WC4 definitely needs to come before they decide to do something drastic. I mean lets look at it:
Diablo 3 --> Follows series' formulaic approach to hack'n'slash-type action, standard online RPG with single player, no monthly fee
SC 2 --> Sequel to the most acclaimed RTS of all time. They try not to mess with the formula too much, and add maybe a few units as not to make a carbon copy of SC while keeping it easy to balance.
Unknown Next-Gen MMO --> Not much to say here, but just something to notice. The WoW team is the WoW team and they've got their own thing to do, at all times. There's developers who are responsible for the monthly material while some are strictly always working on the next expansion, and I'm sure the WOW team is extremely expansive by now. This MMO is being developed by yet a different team, we are told its not from an existing Blizzard franchise, so its new and "next-gen" is all we have to go on.
--WHAT'S NEXT?--
There next project can't be an MMO. With WoW at its peak (11 million subs?) and possibly still climbing, they can squeeze out like 10 more expansions before starting to feel a decline, but Blizzard isn't stupid. All their expansions have been pretty massive, and their not even going to put any serious pre-production development into WoW-2 until the numbers actually look like their starting to wince. 11 MILLION subscribers world-wide. MMO's that have like 250,000-500,000 are considered profitable and successful. WoW has 62.2% of the world's MMO market. Lineage and Lineage II together own 13% of the world share. Everquest I and II have only 2.3%. So forget WoW-2, because WoW is simply too successful to start diverting resources to WoW-2.
WC4: Warcraft-3 is also one of the highest rated RTS games. Its still played competitively worldwide. Of the average 150,000 users still playing on battle.net at any one given time, half of those are on Warcraft III: Frozen Throne. In a few years, when D3 and SC2 are both out and done with, WC-4 I think has to be the logical move for Blizzard. With WC4, they have top-notch games from their 3 franchises along with the world's biggest MMO (by a LONG shot) with another MMO in development and pretty much the freedom to do anything they want. Diablo 3 will rejuvenate the old D2 crowd. SC2 is the sequel to a still-popular RTS thats 11 years old. You can bet anyone who has ever played Diablo will be interested in D3. Tons of ex-WoW'ers (like me) are looking forwards to playing it. It will likely draw tons of new-comers as well who were maybe too young during the D2 prime and will discover the series.
After WC4 you say? Probably the release of the Next-Gen MMO they're working on (MMO's have huge dev cycles). After that? I really can't even speculate.
-
- Zarx
- Registered User
-
Member for 15 years, 9 months, and 27 days
Last active Tue, Jun, 30 2009 02:28:47
- 0 Followers
- 136 Total Posts
- 0 Thanks
0
You can assume their going to follow the same thread of design philosophy when dealing with the town portal system. Seeing as it had a cheesy factor to it and would conflict with this new approach to the game, you can be positive it won't be coming back in the same fashion. Likely it's going to have a change of mechanics. As for visuals, it's likely going to just look like an updated and higher resolution version of the old TP. Improving while keeping that retro feel, making it still feel Diabloish.
0
I like the 3 tabs and the big icons. Feels much more Diablo. Little icons, and lots of them, felt very MMO'ish and very WoW'ish. As long as there is an easy way of hotkeying the 3 inventories swiftly I don't see a problem.
0
-Intro cinematic (Footman vs Grunt, infernal lands, with voiceover)
-Thrall's Dream (Medivh's voiceover, two armies clash, Thrall wakes up)
-Medivh's message to the king (Crow flies into King's chamber, transforms, flies away)
-Human closing cinematic (Arthas returns from Northrend, kills King Menethil)
-Undead closing cinematic (Archimonde playing in the sand, destroys Dalaran)
-Orc closing cinematic (Thrall and Grom Hellscream meet Manneroth in the canyon)
-Night elf closing cinematic (Archimonde descends upon the World Tree)
That's 7 in ROC alone. Frozen Throne has the opening featuring Illidan and the waking of the Naga. The end cinematic shows Arthas' climb to the Icecrown Glacier.
That's 9 for Warcraft 3 in total including expansion. I think D3 is going to have a whole bunch because they know it makes the final product feel that much more polished and its a real treat for the fans. They got plenty of development time so it shouldn't be an issue. Expect cinematics at the end or beginning of each Act (or whatever they name the campaign chapters)
0
0
If anything they could make this character instead of an Assassin. We got Barb, Wizard and Witch Doctor (they said 5 classes at release?). I'd guess Paladin is making a comeback, along with a ranger-type character and that's our 5 for release. For expansion you can expect probably 1-2 more classes (I could see them stretching it to two expansions with 1 class each) and that's where this class could work.
0
I'd tend to agree. If they decided Blizz North's version wasn't up to par, its not beyond Blizz to scrap it all and start over. Conceptual work would be the only stuff that lasted because it still represented the right ideas. The problem is that the outcome of what they developed wasn't up to par. They got the resources and they won't accept a game that isn't simply FUN and well made. Lesser companies would likely just try to make a few changes without scrapping current progress.
It's DEFINITELY not coming out in 2009 (no chance) and for it to come out in 2011 seems even long by Blizz's standards (that means pretty much 20 months more from here on), so I'm thinking mid-to-late 2010 for D3's release. Who knows though. It could easily go into 2011 if the beta test is extensive.
0
0
I didn't know when the wiki was started, I was just making a suggestion. I think for now the majority of articles should contain D1-D2X information, plus all the lore, etc...
