June 2013 Interview of Josh Mosqueira, Travis Day, and Kevin Martens

The Diablo III developers discuss the itemization revamp, designing D3 for both console and the PC, monster affixes, and much more!

Josh Mosqueira - Diablo III Game Director
Three Diablo III developers recently provided an exclusive interview to Diablo Somepage. They discussed the itemization overhaul and why it won't be finished by BlizzCon 2013, killing bosses versus elites, achievements, and many more D3 topics. Diablo III Game Director Josh Mosqueira (seen above) was joined by Game Designer Travis Day and Lead Designer Kevin Martens for this wide-ranging interview on June 7, 2013. A transcription of the interview is provided below.

Details about these topics can be found in three news reports, providing context for the questions and responses in the interviews:



Interview Topics
Select any of these interview topics to jump directly to that part of the transcript:

Read on for the full transcript of the interview with the Diablo III developers!


  • Interview Date: June 7, 2013
  • Interviewees: Josh Mosqueira (Diablo III Game Director), Travis Day (Diablo III Game Designer), and Kevin Martens (Diablo III Lead Designer)
  • Interviewer: Matthew Bramblet (Diablo Somepage)
  • This transcript was taken from an audio recording of the interview, and was lightly edited for clarity.


Developer Interview Transcript
History of Josh Mosqueira at Blizzard
Diablo Somepage: Josh, congratulations on the Diablo III game director position. Your introductory post gave an overview of your work in the industry; can you share a bit about your history at Blizzard, and your work on the console development of D3?
Josh: So I joined Blizzard two years ago, and was hired specifically as a lead designer for the console team. When I started working it was just myself, and Julia Humphreys who was our producer on console, and Norbert Zeibel who was our lead programmer. It was just the three of us in an office for a month or two, as we were all getting to know each other, getting to know Blizzard, and starting to tackle the big question of how do you take such an awesome PC game as Diablo III and put it on console while keeping it that awesome.[audio] We started that and then through the course of the summer, first Norbert, then Julia, then myself, we got roped into helping the PC team. They were coming down the pipe, and they really wanted to finally ship D3. So Norbert ended up working on some streaming stuff, and Julia and I spent most of that summer running usability tests, just making sure that things like the tutorial and the opening of the game were as awesome as it can be for new players. I ended up working on some distribution for some of those areas, really trying to get a good sense for what the game really is... [audio]

It wasn't until we shipped on PC that the real focus on the console side of things really started in earnest. So I've been doing that for the last year and a little bit.


Diablo Somepage: For the PS3 and Xbox 360 version, was that all pretty much developed together, or were separate teams looking at the different aspects of those consoles?
Josh: We have sort of a sub-team within what we call Team 3, which is the Diablo team; it's just the console team. We've been working on the PS3 and the 360 in tandem from the start.


Game Director Position
Diablo Somepage: So the Game Director position covers both the PC and the console side, as far as setting the vision for the entire game?
Josh: Yes it does. I think it's very much the same relationship that Jay had when he was the game director, he oversaw both the PC and the console side of things. On the console, we were a little bit more autonomous. Now, after E3, my focus is going really to be diving deep on what we're doing next. We actually have one of our senior designers stepping into the lead console role, Jason Bender, so he'll be continuing to keep the console flame alive.


Console vs. PC Development
Diablo Somepage: What do you think as far as the differences in development of Diablo III on the PC side as opposed to the console. I know there were some console-specific functionality that was added in, when you moved it from the PC side.
Josh: That's a really sort of good question, I think it speaks to the general philosophy here at Blizzard. In that, when we start thinking about new games, we don't ask ourselves, "Let's start by what platform the game comes on first, then figure out the game." We figure out the game first, and then we ask ourselves, "What platforms would that game really feel awesome on?" I think it was really important for me, especially when I was the lead on the console. So Jay said, "Look, whatever tweaks you need to make to translate Diablo so it feels like an awesome console game, feel free to make those decisions." Which is why we went in, and so many of the tweaks we made, not just to skills, but to the camera, and some of the other things we added like the Evade move -- basically we're trying to make the best Diablo console game we can.

I think that philosophy is still going to be in place. And I really want us to when we're thinking about Diablo on the PC, we want make sure that we're making the best game for PC that we can. I want to always make sure that we treat each of these platforms as -- they're not copies of one another, they're just sort of different games. What makes a great PC game, we will make decisions that will steer Diablo that way; what makes a good Diablo console game, we will steer console in that direction.


