Hopefully never for Diablo, its meant to be a hack and slash adventure game. There are plenty other MMO's out there to play. I like Diablo just the way it is.
This topic is like asking 85 year old farmers if they'd like a blue pigment of tomatoes.
"NO! Blue is so not red, even if it's still a tomato!"
The people that don't want things they've grown up with to become something else, simply because they're used to it. The same people that don't vote for change in parliaments worldover.
I think the answer to your initial question is a blatantly obvious no. It would ruin the franchise and jeopardize Blizzard's livelihood as a game developer. They would never be foolish enough to make such a horrific decision.
No. Its already a blasphemy in itself that it is treated like an MMO (online only, playing on their server only).
But anyway, your post is just exaggerated wishful thinking for game that should not be called Diablo.
Well they don't have to call it Diablo. Give it a different title. But keep a photo releastic style. I mean WOW art style just does not appeal at all to me. And I am talking like 5-7 years from now when Diablo 3 is old news.
Well, wasn't this the "Should Diablo be made into a MMO"-thread?
The answer is no. What you're describing is Aion+Warhammer Online. Or at least a game with more photo-realism and neat graphics than WoW, plus exaggerated pvp. 200-300 people in combat at the same time? Think about it. How fast do you go down in 5v1 in WoW, or any other game for that matter? Imagine 20v170, or 10v200, or just about any number. Imagine the chaos that would ensue.. no one would able to tell Bill from Bob, or Chris from Ziggy.. it wouldn't work, I hope no one ever tries to make it work and Diablo should not be desecrated!
This topic is like asking 85 year old farmers if they'd like a blue pigment of tomatoes.
"NO! Blue is so not red, even if it's still a tomato!"
The people that don't want things they've grown up with to become something else, simply because they're used to it. The same people that don't vote for change in parliaments worldover.
Well yea, what's your point? Diablo 3 has a ton of changes, but they are still keeping the fundamentals of the game. What this thread is describing is a complete change from what the game is. Of course we don't want it to change into another of the thousands of mmos out there.
You want an mmo? Go make your own or play a different one, leave this one alone.
Also, don't group people who like diablo with politics, you're just asking for an argument over nothing.
No. Its already a blasphemy in itself that it is treated like an MMO (online only, playing on their server only).
But anyway, your post is just exaggerated wishful thinking for game that should not be called Diablo.
Well they don't have to call it Diablo. Give it a different title. But keep a photo releastic style. I mean WOW art style just does not appeal at all to me. And I am talking like 5-7 years from now when Diablo 3 is old news.
Well, wasn't this the "Should Diablo be made into a MMO"-thread?
The answer is no. What you're describing is Aion+Warhammer Online. Or at least a game with more photo-realism and neat graphics than WoW, plus exaggerated pvp. 200-300 people in combat at the same time? Think about it. How fast do you go down in 5v1 in WoW, or any other game for that matter? Imagine 20v170, or 10v200, or just about any number. Imagine the chaos that would ensue.. no one would able to tell Bill from Bob, or Chris from Ziggy.. it wouldn't work, I hope no one ever tries to make it work and Diablo should not be desecrated!
I agree with you on the no, Diablo shouldn't become a MMO matter. However you clearly have never played Ragnarok Online, 200 Vs 200 is considered a small battle in WoE(with the alliance system, it tends to be much more then that, atleast around double).
I understand the feeling towards turning Diablo into an MMO. I like Diablo as an ARPG due to the fact that you can play it as casual as you want. But I don't resent the idea of it becoming an MMO either. Many will argue that WoW raped the lore of warcraft... and that therefore WC4... WC5 etc will suck because of it. However, the devs have basically announced that you should take WoW lore with a grain of salt and pretend they never happened (aka WC4 will still exist and still be badass).
I personally would LOVE a World of Starcraft MMO (Zergling class FTW). I was DYING to play Stargate Worlds (my favorite fantasy/sci-fi universe of all time) and was depressed to find out they went bankrupt and cancelled it. (I sometimes actually contemplate drumming up investors and purchasing the license/code from them... the only problem is that MGM revoked the license due to the indefinate delay).
