DiabloFans

It is hardly fair to compare armored to naked, as everyone will think armored looks better.

Also those poses are terrible, of course the "cooler" poses of alpha look better.

That picture is misleading and intended to evoke a particular response.

Quote from "Veritech017" »

So you would play Diablo if they did it entirely in pastels, replaced all the heroes with cute woodland creatures so long as it had the name Diablo and good gameplay? You're a consumer whore.

Also, your knowledge of statistics is out of date. Go back to high school.

50k people signed a petition, let's say five million people did actually play D2. How many of that five million do you suppose have not heard of the petition?

Talk about melodramatic exageration.

Your petition number is bogus. Anyone can sign it multiple times even, using fake names.

Quote from "Zellogs" »

I'm really glad they can justify their choice, it makes me even more happy that they went down this line as it shows they've clearly thought it out.

I agree. Good job Blizzard, I look forward to playing it!

Quote from "Mud" »

You can read this on the WoW forums here.

http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=7475464063&pageNo=2&sid=1#24

Good. Grief ganking sucks and the guys that do it are tards. Go play the game and quick picking on people lower level than you.

Quote from "RAppel" »

So, I installed Diablo I a few days ago just for the heck of it. Apart from the no-run issue its hella fun

It still is an amazing game. I'm suprised over the years how few attempts to clone it have come around, and none as good.

I think when Diablo 3 was announced, the earth shook a little. The first 2 games are loved just THAT much by the gamers who played them.

I should reinstall it myself.

Quote from "Murderotica" »

1. Keep the kiddies out. I am tired of 14 year old punks ruining my gaming experience.

I keep the kiddies out by playing with my friends on a passworded game. If I play with strangers, I either take the good with the bad or I go get my friends.

2. If blizzard plans to regularly update this game like wow, then I don't mind one bit paying for the content. It would give extra money to blizz for new enhancements and whatnot.

This I can sort of agree with, sort of. However I'd rather it be like Guild Wars, where it is free monthly but releases an "expansion" every few months for new content. I'd buy that.

As for monthly fee: No, I don't agree. There's better ways of doing it, especially for new content. Look at other games and how they do it.

Quote from "FEELFOOL" »

I Love blizzard there the best

Give blizzard a BIG THANK YOU AND WHAT EVER YOU WANT TO SAY AFTER

thanks for giving use Diablo 3:thumbsup::necro:

Thank you to Blizzard for all the wonderful games over the years!!

A lot of hard work has gone into these games, and I am sure they are proud of their good work.

Quote from "Internetpersonality" »

In Diablo 2, towns were for the most part, small.

(This could be argued)

Sure, it fit the style of what was going on. You had a healer, a Merc person, a gambler, an armorer/black smith, Cain, and 2-4 other characters for idle banter (maybe a quest) and means of moving the story (Warriv etc)

So in that right it fit.

I think I would like some expansion of the towns, MAYBE something similar to Baldur's Gate:SOA. And with all the questing that's supposed to happen, this could only help. -shrug-

I dunno, the towns seem to be there only to fill a basic need. They are a stopping place to rest, recover a bit, with a little eye candy to advance the story.

I don't really feel they need to make a "big city", as I was happy with the towns in Diablo 2.

Quote from "paralleluniverse" »

I've noticed from the gameplay trailer that there's no light radius.

The light radius was one of the most important mechanics for setting the dark mood and atmosphere in the previous Diablo games. It also adds a sense of danger because you don't know what's around the next corner, or what's behind the door.

Maybe they haven't added it because its one of those features that gets put in near the end of the development cycle, but it NEEDS to be in D3.

What does everyone else think about the issue?

We cannot be sure of what graphics setting was used in the demo, nor the video card type or setting, nor how much of it was brightened so that it would show up better in a demo.

Why don't we wait for more demos, or perhaps a technical graphics programmer from Blizzard can answer these in an upcoming interview.

Quote from "Tanton" »

I just hope they stay away from the cartoony feel of WoW - it would certainly serve to taint the essence of what Diablo should be.

I can understand your point.

They did borrow a little flavor from WOW, but it isn't much. Some of the most angry people seem to think they are taking 100% from WOW, which isn't true. It is just a little flavor of WOW style, which is Blizzard's style. For the most part, the art is Diablo.

I can live with a little hint of WOW flavor, if it is done in good taste and done well. So far it seems to be done well. I don't see a problem.

Quote from "Belac_cM" »

The fans have a right to have a concern about the way the game looks. It is a pretty dark rendition, I know. I was trying to capture the feel you have in the Durance of Hate or other dungeons. We're all trying to voice our opinions the best we can to help blizzard get the best end result that we feel stays true to the series.

You pick the Durance of Hate as your comparison???

That was later on in the game, and of course it was darker!

You can't compare that level to the demo. That really isn't a fair comparison.

Quote from "fuzz" »

I hope they will take this petition seriously, just because one retard like you is not happy.

.

Amazing job of photoshopping pics that you guys are doing. It doesn't help your case at all. Distorting pics of the demo, and then passing them around to sway public opinion is about as flawed as anything could get.

Here are some facts:
1) The petition is already bogus, because it has fake names on it. Lots of fake names. The results are invalid.

2) You've seen a small fraction of the game, a small demo. You don't even know if that level IS in the game, and what part it is. That might have been a map made just for this demo.

3) You don't know what color settings the demo was made in. What gamma settings did they use? What filming method? How do you know they didn't turn up the gamma, just for demonstration purposes? Having a demo be mostly dark would be dumb.

4) What do the later areas look like? What about Hell areas? More corrupt areas?

5) This is no longer the age of sprite graphics. Welcome to 2008, we have dynamic lighting and a much larger color pallette to use.

The heart and soul of the Diablo games has always been two things: Presentation of story, and exciting hack and slash against overwhelming odds. Gameplay decides the game, not fond memories of limited sprite graphics.

Petition with a lot of false signatures on it. I know people who signed it using fake info.

As for the looks and appearance, we haven't seen the deeper areas. So waht if one area looks a little colorful, with autumn leaves? That dungeon wasn't the deeper hellish pits. It all looked like a starter area.

Give it a break, it's 2008. Our game engines use 3D now, our color palletes are more than 256 colors.

A few small vocal people are being drama queens.