As I've said in so many words, most Diablo, Warcraft, and Starcraft fans are interchangeable in games. So I don't even think Blizzard needs to think about which games would be the most popular at the time, they only need to know that their games are popular, period.
What I've wondered is that surely by now they're so big, there would be a Blizzard North, East, South, West, all developing these different games. Or at least a North and South making Starcraft and Diablo.
- Siaynoq
- Registered User
-
Member for 17 years, 9 months, and 17 days
Last active Sun, Aug, 7 2016 20:07:13
- 50 Followers
- 15,813 Total Posts
- 221 Thanks
-
Apr 29, 2007Siaynoq posted a message on Blizzard Confirms New Product Next Month!I reckon that would instigate some letter bombs.Posted in: News
-
Apr 29, 2007Siaynoq posted a message on Blizzard Confirms New Product Next Month!Hmm, I never even considered it would be a new franchise. If that's the case, I wonder if it would be a magic/fantasy game or sciency spacey game. Or something more akin to a regular Earth setting placed in our current timeline.Posted in: News
-
Apr 29, 2007Siaynoq posted a message on Blizzard Confirms New Product Next Month!Burning Herpies would be a gay name for any game period.Posted in: News
-
Apr 27, 2007Siaynoq posted a message on Blizzard Confirms New Product Next Month!It seems like WC fans have plenty to chew on for awhile. That would be way too audacious of Blizzard to announce another WC project at this time.Posted in: News
The time is so ripe for Diablo. I'm putting my money on it. -
Apr 27, 2007Siaynoq posted a message on Blizzard Confirms New Product Next Month!This is great news. And even if it ends up not being Diablo 3, I still believe it is inevitable anyway, so I'll celebrate a Starcraft 2 just the same.Posted in: News
-
Mar 27, 2007Siaynoq posted a message on "Official" Diablo 3 PetitionI don't think it means squat. Not much, true. But I think to some extent Blizzard likes to see how much people care. Even in the end, we all petition and vote with our money, just to say we are here waiting and are anxious, I believe that means something to them.Posted in: News
-
Feb 20, 2007Siaynoq posted a message on The Final Diablo 3 is Coming argumentmassive multiplayer onlinePosted in: News
If I'm not mistaken. -
Feb 20, 2007Siaynoq posted a message on The Final Diablo 3 is Coming argument"The only argument I disagree with is that they say "Diablo 3 is a license to print money". Unless you've been under a very large rock the past year, Blizzard already has a license to print money, it's called World of Warcraft and it pulls in almost as much cash in a month as Diablo 2 has pulled in overall. The only question now is, is it worth it to sacrifice programmer power for a game that is going to generate more publicity than revenue? I imagine Blizzard has discussed the possibility of making Diablo 3 a MMO considering the success of their last shot at it."Posted in: News
I read this comment from that page and I disagree with what this person is saying. Does Blizzard necessarily need to sacrifice programming power to make another Diablo game? Isn't that what Blizzard North was founded for? I'm not sure however how I feel about Diablo being an MMO. I actually feel like you're sacrificing some quality in graphics and in-depth content to make an MMO that is designed to appeal to a wide mainstream audience. -
Oct 10, 2006Siaynoq posted a message on "Official" Diablo 3 PetitionPosted in: NewsQuote from "AcidReign" »I read that there was a petition for Peter Jackson to direct The Hobbit movie. They had 40,000 votes, and New Line Cinema was looking into it now. Hah!
Even then, I doubt a poll of 40,000 votes had any real impact. I'm sure any decision to make the Hobbit would be mostly based on the success of the LOTR trilogy in theaters and DVD sales, merchandise, etc. They know the fanbase already exists, and not just the hardcore fans either. -
Oct 9, 2006Siaynoq posted a message on "Official" Diablo 3 PetitionYes, while I'm sure a petition doesn't make a huge impact one way or another, I still believe that the people at Blizzard are interested in what fans are thinking about these games. I've noticed a lot of people are cynical about polls, but if it none of it helps, none of it certainly hurts either.Posted in: News
- To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
0
0
0
0
0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_o-ULSWWng&feature=g-all-u&context=G27a2fbcFAAAAAAAAAAA
0
0
0
And I may feel like people who don't know the story that well also didn't even play the game as I feel that's what makes the game most entertaining. But everyone's playing it for their own different reasons.
I also just think it's debatable on what D2's endgame is. I assumed more people in D2 just did character builds, uber-Trist, MFing, crap like that. That's what I saw most people playing for, not PvP.
