DiabloFans

I hope people don't get all elitist with the voice chat thing. I can picture games like "Belial run 15 MUST HAV MIC" being made. Sure, being able to talk with a mic helps reaction time and such, and it's especially useful in games like WoW that require healers and stuff working in a cohesive team, but it's annoying when people start excluding other players because of their lack of a mic.

I, for one, feel like a complete asshole talking to my computer. I'm rarely alone, so it just seems weird. So I doubt I'll be using this feature.

Wasn't Harrogoth destroyed by the meteor or whatever that impacted that area, not the destruction of the Worldstone? if the player character got out of the worldstone's collapse, Tyrael certainly had no problem.

Quote from "Umpa65" »

Why is he so small?

Indeed, even the oldest of the barbarians we've seen are built like a brick shithouse.

I would understand straying from that a little, but this guy is scrawny.

Regardless of that qualm, it's a really great piece.

Nothing seems to work on AMD for me, but hey, whatever floats your boat.

Blizzard is really good at developing stuff that will work on most machines, I'm sure the graphics card/operating system/other variable won't be a problem.

two screens away is barely right next to someone. i always felt the experience radius in Diablo II was pretty generous.

My guess is it'll be about the same in Diablo III, either that, or you'll have to aid in the enemies defeat to gain experience.

It's not really so different. It's built using the engine that bioware uses, so if you're familiar with those games, this one is quite like that. But different, of course, just a similar feel.

It's not turn based but combat isn't exactly normal, either. it's hard to explain. It's a bit like MMO point-and clicking, except with other timed moves you need to do to make it more interesting. Plus you can dodge around and stuff instead of just watching two guys bash eachother for awhile.

You can play from a third person perspective, or a fairly isometric one (where you click about the screen to get around).

The game is segmented into Chapters, in a way somewhat similar to Diablo II. The game isn't entirely free, but you encounter new big areas to explore which are fairly free as you progress in the story.

The quests are most reminiscent of quests from some bioware games - there aren't too many. I mean, the main story has a lot to do, but as far as side-quests go, there isn't much, and they aren't all too optional, you'll probably end up doing everything for the much-needed experience.

The alchemy is a big system in the game, and quite interesting once you get used to it. It's different than it is in other games, and makes combat more interesting for an alchemist. Not really an option though - pretty much anybody will have to do alchemy to get by in the game.

One big thing about the game are the choices. The game presents many choices, most of which are all morally gray areas (not just clear cut 'good' and 'evil' bullshit) and the choices you make can greatly effect the game. You get more than just a slap on the wrist in some instances - characters you see, enemies you encounter, all may be different based on the choices you make.

Also, you can play poker dice and lay plenty of wenches.

And that's about as thorough description as I can give. It's a pretty swell, Dark, and morally ambiguous game

Quote from "Terror" »

Recommended to play while waiting for DIII? Absolutely. It's not mind-numbingly boring like Oblivion was after a few hours..

What's with all the Oblivion hate in this thread?

I really love the Witcher as a game, but at that, I tend to get bored with it relatively quickly and move on (usually to replay Morrowind and Oblivion some more).

The Witcher may have a better story, more thought-out characters, and some interesting combat systems, but in the end it lacks customizability. You're basically stuck using the same weapons and armor(which I would assume sucks pretty immensely to the typical Diablo fan), and obviously you look the same no matter what. No matter how differently you distribute your stat points, you'll still be playing the same character essentially. With Oblivion, (or moreso, Morrowind and daggerfall) you can make a vastly different character every time, that requires completely different playstyle.

And for me, that creates replayability, I've put over 400 hours into Oblivion, quite a bit more than that into Morrowind (probably enough to rival the time spent in Diablo II) whereas I have probably only put about 20 hours into the witcher.

To get this post at least slightly closer to the topic at hand, I really did love the Witcher, but believe it seriously lacks replayability. And say what you will about Oblivion - I'll probably agree with most criticisms, but damn is that game replayable.

Quote from "XZ3ROorDieX" »

but have not yet played (or ever going to play) diablo and diablo 2.

To the part bolded.. Why?! As scyberdragon said D2 is pretty cheap. And let's say Diablo 3 comes out, and it's your favorite game ever - would you never be curious to even go back and try the older games? They're really great. I'm not saying you need tor un out and buy/beat them before diablo III, just saying, keep an open mind to them in the future.

Also, who knows. I think some of the skill trees we've seen are fairly nailed down, but everything's subject to change, and we can't really be sure of anything until the game is out. However, don't compare the number of skills in this game to skills in other non-diablo games - if you haven't played the past Diablo games, I'm sure you're quite unaware of what the number of skills really matters to the game. Like comparing apples to oranges and such... maybe one has more seeds or something, but they both taste good if you like 'em.

Quote from "MidnightTempest" »

And here's also hoping D3 will release by the first half of 2010.

Heh, good luck on that one.

Here's hoping for first quarter 2011.


Anyway, welcome, you'll find there are plenty of people who will agree with your criticisms, and then an equal share of people that will complain endlessly about people who complain too much.

Since I first played Diablo II...

I continued to play Diablo II, and turned down any chances at human interaction, or moving forward with my life. And beat hell difficulty hardcore.

I think i made the right choice.

Cool stuff dude! Really great sculpture. And damn is sculpting hard! I've been messing around with sculpey a lot lately, it can be rough to get anything looking just right.

Quote from "ydemonhunter" »

This is called perspective.

Nobody likes an artist who's too cocky. However, yeah, arm looks fine, foreshortening and that.

Really great drawing over all.

Quote from "Pryda" »

Same here. I was expecting a lot more from a movie with such good actors but maybe the style just didnt appeal to me. They should had just made it an animation.. :confused:

Wait, a Sin City fan and it's the style that didn't appeal to you? Wild.


I liked the Spirit, but not near as well as I would have liked to. I'm a huge Frank Miller fan, and always did enjoy Will Eisner's 'The Spirit'. I thought it would be a great thing for Frank to do as his solo directorial debut. I loved the style, it was great to look at, but the story and a lot of the dialogue was a bit lacking.

Posted by Dauroth on the 24th, apparently.
http://diablofans.com/forums/showpost.php?p=478241&postcount=6

He was also the one who posted it on the official forums.

Didn't somebody on this Forum post this a few days before it was posted on the official forum? I thought so. Can't recall who it was.

Still, nice find by whomever.