Better that they err on the side of being too hard than being too easy because you can always make it easier if necessary. If nobody can do it, it'll get nerfed eventually, either explictly or through better gear being introduced.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
...and if you disagree with me, you're probably <insert random ad hominem attack here>.
I love it! If all goes well this game should be around for many years, so it's a very good thing if it takes a lot of time and work in order to beat the highest difficulty. I'm not actually that curious to see what fraction of players eventually beat Inferno, I'm more curious to see what fraction MAKE IT to Inferno. To me that will be the more interesting measure of the difficulty of this game.
EDIT: Wasn't there also some quote from Jay Wilson about how the difficulty was set by tuning Inferno so that only the best in-house gamers thought the difficulty was correct, and then doubling it? A quick google search turned up other references to the quote but not the quote itself, which is making me wonder if it was ever a real quote to begin with.
Still having a hard time believing it will be really hard, but Blizzard is surely trying to tell me otherwise.
I just hope their definition of hard does not involve random one-shot unavoidable deaths, as that does not make a game challenging, only stupid.
Hoping more for Dark Souls type of difficulty, where you as the player is always to blame when you die. Not some random number generator deciding you should die.
Well, I heard they removed "Immunities". That was pretty much the only hard thing about Diablo 2, which makes me wonder how hard can Inferno be?
The immunities in D2 was just bad game design, imo. I think D3 will be much harder with all the different kind of champions and elites, like jailers/trappers/teleporters/nightmarish etc. It's gonna be chaos!
They can also pump the hell out of Monster damage making it so you need to actually avoid damage...
Better that they err on the side of being too hard than being too easy because you can always make it easier if necessary. If nobody can do it, it'll get nerfed eventually, either explictly or through better gear being introduced.
omg i will NOT accept that they nerf, but Balance is a different thing. Nerfing is what you do when a 9yr old whines about having to press more then 2 buttons in a good manner and order.
i really hope it will take a LONG while for people to complete inferno, there will defiantly be people that do it "fast" but thats not many at all
but, the first one to beat Inferno, on Hardcore. Will be LEGENDARY
omg i will NOT accept that they nerf, but Balance is a different thing. Nerfing is what you do when a 9yr old whines about having to press more then 2 buttons in a good manner and order.
i really hope it will take a LONG while for people to complete inferno, there will defiantly be people that do it "fast" but thats not many at all
but, the first one to beat Inferno, on Hardcore. Will be LEGENDARY
You are, of course, entitled to believe the word "nerf" means whatever you wish. To the rest of us, as far as I'm aware, it just means to reduce the difficulty or effectiveness of something. Any connotations you are attaching to it are, imho, your own.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
...and if you disagree with me, you're probably <insert random ad hominem attack here>.
I've never seen developers being good at their own game, so I don't think his answer means that much.
I think his name is Jonathan...anyway, the guy from arena net seemed to play GW2 pretty well.
It's an understandable stereotypeas it's usually true. But as it was quoted in the other thread, they pretty much double the difficulty when their best testers complete Inferno. And remember that testers are generally good at gaming, usually much better than the average developer.
I cannot WAIT to sink my teeth in to this stuff. And really not just Inferno, but all the difficulties. ARGH COME ON 2 WEEKS
I've never seen developers being good at their own game, so I don't think his answer means that much.
I think his name is Jonathan...anyway, the guy from arena net seemed to play GW2 pretty well.
It's an understandable stereotypeas it's usually true. But as it was quoted in the other thread, they pretty much double the difficulty when their best testers complete Inferno. And remember that testers are generally good at gaming, usually much better than the average developer.
I cannot WAIT to sink my teeth in to this stuff. And really not just Inferno, but all the difficulties. ARGH COME ON 2 WEEKS
well there isnt really any job as a "tester" the "testers" are the people working at the company doing anything really.
omg i will NOT accept that they nerf, but Balance is a different thing. Nerfing is what you do when a 9yr old whines about having to press more then 2 buttons in a good manner and order.
i really hope it will take a LONG while for people to complete inferno, there will defiantly be people that do it "fast" but thats not many at all
but, the first one to beat Inferno, on Hardcore. Will be LEGENDARY
You are, of course, entitled to believe the word "nerf" means whatever you wish. To the rest of us, as far as I'm aware, it just means to reduce the difficulty or effectiveness of something. Any connotations you are attaching to it are, imho, your own.
Nerfing is somthing that proves a failed system, you never should need to nerf, if you do then you are shooting for wrong goals overall (blizz have done this whit wow for years)
It's better to think of think as a balance, to keep as many peoples as possible in "the flow" of the game. the stage where the game is not TO hard(if it is hard it must still be rewarding) or to easy. Nerfing dips the game into the boring side of the curve most of the time, or at least gets reeeeally close, thats when its quite bad.
when a game is to easy, its boring (one of the reasons we play strange builds in games like Diablo)
when a game is to hard, its frustrating, making you want to smash your keyboard and you have 100% dropped the immersion.
(PIC MADE BY ME for an Essay in Software engineering about Game Flow)
i have written 2 essays about the subject (one smaller, one larger)
Nerfing is somthing that proves a failed system, you never should need to nerf, if you do then you are shooting for wrong goals overall (blizz have done this whit wow for years)
It's better to think of think as a balance, to keep as many peoples as possible in "the flow" of the game. the stage where the game is not TO hard(if it is hard it must still be rewarding) or to easy.
when a game is to easy, its boring (one of the reasons we play strange builds in games like Diablo)
when a game is to hard, its frustrating, making you want to smash your keyboard and you have 100% dropped the immersion.