Well yea, what's your point? Diablo 3 has a ton of changes, but they are still keeping the fundamentals of the game. What this thread is describing is a complete change from what the game is. Of course we don't want it to change into another of the thousands of mmos out there.
You want an mmo? Go make your own or play a different one, leave this one alone.
Also, don't group people who like diablo with politics, you're just asking for an argument over nothing.
I didn't say anywhere that I want a Diablo MMO. But. I will gladly try it out. That's the difference between the 2 groups in this topic.
Also why should a D3 MMORPG look exactly the same as all others? Are you saying Blizz don't have cool ideas? Is WoW just "any of the thousands" of MMOs? Or did it start the "any of the thousands" MMOs thing that copy it? Your logic is flawed good sir.
Well yea, what's your point? Diablo 3 has a ton of changes, but they are still keeping the fundamentals of the game. What this thread is describing is a complete change from what the game is. Of course we don't want it to change into another of the thousands of mmos out there.
You want an mmo? Go make your own or play a different one, leave this one alone.
Also, don't group people who like diablo with politics, you're just asking for an argument over nothing.
I didn't say anywhere that I want a Diablo MMO. But. I will gladly try it out. That's the difference between the 2 groups in this topic.
Also why should a D3 MMORPG look exactly the same as all others? Are you saying Blizz don't have cool ideas? Is WoW just "any of the thousands" of MMOs? Or did it start the "any of the thousands" MMOs thing that copy it? Your logic is flawed good sir.
Actually, WoW is worse then pretty much every other MMO out there, so I wouldn't use it being diff as an example, because It's diff in a bad way(porly implimented systems, and really crappy map design).
However DDO would be a much better example, It's very unique in the MMO world, and would very much fit the Diablo world/gameplay style(just give the monsters the Diablo drop system, and switch out the D&D skill tree, for a more Diablo type skill tree= done.
With that said though, while it would be pretty awesome if done in that way, I don't think Diablo should go the MMO rout.
Well yea, what's your point? Diablo 3 has a ton of changes, but they are still keeping the fundamentals of the game. What this thread is describing is a complete change from what the game is. Of course we don't want it to change into another of the thousands of mmos out there.
You want an mmo? Go make your own or play a different one, leave this one alone.
Also, don't group people who like diablo with politics, you're just asking for an argument over nothing.
I didn't say anywhere that I want a Diablo MMO. But. I will gladly try it out. That's the difference between the 2 groups in this topic.
Also why should a D3 MMORPG look exactly the same as all others? Are you saying Blizz don't have cool ideas? Is WoW just "any of the thousands" of MMOs? Or did it start the "any of the thousands" MMOs thing that copy it? Your logic is flawed good sir.
Actually, WoW is worse then pretty much every other MMO out there, so I wouldn't use it being diff as an example, because It's diff in a bad way(porly implimented systems, and really crappy map design).
However DDO would be a much better example, It's very unique in the MMO world, and would very much fit the Diablo world/gameplay style(just give the monsters the Diablo drop system, and switch out the D&D skill tree, for a more Diablo type skill tree= done.
With that said though, while it would be pretty awesome if done in that way, I don't think Diablo should go the MMO rout.
Well, if you say that DDO is better than WoW, then there is no point going forward. Argument ends here.
Well yea, what's your point? Diablo 3 has a ton of changes, but they are still keeping the fundamentals of the game. What this thread is describing is a complete change from what the game is. Of course we don't want it to change into another of the thousands of mmos out there.
You want an mmo? Go make your own or play a different one, leave this one alone.
Also, don't group people who like diablo with politics, you're just asking for an argument over nothing.
I didn't say anywhere that I want a Diablo MMO. But. I will gladly try it out. That's the difference between the 2 groups in this topic.
Also why should a D3 MMORPG look exactly the same as all others? Are you saying Blizz don't have cool ideas? Is WoW just "any of the thousands" of MMOs? Or did it start the "any of the thousands" MMOs thing that copy it? Your logic is flawed good sir.
