DiabloFans

Count me in! I figured its time to join SICK, and so I pledge my alliegance to the Great Lord Silversurfinstud!

I joined because I was looking for any information about Diablo 3 so I could prove to my friend that it has not been announced.

Saw the site, thought it was cool, everyone seems nice enough, so here I am.

I voted for xSICKx and [SICK]... since either seems fine to me.

I mean, I know I haven't joined yet, but when I do (eventually), thats what I'd like.

Quote from "PhrozenDragon" »

Logically, who created more destruction. Baal who harassed some barbarian town, or the character, who slaughtered thousands of demons? I think DESTRUCTIONS END was Tyrael way of saying: Ok you've had your fun. Now jump in here before you do more damage.

Besides, its Diablo! Dead, maybe, but where will your soul go? Heaven or Hell baby, and its back to the start.
Joking around of course, but come to think of it that could actually be a possible storyline type thing.
Your dead, but all is not peaceful in the afterlife. Haha, something like that.

Quote from "Warlord55" »

lets just say there wont be a blizzard anymore if that happens

I don't quite follow your logic. The outcry will be so ginormous that Blizzard collapses? Will you lead a charge to destroy the Blizzard offices?

That would be a bad thing. We KNOW that SC2 and D3 in some form are going to come eventually. Interviews, vague announcements, etc, all point to the fact that someday we will get what we want.

Stoping them would be counter productive.

Who said anything about announcing two months before release?

In case I was misunderstood, my plan was like this.
MysteryGame Announce - Early 2007. Release - Late 2007.
SC2 Announce - mid 2007. Release - Summer 2008.
D3 Announce - Winter 2007/2008. Release pre-Xmas 2008.

So basically giving themselves a year to test and perfect SC2 and D3, while all us fans who don't get to do the open-beta just sit and wait and cry until it comes out :-P

But this is all pointless conjecture anyway, they most likely wont follow my plan.

My friend predicts the WC movie will be a War of the Ancients movie, nothing modern.
Personally I'd rather see "Warcraft: Orcs and Humans", ya know, the first game.

Man, I've missed the release of a ton of games. Bf2142 is out? Who knew?

But yeah, I that doesn't seem completely accurate. We would have heard something from Blizzard... I think.

Still, good find for whoever spotted the D3 date first.

Its possible. In fact, its probable they are working on something else.

Didn't they say somewhere that they have three major game announcements in 2007 or shortly thereafter? That leaves us room for new material.

If I were them, I'd probably hold onto D3 longest.

First, announce a new game in a new world. We can hardly even speculate on D3 and SC2 so its pointless to speculate what this could be. However, I doubt it'll be a Warcraft game, since WoW is still their prevelant Warcraft game, and even Wc3 still has players and tournaments. This one should come late Q1.

Second, announce Starcraft 2. HUGE fan reaction. Much rejoicing, major huzzahs from millions of gamers across the globe. Lots of hype, of course, and all the hooplah and speculation on storyline, units, gameplay, etc. This should be a late-mid Q2 announcement.

Then, the big announcement we're waiting for here on these boards. Diablo 3! Same reaction as SC2. Mid Q3 announcement.

By then, Mystery Game 1 should be out (in time for Christmas), then release SC2 in the summer, then Diablo 3 in the fall of 2008.

That is, if they're finnished and I ran Blizzard.

I only ever buy my games once unless I reeeally need to.

So far, never happened.

Since I just got the Battle Chest I didn't really start with Diablo, but I do play it when I'm up late and bored. I can play it in my room with no internet and still have fun.
With D2 you gotta have the Battle.net experience.

Quote from "Thasador" »

lol what about hedging your neighbors lawn. lol

I'm shure Blizzard could incorporate that into some sort of game, but as a standalone that'd be hard. Unless, of course, this lawn is some sort of portal to a new dimension :rolleyes:

Haha, but yeah, it should rock no matter what they make (unless its another MMO).

Quote from "PhrozenDragon" »

To Ocarina, Golden Sun 2 was the exact same technology. They only released two verions because it was too big for one game, and to make more money (obviously)
If the information General Ryan provided that you can transfer your characters intact, then I believe the information is completely made up. There is no logical reason for that to exist.
However I could imagine it being that you transfered a character, and depending on what difficulty you beat (N/Nm/H) you get the different titles (Slayer, Champion etc...) as proof that you beat D2 and as a minor thing to view in-game.
But, maybe there is a slight chance. In Baldur's Gate II, your characters started at lvl 7-8, unless you transferred, then they could be anywhere in between 1 and 20.
But if such a thing happens, the levels will have to be rescaled, or increased in total. There's no point running around as a lvl 90 in the beginning when the max lvl is only 99.

Admittedly the GS games were the same technology, but really the main reason they were split was because each started and followed a different story. You can't have a game be like "Okay, so, you worked on this game and did these quests, and taa daa! Heres new characters to start over from a different point of view!" But thats beside the point.
It was just an example.

Like I said previously, if there is some interaction between D2 and D3 Blizzard will most likely not make it an exact character transfer. They will make something work, and that something will most likely not be direct character transfer at the onset.

Also, you can't use the "You couldn't do it between D1 and D2 so you cant between D2 and D3!". One of the major things in subsequent games is update and revamp of an older system or idea. Some things are changed, some stay the same, and some things are added! If D2 was just like D1 with a different storyline then... well, it wouldn't be as popular today as it is. Diablo 1 is fun, but in 90% of instances I'll pick the sequal in this case. Its just a newer and better game.

With or without, however, it'll still be fun whenever it comes.

I think the Computer would be a better choice.
No console Diablos.

But in reference to the original poster, that is mighty sexy news. SC2, D3, who knows?

Only game Blizzard has released that I don't like is WoW, so I'll probably be happy with whatever. Starcraft 2 though... heck yes.

Quote from "AcidReign" »

I'd love to battle the Zerg in a G-string

I'd rather not!

But I agree with Siaynoq to a certain degree. The Ghosts weren't sex symbols, they were assassins and sabateurs, and while its true that sex sells, that shot is a little ridiculous. Who would want to fight Zerg while they have a wedgie?