D3 Features From Console to PC
Diablo Somepage: You've talked before about why the Evade move is necessary for the console, and not necessarily for the PC. Are there other areas where there were ideas that were added to the console game, as these ports were being developed -- such as, I think there was a small little 6 second buff that you can get throughout, on the console side. Is there anything like that that you could see as being tried out first on the console, and actually making the shift over into the PC side?
Josh: I think, this is really one of those questions, once people get their hands on the console game and start learning more about it, and when it comes out in September - I think if there are certain aspects of it that our PC community says, "Hey, we would like to try some of this stuff out", I think we would be open to considering some of those changes, for sure.


Designing the Fantasy
Diablo Somepage: Going forward with the PC version, what are the main areas you would like to see improved or expanded on?
Josh: Well, I think the team, and Kevin and Travis here, we've kept working on keeping the game evolving and moving forward. Like I said, once I come back from E3, that's when I myself will be going to start to dive into the deep end of the Diablo 3 PC world. But I think, just to talk high level, a lot of what I said in my blog post I think for me is the foundation of Diablo 3 going forward: that is, really focusing on what our fantasy is. I think that Diablo is such a unique Action RPG in terms of the sense of: we let the players play these bad-ass heroes, they have these great skills, and they have all these awesome items. The combination of epic heroes and epic loot is, for me, at the heart of the Diablo experience.

So moving forward, we know that itemization is something that keeps coming up that we have some really cool plans, I think Travis and Kevin will talk about some of those right now. We really want to reclaim the Diablo roots, and hold them up high, and focus on: what are the fantasies, what are the core pillars for our fantasy, how do we make the player feel like they're embodying these epic heroes? How do we create epic villains that will challenge these heroes? How do we make loot meaningful and rewarding, and something that makes you keep coming back for more and more and more. I think those are the sort of the big tent poles that as a team, that we're really rallying around, and we really want to drive forward.

Josh: I don't know if the other guys want to add anything to that.

Kevin: I've suggested that we double down on Whimsyshire, and have the teddy bears escape from it and populate the whole world, as monsters. [Laughter]

Diablo Somepage: There you go, that would certainly give a very different feel to the game, I imagine.

Kevin: Josh hasn't bitten on that one yet, but I'm going to keep pushing for it.

Josh: I think if I show up, and my office is filled with teddy bears, I might consider that.

Travis: That could be creepy though, flowers and teddy bears, just disturbing. [crosstalk]

Josh: Probably not the best idea... [Laughter] [audio]


Xbox 360 and PS3 Diablo III
Diablo Somepage: Will the Xbox 360 version have the same feature set as the PS3, or are there any significant differences between the two?
Josh: No, I think it was important for us from the start, even though we have this really great relationship with Sony, is that we wanted to make sure that we treated all our console players equally. In terms of feature set, and that kind of stuff, we've been making sure that both PlayStation and Xbox players have pretty much the same experience.


Diablo Somepage: So the consoles are each on each on their own separate networks. Will either of those have any sort of public website display as far as the characters go, to show off to your friends, not just the people who are playing with you?
Josh: I think that's one of the great things on the PC, the way we have our battle.net and the way we have for players to see their profile. We feel that's such an important part of the Blizzard experience. But unfortunately for Sony and the PlayStation Network, and for Xbox Live -- they're great platforms, but we haven't been able to really get that level of interconnection between our Battle.net and those platforms. So for the time being, we won't have a public website where you can see all your cool profiles and all that kind of stuff. You'll be able to do it in-game; you'll be able to go through your friend's list, and be able to see their characters and stuff like that. But outside of that, we won't have anything, yet. It's something that's potentially for the next-gen platforms, we may have a bigger sort of emphasis on these social features; we want to see if we could try to do something for them.


Trading and Auctions on the Console D3
Diablo Somepage: Is it accurate that for both the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 versions, there will not be either a Gold Auction House or a Real Money Auction House?
Josh: That is correct. For the Xbox and PS3, there are no auction houses.

