i was doing some reading today, and one of the original coders for the diablo series said it was an awful idea to bring the barb back and they shoulds stuck with what blizzard north was trying todo and make all new classes not revamp old classes?
now im a fan of the Barb, but im a bigger fan of the diablo series what do you think do you think it is wise to bring back old classes or do you think they shoulda just made brand new classes for the game?
my other take on this is: Blizzard norths story line was probably very different then Blizzards story line, so thats why they brought the barb back?
well i would have liked to see all new chars, but one for storyline purposes isnt gonna kill anyone. and i think the barb is the most iconic of all diablo classes. and hes my number 2 fav after sorc of course...
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Remember the String of Ears
"to the worm in horseradish, the world is horseradish."
Well they wanted to give us something familiar and the barb was the best choice. Pure melee dps.
There is always one pure melee dps.
(When I say dps, I know all Diablo characters are dps I just mean he doesn't use a shield)
He has some new skills to so it makes it more interesting.
Yeah, you have a good point. There are only so many archetypes for characters, so no matter what you do some aspects of them are going to be derivative.
Yeah I mean they could of changed him to like... berserker or something else but if they said warrior or something similar it would imply shield usage.
The barbarian is kind of different.. story wise vs. the other D2 classes. Stuff like Act 5, Barbarian Mercs. , and the name Barbarian is associated with a more intense, gruesome .. brutish image than say a warrior, fighter or berserker. Barbarian just seems uniquely Diablo..
It's a good thing to have a heavy melee class in, so why not bring back the Barbarian, although I wouldn't have minded a ( heavy Knight class ? ) either.
The barbarian is kind of different.. story wise vs. the other D2 classes. Stuff like Act 5, Barbarian Mercs. , and the name Barbarian is associated with a more intense, gruesome .. brutish image than say a warrior, fighter or berserker. Barbarian just seems uniquely Diablo..
Just my 2 cents
More like uniquely Conan the Barbarian.
Any Barbarian in a video game is just a tribute to Robert E. Howard.
As to the topic, I think it was a bad idea. It's a boring class and apart from a few new skills is just a total conversion from D2, meaning I've played that class already. But it's going in anyways, so I just will not play one. Pretty simple.
Also, people need to stop saying Necros and Barbs are iconic. They're way underplayed. Sorceresses are iconic because they make of the majourity of played characters.
If there had been a basic warrior instead of barb peope would have whined about WoW again
I think this new barb is a lot different than what we've seen in D2. I guess the other classes are new to us so there will be a lot of new things to find out, even with barbarian.
now im a fan of the Barb, but im a bigger fan of the diablo series what do you think do you think it is wise to bring back old classes or do you think they shoulda just made brand new classes for the game?
my other take on this is: Blizzard norths story line was probably very different then Blizzards story line, so thats why they brought the barb back?
"to the worm in horseradish, the world is horseradish."
There is always one pure melee dps.
(When I say dps, I know all Diablo characters are dps I just mean he doesn't use a shield)
He has some new skills to so it makes it more interesting.
Yeah, you have a good point. There are only so many archetypes for characters, so no matter what you do some aspects of them are going to be derivative.
Just my 2 cents
My YouTube Channel
Making Controversial points one post at a time!
More like uniquely Conan the Barbarian.
Any Barbarian in a video game is just a tribute to Robert E. Howard.
As to the topic, I think it was a bad idea. It's a boring class and apart from a few new skills is just a total conversion from D2, meaning I've played that class already. But it's going in anyways, so I just will not play one. Pretty simple.
Also, people need to stop saying Necros and Barbs are iconic. They're way underplayed. Sorceresses are iconic because they make of the majourity of played characters.
Words I hate in Gaming Culture:
Epic
Hardcore
E-Sports
RIP: Demon Hunter: lvl 50 | Barb: lvl 60 (plvl 5) | Monk: lvl12 & lvl70 (plvl 200)
Extra Strong Lightning Enchanted Multishot [Physical Immune]
Words I hate in Gaming Culture:
Epic
Hardcore
E-Sports
"to the worm in horseradish, the world is horseradish."
But you got it right barb is taking some heavy damage after 1.10. They seem to have upped a lot of monsters physical damage.
Nowadays I'd be much more worried about lightench aura ench(conviction) fire ench cold ench combo
Btw barbs were not underplayed before lod and in classic before 1.10. They were everywhere.
RIP: Demon Hunter: lvl 50 | Barb: lvl 60 (plvl 5) | Monk: lvl12 & lvl70 (plvl 200)
even if you dont like the barbarian, the barbarian is a giant part of diablo
I think this new barb is a lot different than what we've seen in D2. I guess the other classes are new to us so there will be a lot of new things to find out, even with barbarian.
RIP: Demon Hunter: lvl 50 | Barb: lvl 60 (plvl 5) | Monk: lvl12 & lvl70 (plvl 200)