For example, a necromancer can have 10-30 minions. That amount has never been used in an MMO. So would a necro be somehow "limited" to 1 skeleton??? That pretty much ruins the class.
How would you know if it works if it has never been used? What works in a game depends on the game mechanics, and since we know nothing of the game mechanics of this so-called world of diablo, no one can make that judgement.
Playing D2 on Battle.net was very close to being MMO quality. If it were to be an MMO, all you would have to do is scrap the join game screen and make the diablo world one big one. But the world would have to be larger of course. Establish a flexible in-game economy and all that good stuff that has become standard in an MMO.
How would you know if it works if it has never been used? What works in a game depends on the game mechanics, and since we know nothing of the game mechanics of this so-called world of diablo, no one can make that judgement.
Playing D2 on Battle.net was very close to being MMO quality. If it were to be an MMO, all you would have to do is scrap the join game screen and make the diablo world one big one. But the world would have to be larger of course. Establish a flexible in-game economy and all that good stuff that has become standard in an MMO.
Imagine the lag of players with 30 minions.
People complained of lag in 8 player games with one necro's minions...
Given the different vision perspectives of D2 vs WOW, you would hardly be able to see anything on the screen with 2-3 necros plus 90 minions running around you.
Its pretty obvious "mechanics wise" there would be issues with that many minions in a diablo MMO...
People complained of lag in 8 player games with one necro's minions...
Given the different vision perspectives of D2 vs WOW, you would hardly be able to see anything on the screen with 2-3 necros plus 90 minions running around you.
Its pretty obvious "mechanics wise" there would be issues with that many minions in a diablo MMO...
I may only have a small understanding of how game coding works, but I do know something about how it's processed.
At that point it's graphics processing. If the graphics in the game are upgraded by a reasonable amount, then the average computer would be able to handle it. And that's also programming. Depending on how much of the game information is stored on the computer and how much is sent through the internet. The less that has to be exchanged through that series of tubes, the less of a chance of lag there will be.
Besides, who's to say that D2 is comparable to WoW. Two completely different games at two different periods of time.
But the fact remains that you can't know something if it hasn't been proven.
No your not understanding, Warcraft or Diablo arent just a name or story or setting, its a total package.
One of these things in the total package is the rts formula of Warcraft and the hack&slash (single/multiplayer) formula of Diablo.
WoW isnt part of that Warcraft formula, WoW is part of the WoW formula (wich may or may not share things with Warcraft) and subsequently a "Diablo MMO" would be WoD or part of the WoD formula, not Diablo formula thus not a Diablo game but a WoD game. (there is a difference in name for a reason)
Diablo and Warcraft arent the "games". They're the franchise. And WoW (and any possible WoD in the future) would stay on the same franchise. Doesnt matter how different a game is. As long as the game isnt "named" as part of the series, its ok. But its still the same franchise. I think it covers everything.
No your not understanding, Warcraft or Diablo arent just a name or story or setting, its a total package.
Correction, they're franchises. You're treating them more like genres than franchises.
One of these things in the total package is the rts formula of Warcraft and the hack&slash (single/multiplayer) formula of Diablo.
WoW isnt part of that Warcraft formula, WoW is part of the WoW formula (wich may or may not share things with Warcraft) and subsequently a "Diablo MMO" would be WoD or part of the WoD formula, not Diablo formula thus not a Diablo game but a WoD game. (there is a difference in name for a reason)
Okay, listen: Blizzard's naming process is not an equation of any sort. They name it as they see fit. Don't oversimplify it like that.
Besides, World of Diablo is a horrible name. Just so everyone knows, World of ___ is not a standard title for MMORPGs. Don't let this guy mislead you, as he is very wrong.
Yes WoW 2, part of the WoW franchise.
You didn't even read the whole sentence did you? How can you make a sequel to a game that doesn't end? Especially when it is part of a larger plot (you know, the one that ties into entire Warcraft franchise, as it is part of it).
World of Warcraft is not a franchise in itself. It is part of a franchise.
btw, about tRaDiNgYo's post about guildwars (and i dont mean this as an offense m8) ; i got that game too, thougt it was kinda cool and all (except for the itemdrops, not enough variation in the game about those drops). and it wasn't 'pay to play'. Should diablo3 be like that it think it would be exceptable (except with more item diversity off course :rolleyes: )
I like the worlds, and the mmo. along with the camera view and shit.
BUT it was boring. blizzard can fix that easily with d3
It doesnt cover anything, believe what you must believe, whatever, your just to stubborn to see my points, arguments and facts.
Facts? You just pulled a titling formula out of your ass and confused genre for franchise. You're ignorant as hell.
No i'm treating them like franchises, your treating them like a story or a name or a setting.
