This is an idea I had a while back, and it would work for a few older games that continue to have huge player-bases today. Out of any old games, I think Diablo2 probably has one of the higher player-bases, perhaps not including MMOs.
The idea is that they leave the game mechanics mostly the same, but update it with new features and graphics, and maybe even some new quests.
It would work similar to an expansion, but it would have a complete rework of the graphics with the same style that could handle new higher resolutions. Of course, they could add in another class or 2 and maybe some more content with new areas, quests, npcs, and loot. The new content isn't even required though, because I think that they would still sell millions even if all they did was update the graphics and re-release it. Making just a few changes to features would go a long way as well. I would love to see item linking, an auction house for trades, guild features (like guild tags etc), loot options for assigning loot rules in the group (round robin, free for all, etc), and of course a more stable battle.net with no hacks like duping, map hacks, or even botting. I thin the graphics could even remain 2D as long as they were done well.
The nice thing about this idea is that I am sure the fans would love it. If they try to completely remake a new diablo, like Diablo Online, or D3, they risk making something that isn't as great as it's predecessors. By re-making D2, they are sure to get another big hit! And, the cost to develop it and time would be much less than making a new game from scratch. They would already have 90% of the mechanics and ideas in place. All that would need to be done would be mainly graphic work and then a few new mechanics. Since they have already made the game once, and have had it running for so long, I am sure they know very well what they would do differently if they could do it again.
I know that I for 1 would pay 50$ right now if I could buy Diablo 2.5, wouldn't you? Would this idea count as "totally awesome"? LOL!
Of course, I would still love Diablo3, but I would buy 2.5 and 3 if I had the choice to get both!
Perhaps some would like it, but personally I don't think it would work out. It sounds very contrary to the Blizzard spirit of not treading the same ground twice. If the guys in marketing say they must, they will at least make a really good job out of it and call it an expansion pack - where most other companies would readily settle for adding a few new maps and call it a sequel.
See Lord of Destruction, and even if it would sell a bunch blizz isn't so much about making money as good games... if they were World of Diablo and Universe of Starcraft would be out by now. And everyones forgetting this article may or may not be accurate.
See Lord of Destruction, and even if it would sell a bunch blizz isn't so much about making money as good games... if they were World of Diablo and Universe of Starcraft would be out by now.
Lord of Destruction was an expansion pack, but it did NOT bring the graphics up-to-date. Max resolution of what, 800X600? I think even if they used the exact same renderings they used to make the original graphics, they could convert them to much higher resolution textures and the game would be like new.
I am not saying that Blizzard is all about making money (even tho I am sure it is a concern). I am saying that you don't always have to make something completely new for your customers to enjoy it. Diablo2 is THE only game that I have gone back to playing for a couple months year after year! And I have played a TON of games, LOL. It should be obvious to them that D2 still has a large player base. And by updating it, they would be giving something back to their customers that we can all appreciate. I am sure it would attract old and new fans alike.
If you can honestly say you wouldn't buy it, then you probably don't belong here
I just recently got back into D2 again a couple months ago, and so far it seems as populated as when it was released and I first bought it. That is pretty amazing for a game that hasn't had any major updates since 2001!
And everyones forgetting this article may or may not be accurate.
Gamasutra is a respected webzine targeted at the game developer (not consumer) audience. They are also affiliated with Game Developers Conference, the largest annual gathering of professional video game developers. I strongly doubt they want to risk - or have any reason to - putting out inaccurate information.
And, again, "Team 3" has already been referred to by Blizzard in interviews with other media outlets. This new article just adds a bit of clarity and some new information.
This hasn't been brought up for a while so I'll bring it up again. Battlenet is being revamped extensively for Starcraft 2. Why would they update Battlenet so extensively if Diablo was going to move to an MMO style? I think Diablo 3 is going to come out and will be based on Battlenet again and not an MMO.
I am betting the new franchise is going to be the revolutionary MMO, and Diablo 3 will be announced before then.
This hasn't been brought up for a while so I'll bring it up again. Battlenet is being revamped extensively for Starcraft 2. Why would they update Battlenet so extensively if Diablo was going to move to an MMO style?
What changes are happening exactly? I see no noticeable changes when playing StarCraft on Battle.net.
Blizzard intends to transform the aging Battle.net into the online platform for all their future (non-MMO) games, so any changes could mean anything.
i dont think they'll just change the concept of Battle.net so easily. They stick to tradition (see the StarCraft II gameplay) and i think they will keep battle.net free. I also think that whatever happens with the StarCraft II multiplayer will be the same with the Diablo 3 multiplayer. If there are monthly charges planned for that (i dont think so but who knows?) we'll prolly get the same thing too.