a concept. In EQ there was no end game because they kept extending the game.

[posthumous_GRIN]

I am still on the fence about buying the game. I enjoyed D2 and I played the D3 demo and enjoyed it but if I don't intend on playing through the game over and over under different difficulty levels, is it worth it still? In other words, if I am only doing one play through, is it worth it?

[flutie98]

I am still on the fence about buying the game. I enjoyed D2 and I played the D3 demo and enjoyed it but if I don't intend on playing through the game over and over under different difficulty levels, is it worth it still? In other words, if I am only doing one play through, is it worth it?

One play through on normal is not worth 60 bux imo.

[Rush]

"End game" in D2 sucked as well. The fact that there were addicts who played the game for years was an anomaly and always kind of odd. There was a half-assed PvP system that really had no point. People basically made up end game. It wasn't really engineered.

Diablo has always been a dungeon crawling RPG. It was meant to be played through over and over with different characters, not treated like an MMORPG. Maybe they'll add PvP to D3 and it will extend the game a bit, but the reality is that it's not, and never has been, the kind of game that has an end game. Maybe with the PvP update people can once again invent some kind of "end game" and a reason to keep playing the same character.

The term "end game" didn't even really exist until MMOs had been out for a while, and yet people are talking about this in D2. The concept didnt even exist when D2 came out. The first time I can remember people talking about end game was in DAoC, because they actually engineered a main RPG element, and a post-60 PvP element. Before that I'm not sure that there was such a concept. In EQ there was no end game because they kept extending the game.

I don't mean "end game" in the conventional MMO sense - I just mean what you do once you've "beaten" the provided content in a game. Diablo 2 had goals - it was tough to hit the level cap, you could improve your character, and you could get better gear to become stronger and better at pvp. For me the item finding was intertwined with leveling higher and higher - you could keep leveling while farming bosses for items, doing MF runs, etc. Because you could get 8 players in a game, there was more socializing. Players became somewhat known. There was more of a sense of community and pecking order. You aspired to be as good as some of the elite duelers out there.

I have to disagree with such fans being anomalies. There is a massive fan base that has kept playing the game over the years - usually quitting for a while, then coming back to it for a bit (pretty much how it went for me). The reason is the replay-ability, which is missing from D3. And the reason is far from just lacking pvp. They killed off everything that made Diablo 2 such a successful game.

[ImaNihilist]

Diablo 2 didn't really have goals. They just didn't finish the game up to level 99, so people "created" goals. End game was a social construct, not a game construct.

When I say the fans were an anomaly, I don't mean that in terms of numbers. What I mean is that they never expected the game to have a fan base that played for years on end, because they figured people would get bored. After the skill tree was complete they just pretty mush stop developing the game and then just scaled it all the way up to 99 because they could, not because there was any reason to do that.

The reason for replay ability IS PvP. If you remove PvP from D2, it's pretty much the same loot grind, and the problem is there is no reason or motivation to do it. Even if you didn't participate in PvP in D2, the fact that it existed is the reason you played to 99. It's the reason gear mattered.

Diablo 2 was designed to be played to maybe level 50 or so. Beyond that the XP grind was severe. The only reason people kept going was because you were competing against each other, even if you weren't dueling. What Blizzard realized is that you could extend an RPG, without actually adding any content, simply by letting people compete against each other.

If they add PvP to D3 it will fundamentally change the game. It will either end up being exactly like D2, or end up being something else entirely if the PvP is more action based. End game in D3 may end up being like NOX, which I wouldn't be opposed to. Or it may end up being just like D2.

[Timman_24]

"End game" in D2 sucked as well. The fact that there were addicts who played the game for years was an anomaly and always kind of odd. There was a half-assed PvP system that really had no point. People basically made up end game. It wasn't really engineered.

Diablo has always been a dungeon crawling RPG. It was meant to be played through over and over with different characters, not treated like an MMORPG. Maybe they'll add PvP to D3 and it will extend the game a bit, but the reality is that it's not, and never has been, the kind of game that has an end game. Maybe with the PvP update people can once again invent some kind of "end game" and a reason to keep playing the same character.

The term "end game" didn't even really exist until MMOs had been out for a while, and yet people are talking about this in D2. The concept didnt even exist when D2 came out. The first time I can remember people talking about end game was in DAoC, because they actually engineered a main RPG element, and a post-60 PvP element. Before that I'm not sure that there was such a concept. In EQ there was no end game because they kept extending the game.

I think the simple addition of lobbies where people can strut their character off. Maybe a city or something. Then you can do LFG and such and jump into quests with group members. They could add new dungeons and such with new loot every 1-2 months and it would keep the game going a long time. I wouldn't mind an MMO-lite type experience in the diablo 3 world. Charge 5 dollars a month or something to keep content coming.

[Kamakazie]

I would have loved to see something similar to Torchlight where after you beat the game, there's the option to delve into a never-ending, randomly-generated dungeon.

[Snakespy]

Still stuck on Inferno act 1 at level 55. I can't get anywhere unless I have a level 60 friend with me...Lame.

[Trunks]

Last I checked, you can't even play Inferno unless you're level 60. Are you talking about Hell maybe?

[Nik00117]

Still stuck on Inferno act 1 at level 55. I can't get anywhere unless I have a level 60 friend with me...Lame.

You mean Hell? You can't be Act 1 Inferno at lvl 55.

They should do a never ending dungon type game, also they should add like a city where all the players can get together, maybe call it heaven?

[taggart6]

I plan to beat nightmare and then call it a day. At least then I can say i got some use out of the game. I dunno...it might not just be worth it. I honestly feel nothing for this game and regret buying it.