Oh my god. You're so horrible at this. You're saying that WoW can't be part of the Warcraft franchise because it's an MMORPG and not an RTS. Thus, you're classifying them by genre. Therefore, you couldn't possibly be talking in terms of franchises.
No they dont you dumbass, you think they wouldv named WoW Warcraft 3 if they wanted too? (your still not getting WoW WAS Warcraft 3)
Obviously not, as there is a Warcraft 3, and it is the RTS, as opposed to World of Warcraft. I don't give a shit if WC3 was originally slated to be an MMORPG. That's not what I'm talking about.
Thats not the point, stop being dumb.
Ladies first. *that's you doppel*
WTF are you talking about? THATS NOT THE POINT, dumbass.
(but it is as of today the standard of Blizzards MMORPG's, or do you want to debate that? lol)
If you weren't the dumbass, you would have noticed that I wasn't saying that in reference to anything you said in particular. I was addressing something that was urking me. Way to go, dumbass.
You think your some kind of filosophical genius? LOL, give me a brake, or better yet give yourself a brake because your filosophical thinking SUCKS.
For the record, not only did you spell philosophical wrong, but you used the wrong word for "break". "Brake" is what is in your car.
Anyways, it's not a philosophy you dumbass. It's common sense. Why would they make a sequel to a game they can release expansions and patches for to update and improve the game? Not only that, but considering that the game is continuous, there is no ultimate goal to be achieved, thus there is no ending.
I never said both games cant tie in with eachother, fact remains Warcraft is Warcraft, WoW is WoW.
If WoW isn't Warcraft. It wouldn't be in the title.
So if I'm not addressing any of your points, then you should take care to clarify your points. Although I doubt you'd get anywhere with that, as it wouldn't make any sense, anyways.
Quote from name="dictionary "franchise"" »
A brand name under which a series of products is released.
Warcraft is in the name, World of Warcraft, therefore, it has the brand name, thus making it part of the series of products. Therefore, it's part of the franchise.
(For the record, Doppel threw the first punch. Just saying that in case someone tries to point the finger at me.)
It doesnt cover anything, believe what you must believe, whatever, your just to stubborn to see my points, arguments and facts.
i tend to believe the exact same thing. In fact, you're not making any sense. How can you say a game thats in the Diablo setting doesnt belong to the Diablo franchise? Just check http://www.blizzard.com mouse over the games. What do you see?
Warcraft Universe
<game names listed i'm too bored to write down>
Diablo Universe
<game names again>
Starcraft Universe
<dont have to repeat myself, do i?>
what does it tell you?
No they dont you dumbass, you think they wouldv named WoW Warcraft 3 if they wanted too? (your still not getting WoW WAS Warcraft 3)
actually you're doing wrong in 2 ways.
1. you personally offend him cause you didnt prove a valid point.
2. WoW wasnt Warcraft 3. They were developed at the same time, thats why the so close announcements and releases. In fact, WoW only got released after the Warcraft 3 expansion (Frozen Throne) which was connected with it (Founding of Dutorar - starting region of the Orcs - etc). Blizzard planned this, it didnt "happen by accident".
and a side comment on "Filosophical". I dont think its spelled that way in english. Its "Philosophical", "Philosophy" etc. Would be just as wrong as if you wrote "Filosofical". In greek however we use F only for that kind of thing and letter by letter translation would make it "Filosofika" (toned on the last a).
I agree that If they made a WoD or whatever it would still be in the same Franchise of course but they game would be so different it would be hard to compare the two just as WC3 and WoW i just hope they would make an MMORGP of Diablo and i highly doubt they would because most Diablo fans not all think that Diablo could never be an MMORPG because of the slow game play. agree or disagree i just had to add my two cents.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Dream as if you'll live forever, and live as if you'll die today. "James Dean"
now on what you said, i think i understood what you said and also agree with it too (!). Slow gameplay definitely doesnt suit Diablo. But who expected what they did with WoW in the first place? And it was a success.
Yes, it was a success but i think that most Diablo players disagree with the "success" statement. If you played D2 again, (don't know if you do or not) you would notice that if you asked anyone playing "Is WoW a good game?" 90% of all players would tell you it was the worst game ever put out by Blizzard. The whole "World of Diablo" idea just doesn't appeal to "MOST" of the Diablo fan base.
(is my punctuation better?)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Dream as if you'll live forever, and live as if you'll die today. "James Dean"
Mmmmm...
What's with all this argueing? And Doppel, please type english a bit better.
This is what I can get out of all this and then these are facts
- WoW isn't Warcraft 3. Warcraft 3 is Warcraft 3.
