the female witchdoctor just looks like a woman who dresses a little funny... The male witchdoctor twitches and looks old and slightly on the mad side, where the female witchdoctor, well... doesn't...
Culturally we seem to be afraid of old women - playing a wizened old wizard is common but an old woman? Unheard of. It's just not done. I agree with you though - I'd like to see an older, twitchier female witch doctor - she looks too much like a sorceress, too young.
Quote from "Grimhound" »
There was a female Paladin in Act 2 of Diablo 2.
Remember Fara?
And a female Barbarian in Act 5... Anya.
Also by geneology, Charsi from Act 1.
A female Warrior in Act 4... Jamella.
Notice that none of these are wearing chainmail bikinis: I'd rather we had no women than a game suffering from "Xena warrior princess syndrome" - I hate the way almost every game with a "fantasy" setting seems to be populated with scantily clad bints - it's not that sort of fantasy, it's low brow and purile - Tolkein had strong, sensible female characters: These days the gaming market is larger than obese 40-year-old virgins living in mum's basement (they're all too busy playing with their night elves in WoW/themselves).
Yes, sex sells, but Blizzard is better than that, or at least has always been with Diablo.
They'll probably put a new spin on it though, make it even more awesome (course, I'm not sure how you can make an area full of murderously retarded bipedal cows any more awesome).
It's not sexist to acknowledge that there is a difference between men and women, and there is. This is not a gray area people. Men have a greater muscle mass, bone and skull density, broader shoulders and chest and greater lung capacity, all characteristics developed over thousands of years of evolution in aid of fighting eachother over women Simply put, men have a clear advantage over women in physical activities - I'm not even going to argue with you if deny this since you're clearly out of touch with reality (you deranged militant feminist).
So we have two choices:
1. This is a fantasy game - who cares about how realistic it is, let the people have their female character models, the only difference will be visual.
2. Give male characters more health and strength but -
- while on average men have a larger endocranien volume (bigger brain) the average man is less intelligent than the average women, in the same way that Neanderthals had larger brains than us but were too dim to survive. Interestingly male intelligence is also spread further along the spectrum than female intelligence, meaning that you get really stupid men (George Bush) and really ingenious men (Nietzsche) while women are less heterogeneous, and, once again, smarter on average.
- give female caracters greater intelligence and more powerful magic!
It's funny, you're probably assuming that I'm a guy because I'm admitting that guys are stronger, but am I?
Please drop a comment/reply and let me know how you feel about Blizzard implementing a new Samurai Class :thumbsup:
The Paladin fits with the whole Angels and Daemons setting, but these I'm afraid are the West's angels and daemons: a Samurai would stick out like... like... like a Samurai in a Diablo game!
Perhaps if there was a part of the game world that mimicked feudal Japan/China it might make a bit more sense, but if that were the case they really shouldn't be called Samurai - that would be like using Ninjas or Beefeaters or Legionaries - a very lazy design choice.
I'm only worried they'll be really half arsed about the alternate genders, give the male Barbarian tons of personality and have the female one being just a token female Barbarian for example. I mean, I haven't seen any concept art for the female witch doctor (I think) - but hey, I'm sure they'll do a good job, this is Blizzard, they don't do half arsed.
Without question! it's been part of Diablo since those bloody annoying Succubi in the first game. It makes the daemons disturbing because they're sexually menacing as well as menacing in the usual sort of way: The prospect of your corpse being sodomised is truly a horrifying one!
By the way Murderface: what's with the signature? I see the dude making petitions is having his head bitten off (eg - "quit whining") by a monster who's fantasing about dancing chickens (eg - wtf).
What I gathered from the quote is that the basic outline of each area will be set, and that objectives, monsters and dungeon entraces will be randomized. This still isn't enough randomization in my book because if you know exactly where the entrace to the "Burial Ground" and the "Stony Field" are, what's the point in exploring the "Cold plains"?
Quote from name="biff exploder" »
no randomization sometimes is a good thing, just thinking of the forest in act 3 makes baby jesus cry.
That's the whole point: you get the impression of slowly making your way through this dense confusing labyrinth of trees and rivers the first time you play through the act as well as each subsequent time because each time it's a different maze. A maze is no longer a maze when you know your way through it. Without randomization you'll explore an area once and then you'll know your way through, so you'll just head from objective A to objective B and C and so on rather than having to explore the area to find each objective, and I always liked the exploration and scavenger hunts.
