I think Diablo 3 is a special type of game, in that nearly everyone you might talk to - online or IRL - has heard of it and is anxiously awaiting its release. While D3, as it isn't an MMO like World of Warcraft, probably won't be as large a cash cow, I still see the game being tremendously successful. I understand the hype lasting this long due to how dedicated, and how many Diablo fans there are. I can also see the hype being a positive thing - not to come off as a Blizzard fanboy, but the company makes excellent games and wouldn't release a title if it wasn't prudent for them to do so.
And I imagine them trickling out new information over time. Something like a new class being announced, or sets or otherwise would keep the fans tantalized and talking. Then there's when they announce the release date, something that would garner even more attention.
I'd be incredibly surprised if Diablo 3 sucked. You realize Blizzard scrapped the game several times, and the art direction - I believe three times - revising it?
Yep. One can also come to that conclusion seeing many witch doctor skills being inspired by the D2 necromancer - he has his own summon skeleton, explode minion (similar to corpse explosion), confuse, and fear. Blizzard has stated each class will have unique abilities, so one can infer they wouldn't have the necromancer as it would feel redundant.
I'm not sure what's going on in that picture, honestly. Are those two guys on a castle's battlements looking down at approaching demons? Or are they inspecting human troops instead? I dunno.
I'd be fine with runes and runewords returning, so long as they're both implemented properly, possibly with a few alterations from what they were in D2. I recall a lot of runewords being pitifully weak, and others (like enigma, yes) being extremely powerful, even better than set items. I also disliked having to go online for the rune orders, as it was immersion-breaking. They should put in a tome or something in-game that lists the various combinations.
Those concepts are actually really unique and refreshing, and quite unlike all the other hackneyed ideas people have been throwing around lately.
And I don't understand why the archbishop is so laughable. I mean, none of these will be implemented obviously, but I can imagine the archbishop - an alternative caster type using auras.
Under 'Diablo Series,' the Diablo 2 & LoD heading's description has a typo: 'For discussions on Diablo II and it's expansion Lord of Destruction.' 'It's' is a contraction; it should be possessive, its.
Argh. I don't want to come off as a troll, but you people are like roaches. The graphics look phenomenal, stop complaining. I'm concerned all your whining is going to alter D3 for the worse.
As it has been stated that the Barbarian is to be the only class returning as aplayable character,
Could you cite this please, if it's from an official blizzard post? I realize there's a lot of speculation on the barbarian being the 'canon class,' but the majority of blizzard statements on lore I've read have been very vague or all-encompassing, for instance referring to multiple 'heroes' rather than a singular 'hero.' I don't have exact citations for the examples I've seen, which is hypocritical, bahah yes - but there's one visible on the main diablo3.com page which states "Yet for those who battled the Prime Evils, the memory fades slowly." I think you get the idea; it's very nebulous.
I would have assumed with the barbarian returning, we would see at least one other Diablo 2 character returning as well - my guess being the paladin.
Anyway yes, requesting a citation for your statement. Thanks in advance.
I been lurcking around this forum for about a week and finally registered. I just wanted to add my thoughts in about this. Read before you flame please.
There are many reasons I would like there to be a monthly fee, or at least wouldn't mind it.
1. Keep the kiddies out. I am tired of 14 year old punks ruining my gaming experience. With a monthly fee, that is payable by credit card not game card, it would get rid of a lot of immaturity and would result in a better game. The game is rated M for a reason. Go watch your bob the builder and leave the gaming to the adults, thanks.
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. We were all complaining about how d2 hardly ever got updated. Well, why should they when they have no reason incentive to. Added levels, bosses, items, bug fixes, and world events is way worth the cost to me.
There are many other reason however those are the main two.
Also, something else i thought of. Let say they start out with a fee of 5-10 dollars a month. Thats cheap as hell. However, every time you are caught using a hack, cheat, or exploit they raise that price 5 dollars. It would be a incentive not to cheat because it would start effecting the wallet.
Lastly, to the people who say they they cant afford a monthly payment. Honestly, if you cant afford 15 bucks max a month then you really need to get a better job or something and not play games. Im sorry, but if you are struggling to pay that small ammount of money you have other issues.
Bring your lunch to work 3 days a MONTH and save that money.
Dont spend 19 bucks at the movies and have that money.
Dont buy a case of beer and you can have the money.
If you are responsible with it you can easily find extra money.
I'd probably start with hell then play heaven on a later character. I'd imagine each faction would have its own unique rewards, and I can picture heaven's being a lot more hot looking.
Seriously.
Some people would to go into a game store and ask a question; some would rather an answer there on the spot, while others incomplete closure.
I'd rather my Gamestop employee to sound like He knows what he's talking about, even if it's a rough estimate of a release date than walk in and..
Me: Do you know when Diablo III is going to be released.
GE: Umm... derr, I dunno.
Me: (well damn thanks for nothing)
I dunno, I wouldn't like that personally. He doesn't know what he's talking about; he's just giving you false information.
They don't. People just can't get away from DII and htey think that Blizzard is just going to do the same "Sword and shield, pure mage, ranged class" again...
I disagree. I mean yeah, you're right, there's no set in stone rules for class making, but you need to follow the archetypes to some degree to give a reason for some game mechanics to exist. For instance, what would be the point for mana, or spellcasting, if there was no class that took full advantage of it? Or for a better example, why would there be bows with no class to utilize them?
That doesn't mean the classes still can't be varied and have unique skills or whatnot, but their essence needs to set into some structure, in order for there be a functional game.
Also, since the barbarian has been revealed, we can make a probable assumption that one of the three unannounced classes will be a continuing D2 character. I'm not sure if that was hit upon, but it's highly likely.
0
0
And I imagine them trickling out new information over time. Something like a new class being announced, or sets or otherwise would keep the fans tantalized and talking. Then there's when they announce the release date, something that would garner even more attention.
0
0
0
0
0
0
Those concepts are actually really unique and refreshing, and quite unlike all the other hackneyed ideas people have been throwing around lately.
And I don't understand why the archbishop is so laughable. I mean, none of these will be implemented obviously, but I can imagine the archbishop - an alternative caster type using auras.
0
thanks
0
0
Could you cite this please, if it's from an official blizzard post? I realize there's a lot of speculation on the barbarian being the 'canon class,' but the majority of blizzard statements on lore I've read have been very vague or all-encompassing, for instance referring to multiple 'heroes' rather than a singular 'hero.' I don't have exact citations for the examples I've seen, which is hypocritical, bahah yes - but there's one visible on the main diablo3.com page which states "Yet for those who battled the Prime Evils, the memory fades slowly." I think you get the idea; it's very nebulous.
I would have assumed with the barbarian returning, we would see at least one other Diablo 2 character returning as well - my guess being the paladin.
Anyway yes, requesting a citation for your statement. Thanks in advance.
0
I'm onto you, copypasta. Superior trolling.
0
mmm crystal swords.
0
I dunno, I wouldn't like that personally. He doesn't know what he's talking about; he's just giving you false information.
0
I disagree. I mean yeah, you're right, there's no set in stone rules for class making, but you need to follow the archetypes to some degree to give a reason for some game mechanics to exist. For instance, what would be the point for mana, or spellcasting, if there was no class that took full advantage of it? Or for a better example, why would there be bows with no class to utilize them?
That doesn't mean the classes still can't be varied and have unique skills or whatnot, but their essence needs to set into some structure, in order for there be a functional game.
Also, since the barbarian has been revealed, we can make a probable assumption that one of the three unannounced classes will be a continuing D2 character. I'm not sure if that was hit upon, but it's highly likely.