- Uhh WoW is kinda and kinda not part of the Warcraft series. It's still Warcraft storyline, but different genre. Up to you to think how you want about that.
- Wtf is with the ladies first crap.
- Who cares if he spelt philosophical wrong.
*Muttonchops is mostly right, from what I get from all this Chill with the dumbasses though xD
*Lastly, I think blizzard would classify WoW as part of the Warcraft series. Truthfully, I dunno, but seems logical to me. Not part of facts.
*bow*
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Cards and flowers on your window, your friends all plead for you to stay,
sometimes beginnings aren't so simple, sometimes goodbye's the only way."
Moving Diablo to a MMORPG world is worrisome for me. By far my fave character is the Necro. I usually settle at about 20 or so minions.
Lag is already a very unenjoyable factor on bnet.
I will be devastated if the necro gets crippled in order to accomodate a Diablo MMORPG.
Please don't do it Blizzard!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
So we've got over the problem of colour in D3. Great. Now let's argue about everything else not yet set in stone and help make this game simply great! Game on.
No worries. Blizzard will find a way to reduce lag. I already know one way. In mmorpg form, the lands wouldn't be that big, and not very detailed, if they kept it the same. But added lots more to it of course. So, really, it wouldn't be all that bad.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Cards and flowers on your window, your friends all plead for you to stay,
sometimes beginnings aren't so simple, sometimes goodbye's the only way."
See now your just making a fool out of yourself, go look it up please because its becomming embarassing.
right, WoW was developed first, and then because it ended up as WoW and not Warcraft 3 they delayed it till Warcraft 3 and its expansion came out to lead the story there. Makes perfect sense! Or not, you dont make much sense either. And that was a personal offense what you said but i wont lower myself to reply in offenses. I can, but i dont want to.
Quote from Doppelganger »
Are you trying to lecture me about games? Just look it up, Warcraft 3 was going way to much rpg so they remade the game into Warcraft 3 and WoW. (so that they could go even further in the rpg aspect with WoW)
Just look at graphics, dont they seem awfully the same?
the graphics look "similar". Both 3d, both close to release oh, and wait... THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO LOOK SIMILAR. They're showing the same places in most cases. Would be really nice to have 2 different games show the 2 same locations completely different, right?
since you have looked it up, why dont you show me? (can send links with a pm)
I'll say i'm wrong once i see that it was said by Blizzard officials. In public.
Wow, I haven't been back on this site since the lame-ass announcement on May 19th. There is still hope for D3 floating around out there, I see. Good Good. I think I'll hold off buying a new PC until D3 system requirements are released. Anywho.. The SC2 tag line should have been "Hell, it's a waste of time." Peace...
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
How would you know if it works if it has never been used? What works in a game depends on the game mechanics, and since we know nothing of the game mechanics of this so-called world of diablo, no one can make that judgement.
Playing D2 on Battle.net was very close to being MMO quality. If it were to be an MMO, all you would have to do is scrap the join game screen and make the diablo world one big one. But the world would have to be larger of course. Establish a flexible in-game economy and all that good stuff that has become standard in an MMO.
Imagine the lag of players with 30 minions.
People complained of lag in 8 player games with one necro's minions...
Given the different vision perspectives of D2 vs WOW, you would hardly be able to see anything on the screen with 2-3 necros plus 90 minions running around you.
Its pretty obvious "mechanics wise" there would be issues with that many minions in a diablo MMO...
I may only have a small understanding of how game coding works, but I do know something about how it's processed.
At that point it's graphics processing. If the graphics in the game are upgraded by a reasonable amount, then the average computer would be able to handle it. And that's also programming. Depending on how much of the game information is stored on the computer and how much is sent through the internet. The less that has to be exchanged through that series of tubes, the less of a chance of lag there will be.
Besides, who's to say that D2 is comparable to WoW. Two completely different games at two different periods of time.
But the fact remains that you can't know something if it hasn't been proven.
Diablo and Warcraft arent the "games". They're the franchise. And WoW (and any possible WoD in the future) would stay on the same franchise. Doesnt matter how different a game is. As long as the game isnt "named" as part of the series, its ok. But its still the same franchise. I think it covers everything.
Correction, they're franchises. You're treating them more like genres than franchises.
Okay, listen: Blizzard's naming process is not an equation of any sort. They name it as they see fit. Don't oversimplify it like that.
Besides, World of Diablo is a horrible name. Just so everyone knows, World of ___ is not a standard title for MMORPGs. Don't let this guy mislead you, as he is very wrong.
You didn't even read the whole sentence did you? How can you make a sequel to a game that doesn't end? Especially when it is part of a larger plot (you know, the one that ties into entire Warcraft franchise, as it is part of it).