Actually, WoW is worse then pretty much every other MMO out there, so I wouldn't use it being diff as an example, because It's diff in a bad way(porly implimented systems, and really crappy map design).
However DDO would be a much better example, It's very unique in the MMO world, and would very much fit the Diablo world/gameplay style(just give the monsters the Diablo drop system, and switch out the D&D skill tree, for a more Diablo type skill tree= done.
With that said though, while it would be pretty awesome if done in that way, I don't think Diablo should go the MMO rout.
Well, if you say that DDO is better than WoW, then there is no point going forward. Argument ends here.
DDO is a million times better then POS WoW. Hm shall I start a list, DDO actually has an item drop system, DDO actually has a minimap that is useful(how Blizzard can screw up a mini map system, when they are known to make great minmaps due to Diablo, I have no idea, but they did), there's actually diverse quests in DDO(in WoW, It's the same **** over, and over again, non stop), the map designs are trillions of times better(you would think the people who made the WoW maps, never made maps before). Having to buy skills when currency is rare in general=epic fail.
Exc, exc, exc, must I go on, there is literally no redeeming aspects of WoW, It's that bad.
Blizzard is just lucky that they are the only ones who really advertises, because there's more then just a few MMORPGs that blow WoW out of the water, WoW is a POS in every way, shape, and form.
I like diablo because its not an mmo... I like it for what it is =)
See, I like diablo because it *is* an mmo. Just not a wow-style mmo. Diablo 2 was an mmo. It's online, it's multiplayer, there's a realm with a massive number of players! MMO! Heck, you even level up and collect items... MMORPG! It's just not a slow moving persistent world 40 people to kill one boss timesink game like everquest and WoW. But Diablo very much *is* and always has been an MMO.
I like diablo because its not an mmo... I like it for what it is =)
See, I like diablo because it *is* an mmo. Just not a wow-style mmo. Diablo 2 was an mmo. It's online, it's multiplayer, there's a realm with a massive number of players! MMO! Heck, you even level up and collect items... MMORPG! It's just not a slow moving persistent world 40 people to kill one boss timesink game like everquest and WoW. But Diablo very much *is* and always has been an MMO.
its not an mmo my friend.
Its online yes, but by no means an mmo.
that first M means massively, a game (now with only 4) people at once, and where the world changes each time, is not an mmo.
by what you said, all games that are online, are an mmo... COD is an MMO.. o.0 the online only assassins creed game... an mmo?
lol This will probably never happen because Diablo is already so unique in the genre of action rpg. Not a lot of MMO's actually succeed either so its pretty risky. Whereas Diablo is at the top of the action rpg genre hands down. There is no reason to make the change.
Whereas Warcraft lost in popularity to Starcraft, so they changed the series a little. They might remake Warcraft back into an rts in the future though.
Overall its just a bad business choice right now. Due to the way Blizzard makes games, they will never release a truly bad game. So if Diablo 4 fails isn't even an option because they scrap the games that they can't make fun.
Well, wasn't this the "Should Diablo be made into a MMO"-thread?
The answer is no. What you're describing is Aion+Warhammer Online. Or at least a game with more photo-realism and neat graphics than WoW, plus exaggerated pvp. 200-300 people in combat at the same time? Think about it. How fast do you go down in 5v1 in WoW, or any other game for that matter? Imagine 20v170, or 10v200, or just about any number. Imagine the chaos that would ensue.. no one would able to tell Bill from Bob, or Chris from Ziggy.. it wouldn't work, I hope no one ever tries to make it work and Diablo should not be desecrated!
I agree with you on the no, Diablo shouldn't become a MMO matter. However you clearly have never played Ragnarok Online, 200 Vs 200 is considered a small battle in WoE(with the alliance system, it tends to be much more then that, atleast around double).
I have played RO, although not to that extent I know what 200v200 pvp looks like, but I can only imagine it's chaotic as hell. From what I remember, trying to fit 400 people on the same screen wouldn't even work.
