DiabloFans

And don't forget this very important FAQ from www.blizzard.com/diablo3

Will there be a single-player component in addition to multiplayer?


Yes. In addition to battling the hordes of the Burning Hells cooperatively with friends over Battle.net, players will be able to adventure through the world of Diablo III solo. More details on both the single-player and multiplayer experience will be revealed at a later date.


Last time I checked, MMO's do not have Single Player. Kind of defeats the point of it being Multiplayer Online.

diablo cant be a mmo other wise we would be all on one server like WoW

Quote from name="Elfen Lied" »

Last time I checked, MMO's do not have Single Player. Kind of defeats the point of it being Multiplayer Online.

also true i havt seen one yet that has a single player

The guy who created that battle.net forum thread has heard of people who think it is an MMO, and himself is still in doubt whether true or not. I know. Some people gets confused (without calling names or insulting people please).

Quote from name="Elfen Lied" »

And don't forget this very important FAQ from www.blizzard.com/diablo3

Will there be a single-player component in addition to multiplayer?


Yes. In addition to battling the hordes of the Burning Hells cooperatively with friends over Battle.net, players will be able to adventure through the world of Diablo III solo. More details on both the single-player and multiplayer experience will be revealed at a later date.


Last time I checked, MMO's do not have Single Player. Kind of defeats the point of it being Multiplayer Online.

Quote from "Medievaldragon" »

The guy who created that battle.net forum thread has heard of people who think it is an MMO, and himself is still in doubt whether true or not. I know. Some people gets confused (without calling names or insulting people please).

Yeah, this is confusing me. Is he saying that there isn't a cap to the number of people that can be in one game..?
Maybe there's "exclusives" online that aren't on single player. Maybe quests?

Bashiok: One of the larger things to think about when balancing game sizes is that with mechanics that encourage players to stick together, only so many players can be doing these huge over-the-top type abilities without it turning into a visual mess.

---- That means while a normal Battlenet game can support let's say 32-60 players in a single game, it just become too crowded visually. Imagine all these players in a single spot casting. You won't be able to see things on-screen with all those graphics hitting every area of the screen. And there wouldn't be enough mobs for a crowd of big people. So the game is made to accomodate a handful of players per game. Or if there are way too many players they would be going ahead of your group and wipe most NPCs. by the time you catch up, there is nothing for you to kill or loot.

A small group guarantees you all stick together, and find enough mobs to kill / loot. That's how I view it.

In an MMO, everyone spreads around, and mobs spawn every few minutes. There are quests everywhere too.

Good clarification, now only if people would read these things and not go mad and create threads without any facts.

About the player cap. I really hope they keep at least 8 / game but more wouldn't harm(12-16) if there are a lot end game areas and they are big enough. I'm with them about the party size I think 4 should be enough, I don't wanna see those mega slaughter runs anymore that end in 2 minutes, besides like he said things get very messy with 8 players spamming spells all around. So at least 8 players in games but party cap at 4 players.

thank god!!!

Why would you want like...hundreds of people playing on the same realm all at the same time? ( on Diablo III, I mean. )

I don't think it would be just a graphical issue, it just wouldn't be fun. Everyone beefs up their characters so they can take on hordes of demons by themselves, not so they can build them for 20 man raid parties. That's for WoW, but this is Diablo. It plays differently, it acts differently, and it's run differently. The game was meant so that if you did team up with other people, it would take no more than maybe 5 to really get the job done. Anymore is just over-kill, and it takes the fun out of it.

Besides, when more people enter the game, didn't the monsters get stronger too? Wouldn't that be a major factor in too many people playing all at once? Plus how would you share that much exp with that many people?

I thought that was already established.

well since we know its not an mmo.. 2 unnanounced projects left. (mmo, and a new project named "unannounced project" lol

Quote from "LarryNC" »

well since we know its not an mmo.. 2 unnanounced projects left. (mmo, and a new project named "unannounced project" lol

i used to think (beforeWWI08) that blizzard was makin a New MMO, after WWI i think they were just advertising those 'next - gen MMO' posts to get awesome devs to apply and then stick them on the D3 devcrew, i could be wrong.

Specially now that activision (thank god, not EA or Ubi) merged with vivendi, i think that some sorta MMO rivalling wow will be in dev by now.

They said it themselves:
"Stealing players from our games is fine as long as we are the ones stealing them (on possible new MMO)"
hey MD, help me with a link to that recent interview (on dialup it'll take me 4eva!)

As long as they let us determine how big we want it

10 v 10 pvp would be awesome

or 20 man ffa

I'd hope 10 people could be in one party.

Sure, 4-5 sounds nice for an even amount of killing from everyone in the party instead of those few guys or gals that sit in back waiting for when the shit hits the fan, AKA the boss fight, but what about your guild and/or friends? I want everyone in the game at the same time.

