Onyx stated in our interview that ' v1.02 turned out to be the last patch for Back to Hellfire. Unfortunately, so ends the legacy of Back to Hellfire. Hellfire added a lot to the entertainment value of Diablo I and I still enjoy playing it from time to time. Now, all this sounds like I don't like Hellfire. So what Sierra did was basically take the leftovers and use them. The code behind unlocking the Na-Krul room, the Celia quest, the Nest quest and others was also originally written by Blizzard to support planned quests that never made it in the final product.

It's not widely known that most Hellfire monster graphics were originally created by Blizzard, but didn't make it in the final game. The expansion was composed mainly from material that was left behind from Blizzard in the game release, including monsters and game mechanics. I wouldn't say Blizzard have anything to learn from Sierra. More entertainment, more places to explore, new things to do. But, on the other hand, it offered 2 new sets of dungeons with numerous new monsters and items - that's what matters to me. So it's only natural that Hellfire isn't considered cannon and it has many flaws. Sierra developed the expansion, but it wasn't supported on the Blizzard realms and Blizzard kept patching the original game, while the expansion was left behind. onyx: The way Hellfire was created was wrong from the start. Do you believe there are things which Hellfire did that the development team for Diablo III could learn from? Quote from Interview » DiabloFans: Blizzard has denied Hellfire as official game canon numerous times in the past, especially with the dawn of the Monk class in Diablo III, a character that shares a name with that of Hellfire.

To hellfire and back