0
I think Rick is a bit broken now though or a tad psycho. I mean, he's gonna have to change more in order to survive and continue being a leader. It's like, he killed Shane, but he absorbed some of Shane's pragmatism and ruthlessness. Though I always think Rick was ruthless but he had better control over it than Shane ever did. So he'll need to become a bit harder in order to survive the upcoming ordeal.
0
0
I seriously wish we could see Daryl's brother but it's starting to look less likely and I can't bring myself to read ahead in the comics to see if he appears. Actually no, cause in the comics that scene never happened anyway. Glenn just rescues Rick from the city and they never meet Daryl's brother and none of that stuff ever happened. I'm glad the comic is significantly different from the show though. They are different for valid reasons and not just superfluous reasons.
I really wish we'd see the black guy Morgan and his kid again. I think they're story was really fascinating and they were good characters.
0
My biggest beef though wasn't with the ending but with the From Ashes DLC. I've never seen a DLC such as that available on the same day of the game's release. And I thought that since the Protheans were such a huge part of the story, they should've been in the full game and not as some DLC afterthought. Everyone seemed very underwhelmed at the presence of the Prothean too. It was just sad when he was standing there in the Citadel and like two or three people came up to him and were like, "Oh, gosh, wow, you're really a Prothean? No way!" And that was it.
There were a lot of moments that just felt really flat storywise. Like characters and their motivations were kind of hard to understand, especially the Illusive Man's. I also thought whether I destroyed or just irradiated the Collector base in ME2 would have the biggest repercussions of any decision I'd ever made in the game. There was one like from a character that was like, "Didn't you just irradiated the base though?" And I was like, "Yep." And then the Illusive Man seemed to be using the technology to create husks? Or to enhance his soldiers with? But storywise I didn't understand what the effect was cause his motivations throughout the game were so confusing anyway.
I think it was supposed to be part of the game's mystery that you didn't quite know what the IM was up to, but I couldn't tell HOW important his plans were compared to the sheer might of the Reapers. I kept wondering when I'm gonna have a confrontation with Harbinger, but unfortunately Harbinger was just a pawn. I think that was actually the part of the story that disappointed me the most was that the Reapers were just the tools of someone else as a way of resolving the "inevitable" conflict between organics and synthetics.
I thought what would be more interesting of an idea is that the Reapers really were masters of their own destiny and no one controlled them, yet they seemed to have reach the zenith of their own evolution and so they began creating this cycle every 50k years try to assimilate something into themselves that would finally allow them to escape the evolutionary dead end they were in. I didn't see why synthetic life and organic life had to necessarily be at odds especially since the breakthrough you have in the game with the Geth.
Now I did like the idea that the Crucible was conceived not by the Protheans but by a race that preceded them. I just didn't like that the Reapers were controlled by some other intelligence that unfortunately took on the avatar of that stupid kid. For me it kind of removed the mystique and threatening presence of the Reapers. And the fact that Harbinger never taunts you or comes back for his sweet revenge for what you did to his Collectors was all kind of disappointing to me. Mostly because Sovereign was such a great antagonist in the first game. And his motives kind of made sense too. But now I didn't quite understand the Reapers' motives anymore cause they were basically destroying civilization for the sake of saving civilization. As if they know without a doubt that synthetics and organics will inevitably wipe each other out every cycle. How can they know that if they're the ones killing everyone and basically contriving the cycle themselves?
And maybe synthetics and organics will go to war inevitably. But how do the Reapers know that the cycle they bring is any less destructive than what a synthetic/organic war would bring. It was just strange how in a few lines of dialogue this ghost/machine kid basically (for me anyway) removed all logical motivation for the Reaper's actions. I mean, that's the direction they wanted to go with the story, and I guess I gotta respect that. I'm just not convinced that was their story all along with the Reapers and it felt made up on the spot to me.
0
I don't really like her character in the show that much. I hate her contradictory logic about the post-apocalyptic society. Especially when she goes on about how that suicidal girl needs to decide for herself whether to live. Cause Andrea in the first season, pretty much didn't make that decision really on her own and yet she still insists on living. It was Dale that guilt tripped her into not killing herself and so she didn't want Dale to die too so she did flee the CDC building. Yet later she was pissed at Dale for robbing her of that choice, but who was stopping her now? If anyone really wants to kill themselves they're gonna do it. But people intervened anyway and arguably saved Andrea's life. Yet she's all saying no one should intervene in that girl's life and try to stop her from killing herself? I just thought she was stupid. Plus she shot Daryl because she was further stupid.
0
0