Randomization is important in Diablo because you're only new to the game once. Say you play through the game once with each character: a majority of your experience will have been spent retreading familliar, dull and monotonous paths through areas more or less the same each time.
Quote from "Karjalan" »
it makes leveling secondary characters much less frustrating and takes away the need to get power rushed...
This is supposed to be a game, not a job. Sure, static environments are easier for speed runs. For grind. But what happened to fun? What happened to savouring the experience each time? The grind has ruined everything - soon you don't remember what it was like to enjoy playing, you just play for that promised sense of achievement when your character is at the highest level. Wisdom tells us however that happiness come from the journey not the arrival, for with each success we must seek new goals. Without randomization you get a great experience the first time and then each subsequent time is boring.
The exterior world, well, we're going to make it a little bit more static from an environment standpoint, but we will still be randomizing events and monsters across the terrain. [...] we want to build more of a world that you can kind of learn and fall in love with [...] a bit more of a World of Warcraft exterior experience, to really learn these lands, learn towns, learnwhere NPCs are.
- Rob Pardo
Translation 1: "Outdoor environments are harder to randomly generate realistically than dungeons, and we're lazy. Soz lol"
Translation 3: "You suckers will buy anything we make"
Too melodramatic? :confused: Nothing is too melodramatic when half the community is screaming about the game being too brightly coloured!
Looks like randomly generated maps are being more axed for the outdoor portion of the game, and if Diablo III is anything like Diablo II we'll have a lot of outdoor areas, so most of the game will be static, with a few randomized dungeons thrown in for good measure! People have been annoyed about the new art direction but I think conserving Diablo's randomization is far more important than its darkness. Randomization IS Diablo!
If we're going to whinge about something, can we whinge about something important?! I don't want a mpa I can learn, I want one that I have to re-explore each time I play the game! It's called replayability! I don't want to know my way to Kurast Bazaar after the first try, I want to have to find my way, to explore! :mad: Has Blizzard lost their marbles?!
that screenshot is low-res so stop fucking showing it to me. It's a badly saved in Pain Jpeg of the real image which is much more detailed.
No need to shout
Quote from "Zombie_Kamikaze13" »
Supersoldat says that demons attacking towns will be great and you have to defend it, i agree, you know? Like the monsters can get in the town and pretty much kill people (Armorers, Smiths Questgivers and all the people that do important stuff are invincible but normal people and guards can die). That would be sweet
Yeah, in the same way that Cain is invincible throughout the gameplay video - he just moves away from the fighting and the monsters ignore him. Wouldn't want it to happen too often though, otherwise it would get annoying (if every time you came to town to buy something you had to wipe out a horde of daemons).
Would also be kindof cool to come back to a town and find it entirely in ruins à la Tristram in Diablo II, only you were there just 10 minutes ago. You'd have to sift through the ruins looking for survivors - it would have to be at or near the end of an act though. Now that I think of it, it would be awesome to find a ruined Lut Gholein (sorry for spelling, I just can't be bothered looking it up) or something.
All this would give the game more of a sense of urgency rather than the town areas being invulnerable strongholds.
EDIT: Oh, one more thing that would be cool - The gameplay movie is set up so the music corresponds to the action (so pretty much like a film) - what would be great is if in the game the music would change depending on whether you're fighting, beeing overwhelmed, fighting a boss or just wandering around in town or outside. Sortof like in Total Annihilation or better (it shouldn't suddenly flick into some epic exciting music if one fallen stabs you and then dies of fright)
0
0
0
0
0
Notice that none of these are wearing chainmail bikinis: I'd rather we had no women than a game suffering from "Xena warrior princess syndrome" - I hate the way almost every game with a "fantasy" setting seems to be populated with scantily clad bints - it's not that sort of fantasy, it's low brow and purile - Tolkein had strong, sensible female characters: These days the gaming market is larger than obese 40-year-old virgins living in mum's basement (they're all too busy playing with their night elves in WoW/themselves).
Yes, sex sells, but Blizzard is better than that, or at least has always been with Diablo.
0
0
They'll probably put a new spin on it though, make it even more awesome (course, I'm not sure how you can make an area full of murderously retarded bipedal cows any more awesome).