(PIC MADE BY ME for an Essay in Software engineering about Game Flow)
i have written 2 essays about the subject (one smaller, one larger)
The etymology of the word "nerf" comes from the line of Parker Brothers toys which are covered or made out of soft foam rubber. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerf The term, "to nerf," in that light, very clearly means to make something "softer," or to blunt it's impact. In terms of usage, "nerf" can be thought of as the opposite of "buff," and neither one is inherently pandering. After all, you can nerf a player ability or item just as easily as you can nerf an enemy encounter. If you still feel differently about the origins or meaning of the word, can you point me to your sources?
Now, to make a broader point, I would argue that starting difficulty at too high of a level and later "nerfing" it is always superior to starting things out too easy and then "buffing" the difficulty. There are myriad reasons why this is so, including that it's better for people to say, "I beat that when it was way harder than now," than it is for people to say, "it's not fair that it was so easy for him to get that item, but now I can't get it because they made it too hard." You can, of course, argue that they should have gotten the balance right in the first place, but that's just not always realistic.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
...and if you disagree with me, you're probably <insert random ad hominem attack here>.
. And remember that testers are generally good at gaming, usually much better than the average developer.
Well the testers they showed in their inferno is hard video were just graphic designers who obviously don't have the time hardcore gamers do and I doubt they're even a fraction as good as some of the best D2 players...hopefully 2x difficulty will cover the gap...all we have to do is pray that they are made of diamonds and won't crack to pressure from people who can't get past act 1 after the first two weeks (I hope it's that hard anyway)
+ they said they tested bosses they try em like 20 times and if they dont kill em they have to fix em a bit and then on relise they are gona duble the str of a boss.
that one made my day go faster 14 to go
I'm pretty damn certain they have full time testers. Never seen a game get developed without them. Blizzard does use their whole company to assist in gameplay testing though. Unfortunately, the reason for nobody clearing Inferno yet isn't given and we're left to guess if it is due to difficulty or a myriad of other possible factors.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Was anyone in the internal test team able to beat D3 Inferno difficulty?
Jay Wilson:
no
So really... it seems that this is gonna get, really... REALLY... hard
those in the testing team are no noobs i tell ya :I
Source:
https://twitter.com/...027154352013313
Discuss!
like/Dislike?
I like!
EDIT: Wasn't there also some quote from Jay Wilson about how the difficulty was set by tuning Inferno so that only the best in-house gamers thought the difficulty was correct, and then doubling it? A quick google search turned up other references to the quote but not the quote itself, which is making me wonder if it was ever a real quote to begin with.
Cause you know... GladHeHasBeta is an uber leet gamer pro that will beat the game in 4 weeks tops....
I just hope their definition of hard does not involve random one-shot unavoidable deaths, as that does not make a game challenging, only stupid.
Hoping more for Dark Souls type of difficulty, where you as the player is always to blame when you die. Not some random number generator deciding you should die.
They can also pump the hell out of Monster damage making it so you need to actually avoid damage...
i really hope it will take a LONG while for people to complete inferno, there will defiantly be people that do it "fast" but thats not many at all
but, the first one to beat Inferno, on Hardcore. Will be LEGENDARY
You are, of course, entitled to believe the word "nerf" means whatever you wish. To the rest of us, as far as I'm aware, it just means to reduce the difficulty or effectiveness of something. Any connotations you are attaching to it are, imho, your own.
I think his name is Jonathan...anyway, the guy from arena net seemed to play GW2 pretty well.
It's an understandable stereotypeas it's usually true. But as it was quoted in the other thread, they pretty much double the difficulty when their best testers complete Inferno. And remember that testers are generally good at gaming, usually much better than the average developer.
I cannot WAIT to sink my teeth in to this stuff. And really not just Inferno, but all the difficulties. ARGH COME ON 2 WEEKS
Nerfing is somthing that proves a failed system, you never should need to nerf, if you do then you are shooting for wrong goals overall (blizz have done this whit wow for years)
It's better to think of think as a balance, to keep as many peoples as possible in "the flow" of the game. the stage where the game is not TO hard(if it is hard it must still be rewarding) or to easy. Nerfing dips the game into the boring side of the curve most of the time, or at least gets reeeeally close, thats when its quite bad.
when a game is to easy, its boring (one of the reasons we play strange builds in games like Diablo)
when a game is to hard, its frustrating, making you want to smash your keyboard and you have 100% dropped the immersion.
(PIC MADE BY ME for an Essay in Software engineering about Game Flow)
i have written 2 essays about the subject (one smaller, one larger)
The etymology of the word "nerf" comes from the line of Parker Brothers toys which are covered or made out of soft foam rubber. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerf The term, "to nerf," in that light, very clearly means to make something "softer," or to blunt it's impact. In terms of usage, "nerf" can be thought of as the opposite of "buff," and neither one is inherently pandering. After all, you can nerf a player ability or item just as easily as you can nerf an enemy encounter. If you still feel differently about the origins or meaning of the word, can you point me to your sources?
Now, to make a broader point, I would argue that starting difficulty at too high of a level and later "nerfing" it is always superior to starting things out too easy and then "buffing" the difficulty. There are myriad reasons why this is so, including that it's better for people to say, "I beat that when it was way harder than now," than it is for people to say, "it's not fair that it was so easy for him to get that item, but now I can't get it because they made it too hard." You can, of course, argue that they should have gotten the balance right in the first place, but that's just not always realistic.
Well the testers they showed in their inferno is hard video were just graphic designers who obviously don't have the time hardcore gamers do and I doubt they're even a fraction as good as some of the best D2 players...hopefully 2x difficulty will cover the gap...all we have to do is pray that they are made of diamonds and won't crack to pressure from people who can't get past act 1 after the first two weeks (I hope it's that hard anyway)
pro paint and pro paint accessories
that one made my day go faster 14 to go