World of Warcraft is not a franchise in itself. It is part of a franchise.
I like the worlds, and the mmo. along with the camera view and shit.
BUT it was boring. blizzard can fix that easily with d3
*jz_owns_all
Willing to help xfers/mods.
Facts? You just pulled a titling formula out of your ass and confused genre for franchise. You're ignorant as hell.
Oh my god. You're so horrible at this. You're saying that WoW can't be part of the Warcraft franchise because it's an MMORPG and not an RTS. Thus, you're classifying them by genre. Therefore, you couldn't possibly be talking in terms of franchises.
Obviously not, as there is a Warcraft 3, and it is the RTS, as opposed to World of Warcraft. I don't give a shit if WC3 was originally slated to be an MMORPG. That's not what I'm talking about.
Ladies first. *that's you doppel*
If you weren't the dumbass, you would have noticed that I wasn't saying that in reference to anything you said in particular. I was addressing something that was urking me. Way to go, dumbass.
For the record, not only did you spell philosophical wrong, but you used the wrong word for "break". "Brake" is what is in your car.
Anyways, it's not a philosophy you dumbass. It's common sense. Why would they make a sequel to a game they can release expansions and patches for to update and improve the game? Not only that, but considering that the game is continuous, there is no ultimate goal to be achieved, thus there is no ending.
If WoW isn't Warcraft. It wouldn't be in the title.
So if I'm not addressing any of your points, then you should take care to clarify your points. Although I doubt you'd get anywhere with that, as it wouldn't make any sense, anyways.
Warcraft is in the name, World of Warcraft, therefore, it has the brand name, thus making it part of the series of products. Therefore, it's part of the franchise.
(For the record, Doppel threw the first punch. Just saying that in case someone tries to point the finger at me.)
i tend to believe the exact same thing. In fact, you're not making any sense. How can you say a game thats in the Diablo setting doesnt belong to the Diablo franchise? Just check http://www.blizzard.com mouse over the games. What do you see?
Warcraft Universe
<game names listed i'm too bored to write down>
Diablo Universe
<game names again>
Starcraft Universe
<dont have to repeat myself, do i?>
what does it tell you?
actually you're doing wrong in 2 ways.
1. you personally offend him cause you didnt prove a valid point.
2. WoW wasnt Warcraft 3. They were developed at the same time, thats why the so close announcements and releases. In fact, WoW only got released after the Warcraft 3 expansion (Frozen Throne) which was connected with it (Founding of Dutorar - starting region of the Orcs - etc). Blizzard planned this, it didnt "happen by accident".
and a side comment on "Filosophical". I dont think its spelled that way in english. Its "Philosophical", "Philosophy" etc. Would be just as wrong as if you wrote "Filosofical". In greek however we use F only for that kind of thing and letter by letter translation would make it "Filosofika" (toned on the last a).
punctuation.
now on what you said, i think i understood what you said and also agree with it too (!). Slow gameplay definitely doesnt suit Diablo. But who expected what they did with WoW in the first place? And it was a success.
(is my punctuation better?)
What's with all this argueing? And Doppel, please type english a bit better.
This is what I can get out of all this and then these are facts
- WoW isn't Warcraft 3. Warcraft 3 is Warcraft 3.
- Uhh WoW is kinda and kinda not part of the Warcraft series. It's still Warcraft storyline, but different genre. Up to you to think how you want about that.
- Wtf is with the ladies first crap.
- Who cares if he spelt philosophical wrong.
*Muttonchops is mostly right, from what I get from all this Chill with the dumbasses though xD
*Lastly, I think blizzard would classify WoW as part of the Warcraft series. Truthfully, I dunno, but seems logical to me. Not part of facts.
*bow*
"Cards and flowers on your window, your friends all plead for you to stay,
sometimes beginnings aren't so simple, sometimes goodbye's the only way."
Lag is already a very unenjoyable factor on bnet.
I will be devastated if the necro gets crippled in order to accomodate a Diablo MMORPG.
Please don't do it Blizzard!
"Cards and flowers on your window, your friends all plead for you to stay,
sometimes beginnings aren't so simple, sometimes goodbye's the only way."
right, WoW was developed first, and then because it ended up as WoW and not Warcraft 3 they delayed it till Warcraft 3 and its expansion came out to lead the story there. Makes perfect sense! Or not, you dont make much sense either. And that was a personal offense what you said but i wont lower myself to reply in offenses. I can, but i dont want to.
the graphics look "similar". Both 3d, both close to release oh, and wait... THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO LOOK SIMILAR. They're showing the same places in most cases. Would be really nice to have 2 different games show the 2 same locations completely different, right?
I'll say i'm wrong once i see that it was said by Blizzard officials. In public.