DiabloFans

I, for one, welcome our new bag-dispensing overlords.

Don't get me wrong, I seriously enjoyed the inventory-tetris mini-game. My friends would ask me to do theirs, some times. And it has been a staple of Diablo games. It also made logical sense to my mind that one could carry more smaller things than larger things, and larger things took up more space. (Of course, it still didn't make sense that a sorceress or a necro could carry around as much as a barbarian, toting around five plate mail armor pieces+, but oh well. Suspension of reality in favor of fun = good times in my book.)

That said, I just plain like the bag system better, as much as I'll miss the old one. I am thinking that maybe they will opt to make a virtually limitless stash (like your house in Oblivion) that you can just chuck anything you want into. Not saying that I think it should look or function like the house (more like just a huge chest or something).

I really liked PlugY's inventory paging system. You could scroll by 1, 5, 10, 50, 100 or 1,000 pages left or right. That way, I was able to reserve 1,000 pages for set pieces, uniques, yellows, etc., and have the ability to maneuver between sub-sections for the different item classes (weapons, armor, rings, etc.)

I hope that they have some similar organization system set in place for D3. Having limitless inventory space with a lame organizing system is almost too much to bear, at times (I'm looking at YOU, Mass Effect).

Candy Mountain.

Meshif would be cool.
Elzix would be humorous.
Ormus would be interesting.
Griswold would be unexpected (what happens to people after they die after they had become undead?).

And Ty-rail sounds like an angel from the 'hood.

Here is a Magic Find FAQ. Hope this helps out a bit. For more info, maybe check out Arreat Summit and diabloii.net.

Man, I'm feeling the negativity on this thread. Seems like some people (not all, mind you) just have this burr in their saddle whenever something doesn't make immediate sense to them, and they automatically go the "Blizzard must be holding out on us / they don't care about what their fans want / they are so stupid for doing x/not doing x" route.

'Cause it's not like they haven't been spending the better part of a decade making this game and polishing it to a nice, shiny Charlie Sheen, right?

Give Blizzard some credit, meng. If they say there will be no permanent blood splats, it's not because they don't care if you want it, or won't have it in because they know you want it. They have a good reason for doing what they do.

Egyptian style!

Act 3 smelled like the brackish, recyc water from the African safari ride in Disneyland. The tileset and the music are similar to the sounds and sights of that area of Disneyland.

I guess it's not so much that I don't like Act 3 (though the forests could be such a huge pain if you weren't a sorc or barb), but that I liked all the other acts more. It's like me choosing between Dr Pepper, Mtn Dew, Texas sweet tea or Coke. I like Coke just fine, and would never pass it up, but I'd choose the other ones before it, more than likely.

Matt Uelman did such an awesome job with the music in Diablo 2.

Act 2.

I think it largely has to do with emotions felt the first time through the narrative, for me. The story jumped forward, and it was the first new place to explore, and the sounds, smell, look was so different from Act I. I was like "Ooooh, this is so cool!" Also, it was the first real Diablo-universe "city", so-to-speak. The combination of it being called a city and the music made it feel a bit more central, a bit more important than being in the sticks.

I loved the music for Lut Golein.

I like the merits of a lower level cap. It has two main things that attract me: Firstly, as has been said, it makes the levels more significant. Secondly, and this kinda goes along with the first, is that a lower level cap allows the devs to be able to balance each level better. Regardless of the number of levels, there's an internal metric that must be developed to dictate health/mana/spell efficiency/etc. And the smaller the amount of levels involved, the more time the devs have to make level progression tighter and more polished.


Reaching the final level doesn't have to mean there's no room for advancement. Guild Wars did a good job of this. You were really only around halfway through the game when you reached level 20. The rest of the game was spent locating spells and further beefing out your character. Everquest used some kind of alternate experience points once you'd reached their cap (I forgot how it worked, though. I haven't played that game in like seven or eight years). I'm not saying that these are how D3 should work, but just showing some games where the devs chose not to make reaching the highest level be the "be-all-end-all" of character advancement.

I like the idea of "vanity" stuff, too. Like having your name appear a different color after you've done such-and-such a thing (again, see EQ), or something like that.

But regardless, I got faith in Blizzard that they are going to do the best they can and present us with a solid product that will again suck the life out of millions.

Good times, that.

I think that while it wouldn't necessarily be a good idea as a universal rule, I think it has merit as a possibility for certain offensive or defensive spells. Mario RPG used this idea to great effect.

Or maybe not even additional damage, but maybe a manual detonation, like choosing when Frozen Orb explodes or something. I'm not saying that this example is a good idea, but I like the idea of using active button presses to augment damage or cause different effects.

I would imagine that the frequency of health orbs that are dropped will be enemy- and difficulty level-dependent, and would be handled in a similar fashion to loot drops.

I think the way that they've changed how health is regenerated (mainly orbs vs potions) will help to streamline the action in the game. There's no less skill involved in running over orbs than there is grabbing potions, and makes (to me) more sense. I mean, if you're in the middle of a fight and an enemy drops a health pot, wouldn't you rather have the option to immediately consume it instead of having to put it in your belt/inventory and then drink it? I think that may be part of the theory behind the swap. Then you have regular potions as a back up in the event that you don't have any orbs around but still need health. This would clear up a lot of space in the belt for other stuff that they would rather the belt be used for.

With orbs instead of pots being the main method of keeping health up, this will allow for more of our processing time to be spent actively doing battle things, which will in turn allow Blizzard to increase the complexity or difficulty of the enemies.

I, for one, welcome our orb-bearing overlords.

OP are you female cuz that would explain it.
Me as a man i want to just run around and kill demons.

I enjoyed the puzzle aspect of "tetrising" inventory items, thank you much (same as with Residient Evil). I never felt unduly hindered by the inventory system (except as far as the stash was concerned [woot for PlugY!]). It made sense to me that an individual would only have physical room for so much stuff.

That said, I completely understand that a good many gameplay mechanic decisions are not based on how real they are. There's a line to be walked between "real" and "fun". A pally in full gear would be making a constant clanking sound while walking, and probably wouldn't be able to run very quickly. But for the sake of fun, they took away that realism. People trip, but there's no tripping in most games, save at least one (I'm looking at YOU, Smash Brothers Brawl).

I think it is in this spirit of overall fun and approachability that they decided on this new inventory system. Yes, it is not quite as realistic. But how realistic is it for a sorc or a necro (for instance) to be capable of carrying half the crap that they tote around, anyway?

I appreciate this new change, while at the same time I have fond memories of the former system. It is something that I associate with Diablo. But it is something that I won't be altogether sorry to see go, either. There's more than enough "Diablo" associations that will be kept to make up for this change.

I would appreciate anti-aliasing being included as an option in Diablo 3, and will be surprised if it isn't included.

I am all in favor of the exchange system. I think a gold-based cost would work out in-world, as the blacksmiths/runesmiths/whomever could conceivably be the ones who would be doing the actual operation.

I like the scaling of the cost, too. One thing that really attracted me to PlugY was the fact that you could try out different things and not get pigeonholed, but even that didn't have the ability to remove runes (though that may well have been a game engine limitation).

I'm so jazzed for this game. I am taking a three-day vacation from life to play this when it hits.

@rlstoner2004:

Ha! That's awesome, man.