Diablo Somepage: Thinking about that, and the issues that ended up pushing the creation of the Auction House on the PC side, are you worried about any of the trading issues popping up in those console versions? Will there be any restrictions there, or can pretty much anybody jump into a game together and trade, two PS3 console players for example.
Josh: I think that's a good question. The quick answer is that players will be able to jump in and trade with one another. The key thing to keep in mind, and the real reason for not having an Auction House, is that the console ecosystem is very different from the PC one. Consoles are essentially a closed ecosystem; for example, for Microsoft you need to sign up for Xbox Live, there's a monthly subscription, your friends list, you actually have a limit to how many friends you can have. So all of those reasons combine to... the landscapes are different. A lot of the concerns, a lot of the security things we wanted to make sure that the Auction House addressed, are less of a concern in the console ecosystem.


Itemization Revamp
Diablo Somepage: How is the item revamp going?
Josh: I'll start off, and then I'll let the experts and the item ninjas here fill in. When it says that we wanted to focus on that core essential fantasy for Diablo, one of the things we're working on, is something that I've been calling "Loot 2.0". That is, how can we really deliver on that fantasy? Diablo is all about items; how do we make those items rewarding, making sure that you're getting good upgrades at a reasonable clip. So the guys have come up with a lot of really cool ideas that we just can't wait for you guys to get your hands on. Travis?

Travis: Did you have anything specific you wanted to know about, or did you want me to just sort of talk about it?

Diablo Somepage: Well, I transcribed your lengthy Twitch.tv interview, so I don't want to just copy all of that. Certainly, if there has been anything that has developed since then... The one question I had was, we hadn't heard in a while about the legendaries scaling, where every legendary can drop at the different levels. Is that still part of the revamp, are you expecting to have that in?
Travis: Yeah, absolutely. There's still a lot of work to be done. There are a lot of moving pieces when it comes to Diablo's items and rewards schemes. A lot of the high level points are still the case: we want you to remember awesome items because they did something memorable, not just because they had big numbers on them. It's a lot of work to do, and there's a lot of ground to cover.

The scaling legendaries, just for clarity, because I have to explain this one to people once in a while: they don't get higher level as your character levels, it means that you are able to find higher level versions of things that dropped at lower levels.

Diablo Somepage: Right, they aren't like Heirloom item legendaries.

Travis: Exactly, they aren't heirloom items. But yeah, the scaling legendaries is something we've gotten a lot of great feedback on. People are really excited about the possibilities of, "Oh man, I can find a non-max level The Gidbinn that's amazing, and have a little fetish running around with me", if that's the effect when we're all said and done. Scaling legendaries is a piece of it. A lot of the other moving parts is just coming up with the ideas specifically, like what are the things going to be? How do we generate 200+ ideas for effects that are completely unique to this item? A lot of the examples that I've given still hold true, and we've gotten a lot of work done in that area, there's still a lot to come up with.

We've had some crazy ideas, ranging from the stuff that I've mentioned before, like: let's your Call of the Ancients last forever, and just turns them into basically like permanent companions. We've also had more... flavorful ideas, I guess would be the best way to put them. One of the ideas we had come up in our brainstorm sessions which we all got really excited about, and then have to figure out how to make work is: you have a Treasure Goblin who follows you around, and picks up white and grey items, and occasionally throws magical items out of his sack for you. Things like that... we feel like there's a lot of room, right? We want you to remember the items because they did that awesome thing. Like when people talk about Windforce in Diablo 2, they remember it because Windforce had this completely unique effect. So we're trying to recapture that as much as we can.


Itemization Revamp Schedule
Diablo Somepage: Is that something you're expecting to see before BlizzCon 2013, or is this very much down the road before this entire itemization revamp lands?
Kevin: It's done when it's done.

Diablo Somepage: Fair enough.

Travis: It'll be a while, it's certainly not before BlizzCon. Players should not expect to see it coming piecemeal; when it's ready it'll be all as one big change to the system. It's not going to be something that little bits are doled out.

Josh: That's true. We're really taking it as a more multifaceted approach to addressing the question of loot. As Travis said, there are a lot of moving pieces; not just within individual items, but sort of overall. I think for everybody to get a real good sense of all of these changes, we're gonna have to give you guys a whole package.


Tradeable vs. Soulbound Items
Diablo Somepage: Travis, you had talked previously about the whole question of the wanting my loot to be great, but then how to make that possible with tradeable items being the core currently of the game. What about the idea of items that are not just a binary choice, but as you upgrade them, essentially they become soulbound, or as they become more powerful or special in some way? Something similar to the Marquise gem [items]; something that you can upgrade, it becomes soulbound, perhaps even partially -- that you could then remove for a substantial gold cost. Are there any thoughts along those lines, or are you pretty much going with just the one or the other, either a tradeable item or a soulbound item?
Travis: I will say, this is something that came up many years ago when I was working on World of Warcraft. The second you blur the line between what is and is not a tradeable item, it kind of conflicts with being the whole purpose in the first place. I will say, one of the notes you put in there, about: What if I could make my Marquise gem suddenly tradeable? That defeats the purpose of the system, there's meant to be clarity, it's supposed to help you evaluate things. Like a Marquise gem is good, because you like it and it's good for your character, or it's not. There's no ground where I made Marquise gems, and then found a mechanism to unbind them somehow.