Well, wasn't this the "Should Diablo be made into a MMO"-thread?
The answer is no. What you're describing is Aion+Warhammer Online. Or at least a game with more photo-realism and neat graphics than WoW, plus exaggerated pvp. 200-300 people in combat at the same time? Think about it. How fast do you go down in 5v1 in WoW, or any other game for that matter? Imagine 20v170, or 10v200, or just about any number. Imagine the chaos that would ensue.. no one would able to tell Bill from Bob, or Chris from Ziggy.. it wouldn't work, I hope no one ever tries to make it work and Diablo should not be desecrated!
I agree with you on the no, Diablo shouldn't become a MMO matter. However you clearly have never played Ragnarok Online, 200 Vs 200 is considered a small battle in WoE(with the alliance system, it tends to be much more then that, atleast around double).
I have played RO, although not to that extent I know what 200v200 pvp looks like, but I can only imagine it's chaotic as hell. From what I remember, trying to fit 400 people on the same screen wouldn't even work.
Not as Chaotic as you would think, the maps used are rather big, plus they use their own server(for those that don't know, RO uses a bunch of different servers for features/systems, diff map groups, exc to handle the stress placed on such systems/maps).
There's graphic settings that some use(depending on their class role in woe), that can disable effects, allowing you to better see your targets(when there's a million spells/skill being spammed in the area for instance).
Also these teams are part of massive alliences/Guild system, so basically every guild, and every alliance has ther own really expansive Vent channel, this way they can comunicate instantly.
Generally certian areas(pockets) of the map is crazy(the entrance of the castle, and precast), but outside of thos areas, It's very tactical despite the insane amount of people on the map(It's not what anyone would call crazy).
Basically It's this, guilds are 40 or more people(depending on the guild lv, and I lost track of the cap, they keep raising it), Alliances are 2-3 guilds, super alliances are 6-9 guilds(usually, however there was a few instances where 12 guild alliances formed).
Each guild has a guild leader who acts as the commander in WOE, while keeping in contact will the other guild leaders in the alliance to coordinate a attck plan.
On top of that, within each indivial guild, It's customary to set up multiple parties, to help people keep together, and to better organize such an insane big army, so yea, It's surprisenly pretty organized, not chaotic for the most part.
"NO! Blue is so not red, even if it's still a tomato!"
The people that don't want things they've grown up with to become something else, simply because they're used to it. The same people that don't vote for change in parliaments worldover.
Ha. Bagstone.
http://huntersc.tv
NO MMO!
Well, wasn't this the "Should Diablo be made into a MMO"-thread?
The answer is no. What you're describing is Aion+Warhammer Online. Or at least a game with more photo-realism and neat graphics than WoW, plus exaggerated pvp. 200-300 people in combat at the same time? Think about it. How fast do you go down in 5v1 in WoW, or any other game for that matter? Imagine 20v170, or 10v200, or just about any number. Imagine the chaos that would ensue.. no one would able to tell Bill from Bob, or Chris from Ziggy.. it wouldn't work, I hope no one ever tries to make it work and Diablo should not be desecrated!
Well yea, what's your point? Diablo 3 has a ton of changes, but they are still keeping the fundamentals of the game. What this thread is describing is a complete change from what the game is. Of course we don't want it to change into another of the thousands of mmos out there.
You want an mmo? Go make your own or play a different one, leave this one alone.
Also, don't group people who like diablo with politics, you're just asking for an argument over nothing.
I agree with you on the no, Diablo shouldn't become a MMO matter. However you clearly have never played Ragnarok Online, 200 Vs 200 is considered a small battle in WoE(with the alliance system, it tends to be much more then that, atleast around double).
I personally would LOVE a World of Starcraft MMO (Zergling class FTW). I was DYING to play Stargate Worlds (my favorite fantasy/sci-fi universe of all time) and was depressed to find out they went bankrupt and cancelled it. (I sometimes actually contemplate drumming up investors and purchasing the license/code from them... the only problem is that MGM revoked the license due to the indefinate delay).