When D3 comes out, there will be more than enough to write about.
0
I probably would. Roper and his team created D2, one of the most acclaimed games of all time, were given the greenlight to make the sequel and then basically were told it wasn't good enough, the entire Blizz North office was closed and the divide happened.
Stupid move on Roper's part to start a new company. I understand the disagreement, but he could have done so much more with Blizzard instead of some new company where he has to etch out a place in the market. Blizz has the manpower, the financial backing and the name to make any kind of game they want, and to make it good.
0
0
WoW 2 occurs when a new GAME is created. Yes, a brand new engine, gameplay, everything. WoW is much too profitable right now for them to bother with a WoW 2, but I may be wrong. Maybe the best idea is to come out with WoW-2 in around 5-6 years RIGHT when WoW would start to be in a good decline. These MMO's DO have really insane dev cycles, especially under Blizzard's direction. Doesn't hurt that their using WoW's engine just for "testing". Not like you'd use WoW's engine to do an FPS, or maybe I don't know what im talking about.
WC4 was already confirmed I thought? Or is this it
0
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page
Obviously have featured articles which are complete and offer good information in a concise way. On the side you can have the latest patch with the patch notes (and link to the entire list if need be). Plus add a screenshot of the day, and you have a nice little intro page. Right now it's just a pile of names. People won't necessarily know what a lot of those names are or places are.
I think this D3 wiki is a great idea. If information starts filling in here as Blizz gives it to us, and then through beta, it could remain a premier resource. WoWWiki is pretty darn good too, they're slowly compiling tons of aspects of WoW, especially monsters/boss fights.
0
Yeah I mean I think the next level is something like 100% destructable environments. They could use algorithims from engineering programs that actually compute real-life physics with a variety of materials (like whether this many columns of this material can support this many tons, or in a game's case, how much explosive is needed to blow away this wall? What would the real effect be of a grenade in a closed room?
Crysis is being developed as a trilogy, with the latest Crysis: Warhead not being counted as the 2nd in the trilogy, so 2 more to go. I'd say by the third, we're going to be closer to this fully destructable environments, where I can blow away custom holes in the buildings (and not something campy like a scripted area that "opens" if an explosive goes near it). Something where metal scraps of my hummer can fly off and react with the environment (let's say a small scrap of my hood gets blown off by a blast, it should go flying very high speed, maybe slice into a tree or blow past some plants?). The Crytek 3 engine showcased at this weeks GDC even showed the force of a bullet causing the long leaves of palm trees to sway even if it didn't directly hit them.
I think the most exciting possibilites are with full 3D world RPG's as this technology continues to evolve. Shooters can only get so much more photorealistic and advanced physics while RPG's can generate all sorts of high-definition graphics through spells and other manipulations. Imagine the day when not only will grenade affect environments but also spells? Imagine when game engines and video cards will be so robust that they will be able to show events such as a fire nova spell, for example, where a ring of fire emanates from the caster in an outward ring. Now imagine if that spell, done in a field, immediately turned al the plants and grass into a yellow burnt crisp? How about when using a frost spell, and it misses, it hits the trunk of a tree and manifests as frost over the tree.
It's going to be really scary thinking of something like WoW 3 (yes, THREE) where even if Blizzard wants to make a "low end" game, by whichever year WoW 3 comes, computers will all be universally better as they always do.
0
In terms of PC gaming, if you look at the spectrum of where we started, there are certain upheavals that take place that in essence shake up the status quo of what is expected in terms of quality. The first video game was Pong, nothing more than a few white pixels against a black background representing two paddles and a ball programmed to keep score and show the display. A very simple game. The next upheaval was the advent of the 2D colorized game. The 2D concept was further and further developed until the dawn of the next major upheavel, the 3D game. Finally in a game there would be 3D representations of people, places, characters, scenes and environments. I think we can all agree any serious PC game MUST be 3D, its almost silly to even IMAGINE a 2009 PC game in 2D that is trying to be a good game. Other than a gimmick game that is meant to be 2D, all serious games are 3D. Even WORMS copped out and went 3D!
So what's next? I'd say the next MAJOR upheaval in games would be physics systems. What was once an insane feature when Half-Life 2 came out (HL2 may not be the first game with physics but it's the first polished one I've ever played) is quickly becoming something of an industry standard.
Blizzard games have never had physics. Now for there to be a complete system that is accelerated by our now well-developed GPU's is astounding. As more years go by, most any game involved in a moving environment will have some sort of physics system in place to simulate actual environments. Physics systems make the world so much more robust and REAL. It's amazing when in Crysis, I launch a couple of rifle-grenades into a shack where 3 guards are inside and it blows the house to smithereens and them with it. Why should a shack made of aluminum sheets withstand the blast from a grenade?
My question is, what is going to be the next paradigm shift in terms of what feature that is new (or even still in development) is the next BIG one that will eventually be instituted into all sorts of games?
0
When they say "3-4 years" their probably talking about the development cycle of the version of D3 that we see today, the one Blizzard is obviously supporting and going to finish. In TOTAL the dev cycle would be 6-7 years but in terms of this iteration of D3, 3 years is probably accurate.
Interesting how Bill Roper kinda bashed how Diablo looked (very politically, though). This probably stems from their (likely) more original darker tone to D3, which Blizz-Irvine didn't like or felt wasn't robust enough to spark the new Diablo game with, and moved development to their headquarters.