Diablo Somepage: I should have clarified, I was trying to get at the idea of the items that the Marquise gems go in can't be traded. So it's kind of like the item itself is becoming more powerful with that gem, but then you pay the money to take it out and the item is tradeable again.

Travis: Oh, I see what you're saying.

Diablo Somepage: So from that aspect, where it's more a thing of: you can have something that's cool and basically there's a penalty, or there's a cost to remove it, from a gold sink point of view as well.

Travis: We've definitely been exploring ways in which players could alter or modify their items, and certainly one of the things that comes up is that doing this has a very tangible cost, so potentially making it something that you can't trade again. That has been an idea we've explored, and I think generally view positively. We think that that makes the option of taking something and removing it from the economy in that way, a more positive experience as opposed to a negative experience. Like, you feel like you can't trade it, but the item is even more awesome.


Adding Gold Sinks
Diablo Somepage: Along those lines, are there any further discussions of what type of gold sinks you will add? Is that something we may see more of those added, just to keep the economy within check, apart from the itemization revamp? Or is that pretty much all going to be part of the same big package?
Travis: The gold sink stuff is definitely something we try to stay on top of as much as we can. To some extent the economy is constantly inflating, just by virtue of more gold coming in than going out. We try to help normalize that as much as possible. We try to, if we see that there's an enormous influx of gold, and players don't have anything compelling to do with their gold, we try to come up with cool things for them to do. I don't think those are necessarily some things we would just throw in all at once, I don't think there's a master plan to make gold amazingly important.

We do frequently try to do things, like: hey it would be awesome if we added some new crafting recipes, so we add the Archon armors; and some of those are really expensive to craft, and Marquise gems help with that as well. It's just helping to provide players with outlets for their gold that they feel good about. And more outlets for that gold is always better, so that will probably be something that over time we will just continue adding more and more things, to give players more options for what they do with their in-game gold.


2 Billion Gold Auction House Cap
Diablo Somepage: Are we likely to see the 2 billion gold cap raised on the gold Auction House?
Travis: That is something that comes up regularly. It's something we want to do, unfortunately it's not a spreadsheet value that we can add a couple of zeros to. It's a matter of the way the data is stored in our database, so it's not a trivial problem to fix. I will say that we would like to, but have no immediate plans to resolve that or change that.


Balancing Skills
Diablo Somepage: Wyatt Cheng had talked about a skill model that you originally put in place back during D3 beta, that all the skills were based off of, and then had moved beyond that since then. Are you likely in the near future to do what he had mentioned, to try to pull the skills back around trying to fit around that model again? Or is it pretty much a piecemeal approach when it comes to just looking at what type of skills need to be updated the most?
Travis: We have a lot of internal data. We generally have a very good understanding of what skills are used by players, what skills aren't. In a lot of cases, skills that are used, why they are used, I mean the obvious example is: Why would people use Sprint - Run Like the Wind? Oh, because Battle Rage - Into the Fray and the interaction there, and the way that it helps feed your Whirlwind, etcetera, etcetera. I think in the short-term, we've done a lot to try to help open up more diversity to players. I'd say our goal is always to allow players the freedom to choose to play their character how they want, and for other people to not make them feel bad about it. Because as soon as there's the community involved, your choice to not use Whirlwind gets called into question. Making the other playstyles more varied also helps the game in general feel different; you can mix up your gameplay experience from day to day if you choose.

It's an ongoing fight, to some extent. Trying to find the skills that are the least used is usually our focus. In that case, instead of taking the good things and taking them away, our approach has generally been taking the things that don't get much love, and trying to make them more compelling choices. The numbers that we've seen as a result of the patches, like 1.04 and 1.05, etcetera, we've seen a lot of change. The Demon Hunter and the Witch Doctor, for example, have really really good skill distribution; they see lots of diversity. The flip side of the coin is the Barb and the Wizard, who see very little.