0
Simply put, men have a clear advantage over women in physical activities - I'm not even going to argue with you if deny this since you're clearly out of touch with reality (you deranged militant feminist).
So we have two choices:
1. This is a fantasy game - who cares about how realistic it is, let the people have their female character models, the only difference will be visual.
2. Give male characters more health and strength but -
- while on average men have a larger endocranien volume (bigger brain) the average man is less intelligent than the average women, in the same way that Neanderthals had larger brains than us but were too dim to survive. Interestingly male intelligence is also spread further along the spectrum than female intelligence, meaning that you get really stupid men (George Bush) and really ingenious men (Nietzsche) while women are less heterogeneous, and, once again, smarter on average.
- give female caracters greater intelligence and more powerful magic!
It's funny, you're probably assuming that I'm a guy because I'm admitting that guys are stronger, but am I?
0
Perhaps if there was a part of the game world that mimicked feudal Japan/China it might make a bit more sense, but if that were the case they really shouldn't be called Samurai - that would be like using Ninjas or Beefeaters or Legionaries - a very lazy design choice.
0
0
0
By the way Murderface: what's with the signature? I see the dude making petitions is having his head bitten off (eg - "quit whining") by a monster who's fantasing about dancing chickens (eg - wtf).
0
That's the whole point: you get the impression of slowly making your way through this dense confusing labyrinth of trees and rivers the first time you play through the act as well as each subsequent time because each time it's a different maze. A maze is no longer a maze when you know your way through it. Without randomization you'll explore an area once and then you'll know your way through, so you'll just head from objective A to objective B and C and so on rather than having to explore the area to find each objective, and I always liked the exploration and scavenger hunts.
Randomization is important in Diablo because you're only new to the game once. Say you play through the game once with each character: a majority of your experience will have been spent retreading familliar, dull and monotonous paths through areas more or less the same each time.
This is supposed to be a game, not a job. Sure, static environments are easier for speed runs. For grind. But what happened to fun? What happened to savouring the experience each time? The grind has ruined everything - soon you don't remember what it was like to enjoy playing, you just play for that promised sense of achievement when your character is at the highest level. Wisdom tells us however that happiness come from the journey not the arrival, for with each success we must seek new goals. Without randomization you get a great experience the first time and then each subsequent time is boring.
0
http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3168515
The exterior world, well, we're going to make it a little bit more static from an environment standpoint, but we will still be randomizing events and monsters across the terrain. [...] we want to build more of a world that you can kind of learn and fall in love with [...] a bit more of a World of Warcraft exterior experience, to really learn these lands, learn towns, learn where NPCs are.
Translation 1: "Outdoor environments are harder to randomly generate realistically than dungeons, and we're lazy. Soz lol"
Translation 2: "Yay! Let's sodomize replayability"
Translation 3: "You suckers will buy anything we make"
Too melodramatic? :confused: Nothing is too melodramatic when half the community is screaming about the game being too brightly coloured!
If we're going to whinge about something, can we whinge about something important?! I don't want a mpa I can learn, I want one that I have to re-explore each time I play the game! It's called replayability! I don't want to know my way to Kurast Bazaar after the first try, I want to have to find my way, to explore! :mad: Has Blizzard lost their marbles?!
0
Yeah, in the same way that Cain is invincible throughout the gameplay video - he just moves away from the fighting and the monsters ignore him. Wouldn't want it to happen too often though, otherwise it would get annoying (if every time you came to town to buy something you had to wipe out a horde of daemons).
Would also be kindof cool to come back to a town and find it entirely in ruins à la Tristram in Diablo II, only you were there just 10 minutes ago. You'd have to sift through the ruins looking for survivors - it would have to be at or near the end of an act though. Now that I think of it, it would be awesome to find a ruined Lut Gholein (sorry for spelling, I just can't be bothered looking it up) or something.
All this would give the game more of a sense of urgency rather than the town areas being invulnerable strongholds.
EDIT: Oh, one more thing that would be cool - The gameplay movie is set up so the music corresponds to the action (so pretty much like a film) - what would be great is if in the game the music would change depending on whether you're fighting, beeing overwhelmed, fighting a boss or just wandering around in town or outside. Sortof like in Total Annihilation or better (it shouldn't suddenly flick into some epic exciting music if one fallen stabs you and then dies of fright)