As long as whatever they do has no loss to the potential loot drop chance and difficulty ratio.

I also must say I'm disappointed with the loot system, but it could be because of different games I've been playing.
I've been playing Neverwinter Nights, but specifically, Higher Ground's server.
Every party or "run" as it is called, has a designated person called a "bank" who grabs all of the loot, and "pops" all of the loot (opens the chests, containers, etc.)
At the end of the run, there are places to go to "split the loot," where the bank will put all of the loot into a chest/container, particularly an armoire in this game.
There is a party leader, you get a little crown on your avatar and members of the party can teleport to you instantly almost anywhere except different dimensional planes and shit. That's really all you get for being the leader.
As well, the leader has to do a command, "!partyroll"
This rolls a 100 sided dice, and everyone in the party gets a number, 100 to 0.
This way, the higher the number grabs an item first, down to the last man.
Each person grabs ONE ITEM, in consecutive order.
So if there's 20 items, each person gets two.

This system works wonders, as I understand, but I'm not sure how it looks to someone who hasn't experienced it.
The environment on those servers in that game was spectacular.
Everyone was helping one another.
Runs are constant, leaving the game never not played, even after YEARS, the same runs are done, without boredom.
Everyone understands that they have a role or job within the party.
Everyone understands their day will come for a good high roll in a party, and they will get their items, and until then keep doing their job in the parties and everything evens out.
The economy stays balanced, and this way, you're not having to worry about the one guy obliterating all monsters and getting all the loot. (It was my impression that when you kill things, it drops loot that only you see, so only you can grab it, meaning if there's a hot shot in your party, he/she's getting everything.)
Anyway, this system forces teamwork, not only in the game, but it instills it into the character of the person.
It gives discipline and respect, patience, positivity (imagine a game where 13-16 year olds ACT LIKE adults in regards to character/personality, better stated, kids will be kids, but there's a time and place for that, when a quest and loot isn't on the line - oh, and flaming... that's not even part of vocabulary... I don't even know what trolling means - actually, I haven't witnessed any of this common sense negativity blah blah garbage since I played Warcraft III/Diablo II - you'd be surprised what a loot system and expectation of party etiquette can do in a game, but then again there's 8 worlds of 27 players each and enforced/supervised by those that can ban people from the server, except - !!!!! the good part !!!!!!! - assholes, thieves, jerks, or as you all would say, flamers and trolls I suppose, are banned by the players!!! When you're playing a game where it's pretty tough to get anywhere without a party, and everyone knows you as a piece of shit because everyone informs one another the second they find out someone is an asshole, it's kind of hard to get anyone to invite you, now, isn't it?), and best of all - a lot more quest runs and hours HAPPILY spent with fellow Diablo III fans!!!

Quote from "Resistance" »

Actually you are wrong. They can not be asking for something and "sticking" them elsewhere. They have to sigh a contract that explicitly says what their job is. So for the only thing I think they are working oh is the unannounced project Hydra (which I think is the next gen MMO).

umm... thats why i reiterated myself twice before posting.
please read again.

oh and btwfyi, a job posting on a website is not a contract, its much better to interview a guy, like him, get him to sign an indemnity form, and then tell him what he'll be workin on.
But for the matter you are right. Hydra could very well be another DEV.
BUT then again, that demon that looks like a balrog on d3's trailers got three mouths, the closest definitive form of a hydra blizz has ever depicted

okay.

and the possibility of codename Hydra being D3? will someone please ask someone in the know this question, maybe Bashiok?

Can Diablofans.com inititiate their own exclusive Blizz interview, cuz, that would be cool.

**Question aimed at anybody who's listening**;)

Limiting the number of people in a game should also help with lag issues (I hope). This is the main reason I primarily solo, so I don't die before I see that some one is there...

Hasn't there already been multiple D3 concept art pictures and whatnot with "Hyrdra" scribled in the top left/right corner?

I thought it has already been determined that D3 is the code named project Hydra.

I really doubt they'll support more then 4-5 people in one game. They said they really want to emphasize on the cooperative play, so having too many people might just unbalance the game imo.

Quote from "Robiwan" »

okay.

and the possibility of codename Hydra being D3? will someone please ask someone in the know this question, maybe Bashiok?

Can Diablofans.com inititiate their own exclusive Blizz interview, cuz, that would be cool.

**Question aimed at anybody who's listening**;)

FYI
A blizz rep (I think it was Rob Pardo) said that they will not be releasing their internal project code names or what they mean. I think the quote was "you'll just have to live without that"

I don´t have problem with the 4-5 limit. I would like more people, maybe 8, or even 10, because not everybody on the party fights on the same place. Too big parties is like having a Diablo that plays like a MMO.

Co-op works better with smaller groups and Diablo have worked really nice with small groups where all in the party can participate.