So for the question about the model which we use to tune things. That model is certainly something where we have talked about: "how were these numbers come up with? why did we make the assumptions we made? were they correct? should we reevaluate them?" In the case of some of those things, we went, "yeah, we were wrong, and we absolutely need to redo how we tune these things." Sprint - Run Like the Wind and Energy Twister - Wicked Wind are the best examples. I've said repeatedly, at this point, we suck with anything that's a tornado; basically, if it's a tornado, it's probably broken. [Laughter] So we reevaluate, how do we balance these effects? What decisions lead us to put that number in that place? We have recently said: yeah, this was wrong, let's reevaluate how this tuning model works, for this part of the game that is just horribly askew. Let's see what these numbers should be, with these assumptions that we now have based on live data, as opposed to imagined gameplay.


Achievements and Statistics
Diablo Somepage: Are we likely to see anymore achievements added throughout the game? Or is that pretty much something whenever there's an expansion or something of that level, new achievements will be added in?
Kevin: Yeah, exactly, there's no pending current plans to be adding new achievements.


Diablo Somepage: Is there any chance eventually of having statistics? Like World of Warcraft has a zillion different stats about your character: what it's done, how many times you've killed a specific boss, that sort of thing. Is any of that tracked in D3, that could be available to the players to look at?
Kevin: We track some of the stuff WoW does, we track some things they don't, we don't track some of the things that they do, etcetera. We have discussed that before, but that's also not something that's actively being worked on in a design point of view. In a future Diablo product where a bunch of other stuff gets done, it's possible that we could use some of that to make new achievements, as well, the ones that could be interesting. But for the time being, the live game has the stats that we want it to have.


Multiplayer Public Games
Diablo Somepage: There were many multiplayer improvements made in 1.0.8, and a lot more people now playing public multiplayer. There have been some complaints with that, where people get into public games that are already half completed, or the main objective is already done. Are there any plans to work on that, to try to give better matchmaking there?
Kevin: Yeah, there are plans for that. I should say there's not like solid, settled designs in how we'll deal with that, nor a time-frame, which I'm sure is an answer you're used to getting to a question like this. But yeah, we're concerned about that. We see it ourselves; when you play public games, you'll get in that sort of cycle of jumping into games where, for example, Keywardens have already been cleared out. Yeah, we're concerned about it, and we'll do our best to deal with it when we can.


Diablo Somepage: In those multiplayer games, when there are Barbs sprinting ahead, or other characters running off and people not sticking together. What about the idea of incentives to encourage people to stay together: like if 3/4 of the characters are in one place, and one guy is off in another place very far away, his experience or drops are reduced?
Kevin: Things like that have been both discussed and prototyped, and it certainly gets complicated rapidly. In those situations, there's good reasons for people to fall behind sometimes, or if you get hit with a minor lag spike and you fall behind and miss some experience, people certainly get validly pissed off if stuff like that happens. To make a long story short, some of the build diversity issues -- if we can give Barbarians things to do beyond the Whirlwind - Sprint builds, that are equally compelling, that will solve the problem partly. We've also experimented with ideas like the ability to port to other players using a town portal level channel, so if someone gets too far ahead of you or you get separated, you can get to them more rapidly than jumping back to town and teleporting to them. So it's another problem that we're working on.


Solo vs. Multiplayer
Diablo Somepage: Thinking about the difficulty of content, the content that went in with the Ubers seemed designed for the group; you can do it solo, but obviously it is easier in a group. Is that pretty much what you're looking at going forward for new content, or do you want to push more towards solo versus grouping - where's the thought about that, at this point?
Kevin: I don't think we want to exclusively push to encourage people to play co-op, but co-op is generally something that we feel is more fun, but not to the exclusion of single-player options. I would say that new things that we design for the future should feed both groups. It's not wrong to play by yourself, but sometimes you should feel that it's better to play with others. Somewhere in the "frequent" level, but not "always". So I think that content that can be soloed easily, or might even be better soloed, has a place in the game. The content that's more efficiently done with other players, which increases your social impact. It's a very busy game out there, and sometimes it feels lonely; we don't want it to feel lonely, and when we make it better to play with other people, that inherently makes it more fun.

That's the thing, it's not binary; both are valid, but I think if it's balanced more towards playing with friends, or strangers for that matter, it's a good thing.