Also why should a D3 MMORPG look exactly the same as all others? Are you saying Blizz don't have cool ideas? Is WoW just "any of the thousands" of MMOs? Or did it start the "any of the thousands" MMOs thing that copy it? Your logic is flawed good sir.
Ha. Bagstone.
Actually, WoW is worse then pretty much every other MMO out there, so I wouldn't use it being diff as an example, because It's diff in a bad way(porly implimented systems, and really crappy map design).
However DDO would be a much better example, It's very unique in the MMO world, and would very much fit the Diablo world/gameplay style(just give the monsters the Diablo drop system, and switch out the D&D skill tree, for a more Diablo type skill tree= done.
With that said though, while it would be pretty awesome if done in that way, I don't think Diablo should go the MMO rout.
Ha. Bagstone.
DDO is a million times better then POS WoW. Hm shall I start a list, DDO actually has an item drop system, DDO actually has a minimap that is useful(how Blizzard can screw up a mini map system, when they are known to make great minmaps due to Diablo, I have no idea, but they did), there's actually diverse quests in DDO(in WoW, It's the same **** over, and over again, non stop), the map designs are trillions of times better(you would think the people who made the WoW maps, never made maps before). Having to buy skills when currency is rare in general=epic fail.
Exc, exc, exc, must I go on, there is literally no redeeming aspects of WoW, It's that bad.
Blizzard is just lucky that they are the only ones who really advertises, because there's more then just a few MMORPGs that blow WoW out of the water, WoW is a POS in every way, shape, and form.
Ha. Bagstone.
See, I like diablo because it *is* an mmo. Just not a wow-style mmo. Diablo 2 was an mmo. It's online, it's multiplayer, there's a realm with a massive number of players! MMO! Heck, you even level up and collect items... MMORPG! It's just not a slow moving persistent world 40 people to kill one boss timesink game like everquest and WoW. But Diablo very much *is* and always has been an MMO.
Its online yes, but by no means an mmo.
that first M means massively, a game (now with only 4) people at once, and where the world changes each time, is not an mmo.
by what you said, all games that are online, are an mmo... COD is an MMO.. o.0 the online only assassins creed game... an mmo?
Whereas Warcraft lost in popularity to Starcraft, so they changed the series a little. They might remake Warcraft back into an rts in the future though.
Overall its just a bad business choice right now. Due to the way Blizzard makes games, they will never release a truly bad game. So if Diablo 4 fails isn't even an option because they scrap the games that they can't make fun.
Be my Buddy =^.^=
I have played RO, although not to that extent I know what 200v200 pvp looks like, but I can only imagine it's chaotic as hell. From what I remember, trying to fit 400 people on the same screen wouldn't even work.
Not as Chaotic as you would think, the maps used are rather big, plus they use their own server(for those that don't know, RO uses a bunch of different servers for features/systems, diff map groups, exc to handle the stress placed on such systems/maps).
There's graphic settings that some use(depending on their class role in woe), that can disable effects, allowing you to better see your targets(when there's a million spells/skill being spammed in the area for instance).
Also these teams are part of massive alliences/Guild system, so basically every guild, and every alliance has ther own really expansive Vent channel, this way they can comunicate instantly.
Generally certian areas(pockets) of the map is crazy(the entrance of the castle, and precast), but outside of thos areas, It's very tactical despite the insane amount of people on the map(It's not what anyone would call crazy).
Basically It's this, guilds are 40 or more people(depending on the guild lv, and I lost track of the cap, they keep raising it), Alliances are 2-3 guilds, super alliances are 6-9 guilds(usually, however there was a few instances where 12 guild alliances formed).
Each guild has a guild leader who acts as the commander in WOE, while keeping in contact will the other guild leaders in the alliance to coordinate a attck plan.
On top of that, within each indivial guild, It's customary to set up multiple parties, to help people keep together, and to better organize such an insane big army, so yea, It's surprisenly pretty organized, not chaotic for the most part.