Quote from Britward
Does anyone remember, well before Diablo II's release as it was still in production, a cinematic of the Wanderer in a carriage driving through the rain, and he was in some long soliloquy about the Hells and traveling to the far east for his salvation, and the teaser ends on a shot of the Wanderer's lips being sewn shut and then the soul stone lying in the mud in the rain?
I'm not making this up, right?
I feel like it was out when they were still tossing around the idea that the character you'd play in Diablo II was going to be the guy with the soul stone in his/her head.
No that happened, but last I heard that video is considered non-canon and irrelevant to the storyline.
0
This sounds correct. In D2 the best way to do high damage in Act 1 normal was to get a socketed weapon and throw a bunch of chipped gems in it. That didn't exactly hold true for perfect gems towards the end of the game because those values never scaled and they were eventually outclassed by things that did.
0
The flavor of the Wizard is that they use their arcane power to wreak massive havoc. It doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the range at which this is done. As far as balancing concerns go, typically close range abilities need to be more powerful to account for the increased risk you take in being closer to monsters. They also will need to spend more skill slots on defensive survival based skills instead of offensive gunslinging ones. It is certainly within flavor for some wizards to be adept at close range, powerful, wide area attacks while other wizards choose to focus on longer range more pinpoint accurate spells. That youtube video shows just such a close range wizard, without truly being a "melee" wizard.
A "melee" wizard would be a wizard that walks up and hits things with a sword, which is completely out of character and it doesn't appear that this is the intent of the developers. From my understanding, they have developed a battle mage, which I am all for.
0
0
What's the difference between taking a couple days off work to enjoy a new game and taking a couple days off work to go on vacation? Aside from the financial difference of a game being significantly cheaper.
0
That looks like the closest depiction so far, I believe both shoulder heads are identical, and that it has to do with 3 dying and 1 being brought to life. Mega-prime-evil? Seems kinda hokey and a gimmick, but I'll concede that that much evil being banished in a relatively short time could coalesce in the Abyss into some sort of single being with 3 consciousnesses. Schizophrenic prime evil if you will. It is then very possible that Diablo would win over Baal and Mephisto and take single control over the body. The body would then be mostly (80%) Diablo with touches of Baal and Mephisto (10% each, tentacles and horns, respectively). They could each have their own representative head, but they would no longer be sentient or really aware. They'd be trapped. This is the most logical way Blizzard could spin the megazord Diablo issue. This single entity would then go beat up on Belial and Azmodan, thus why they didn't invade for 20 years.
The candles are pretty compelling:
"It is said that in the end of all things..." Lights 3 candles next to each other
"You'd find a new beginning..." Lights 1 larger candle on top of a skull.
3 end 1 begin. *nudge nudge wink* If you don't think Blizzard would hint that, you need to catch up on their type of humor.
Now that that's out of the way, the side heads, if identical, each have at least 2 horns. One front thick horn sprouts from the top and middle of the forehead and curves back, one thinner horn would be further back and curve forward. This is all that is visible.
Evidence:
It is very possible that there are 3 horns per head, one in the middle curving back and one on each side of the hood in the back, curving inward like so:
( /\ )
The horn furthest from view would then be too low to be seen at any point.