Monster Affixes
Diablo Somepage: There had been a little bit of discussion about new monster affixes. Is that something where we are likely would see progressing a new affix here and there, or is the expectation that there would be 5 new ones added all together, or something like that?
Kevin: Exactly, I think it's certainly possible, let's say that -- First, I think that more content like that is probably be best delivered in some sort of future Diablo project... I wonder what my code word for that is, I can't think of it? [Laughter] It's not usually something we'd deliver piecemeal, when you'd have a monster affix just on it's own, and it suddenly gets populated out there in the existing elite system. Unique monsters obviously get things that look much like affixes sometimes, and they get special variations or even entirely unique ones. Both of those things will be happening in future products.


Combat Pacing and Monster Affixes
Diablo Somepage: Wyatt Cheng had a rather long discussion about the amount of damage that monsters can do, versus the amount of healing that characters can do, since Life on Hit and Lifesteal are so powerful these days at the high end. He had gone through a whole scenario about trying to deal with that particular issue. I was wondering, are there things like that, that could be handled on a monster affix level? Like a monster that would do half the normal damage, but once you engaged it, none of the healing from Life on Hit or Lifesteal would take you above 50% health.
Travis: It is totally possible that an affix could do that. I think that the better question for us would be, is that desirable? Generally, the problem that we have is -- well, the problem Wyatt was talking about specifically was the combat pacing, the rate at which players take damage versus health, the way in which both of those things scale in our game, like leech damage outscales monster's damage at an absurd rate, to the point where you eventually would become unkillable. It's really hard to fix an integral problem to the game like combat pacing with a single monster affix. We don't want it to feel like, "Well, 99% of the time, everything is trivial, but man when I run into that affix I die all the time because my leech stops working." There is absolutely room to have affixes that further affect combat pacing; those are great, that's kind of intentions of the affixes is that they mix up your gameplay from moment to moment, from creature to creature. But as it comes to something like combat pacing, incoming damage versus incoming healing; that's something we need to work out at a very basic level, and have that sort of affect the entire game, and not just a very specific part.

Kevin: To add a note to what Travis said, to briefly cover some of the monster affix design philosophy. Everything said Travis said was accurate. When you're making monster affixes generally speaking, the health one being an example, the affix kind of has to be obvious at a glance. You shouldn't have to engage the monster very long in order to understand what it's doing. It can do somewhat obscure things as long as the visual effects, or the debuffs on your character, somehow make that obvious. So what we don't want to do, generally speaking, is have the monster affect a stat on you, for example like Life Regen on Hit. That would be one level of abstraction too removed, to know what's going on, and that it doesn't have a good visual cue that we could probably design so that you'd know that's happening. So that wouldn't be a good place to solve that particular problem as well... It's just interesting, to think about monster affixes that way. The game just moves so fast, they have to be ultra-clear.


Rewards from Bosses
Diablo Somepage: There had been some talk about making the end Act bosses more interesting. I guess it comes down to the balance of the elites versus the bosses, what do you want people to be really striving to go for? Is that something you're interested in doing, and if so would short-term smaller fixes, like letting them give a Nephalem Valor stack, or provide a big chunk of experience if you kill them with 5 stacks -- would those be the sort of things that might be considered?
Kevin: Right, so a couple of notes on bosses. Why you fight bosses versus why you fight elites, has sort of a different balance than previous Diablo games did. Bosses aren't so much about the challenge in D3 vanilla, as they are about the celebration or the story moment that you have defeated another Lord of Hell. That is different than other games, certainly other games we make right now and other games we've made in the past. That's sort of deliberate; whereas the challenge generally comes in with the elite monsters, which are intended to often be harder than the bosses. That said, every time we make something as heavily scripted as some of the boss fights are, we always think of better versions after we ship, and we always love to go back and fix some of that content. That's not a super necessarily high-priority thing to do.

When you get your hands on the console game, you'll find that improvements have been made to some of the boss fights; some of those could possibly be rolled back into the PC version in the future. And certainly new bosses that we make in the future, we're going to try to learn from what we did with those ones, and make them better. I don't think we'll do any like quick, short-term things, in a patch to just give them a stack of Nephalem Valor or something like that. You're not rewarded in such a way to require you to go kill them very often anyway, it is still better to kill the elites and rares as per my earlier philosophy statement. But yes, they could be better.


[End of interview.]

Our thanks to Josh Mosqueira, Travis Day, and Kevin Martens for taking the time for this interview, and a special thanks to Lylirra for organizing and running it!
Feedback for Diablo Somepage