Diablo 3 is a-coming?

[Kaiserin]

No.

What was that about the criteria for amusing simple minds?

 

[Shota Shernokavich]

What was that about the criteria for amusing simple minds?

Woah.

Diablo is fun for what it is: A fun hack and slay romp with great multiplayer. Diablo 3 would be so much better than any of those other Diablo clones that are coming out repeatedly, because Blizzard actually know how to make such a game fun.

This is what I mean. Not only could they make a hacknslash fun, but they also made it have some good multiplayer. HnS usually turn out to be shit (heavenly sword comes to mind) but blizz knows what they are doing. With the $$ they are making from WoW I can't wait to see the engine.

 

[DoppelG]

I don't understand why everyone is so concerned with whether there will be a Diablo 3 or not. Obviously there will be. I'm more interested to see if they have any new features up their sleeves or will it be another Starcraft II which seems to add nothing new.

The average Blizz game player is incredibly conservative about his games. Do you remember the first version of WC3 that Blizz showed? The shitstorm that followed made them create an updated, yet inferior WC2-BtDP.

They don't want anything to change.

hmm, no. If anything Diablo fans are sick of Diablo clones wich do nothing more then do the same thig Diablo 2 did over and over and over again, but then not as good (so people still keep on playing Diablo 2). Diablo 2 redefined the genre so much that we get nothing but conservatively made clones (apart from maybe the one-of game, like a DD wich sadly almost none play), thus people are looking forward to Diablo 3 because they hope it'll redefine the genre just like Diablo 2 did. People don't want Diablo 3 to become some form of RPG or shooter or MMORPG or whatever wich is not consistent to what Diablo is all about though, obviously. And they probably also don't want WoW graphix.

 

[Jaesun]

How did D2 "redefine the genre", just curious.

 

[Sir_Brennus]

How did D2 "redefine the genre", just curious.

I'm also very interested in an explanation. I possibly could'nt think of one.

 

[kingcomrade]

It changed it from a Godly Genre of the Whale into a LemKoElEld 4 Socket Genre.

 

[Atrokkus]

Well, yeah it didn't *redefine* it, it only but made it, like, 10 times better, in terms of gameplay. That level of quality seems barely achievable as far as other developers are concerned, as i have yet to see another new-age roguelike of similar magnitude as D2 -- in terms of multiplayer and singleplayer powergaming.

I don't know why would anyone want to redefine diablo franchise. I only want it to grow, leaving the same old core intact -- exactly what Blizzard is doing.

 

[Kingston]

"Sorry to get your hopes up, but we can officially deny that Diablo is on our cover next month. We’re announcing something big and exciting and exclusive (actually, there are two big exciting exclusive announcements in this issue!), and we had to go a long way to get it, but it’s not from Blizzard." said Dan Stapleton (PC Gamer Magazine, Senior Associate Editor).

www.diablofans.com

"We definitely appreciate that the community has a lot of interest in seeing the Diablo series continue, and we certainly share that desire," a Blizzard representative told Shacknews when reached for comment.

"For now, though, our focus remains on StarCraft II and Wrath of the Lich King. I'm afraid I don't have any new plans to announce at this time."

http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/52784

 

[kingcomrade]

By ten times better in terms of gameplay Meta means it's less fun than the original.

 

[Kaiserin]

I really enjoyed Diablo 1. I was only 11 years old at the time that it came out granted...

I got super excited about Diablo 2, bought it when it first came out. Beat it with the Amazon, got halfway through nightmare mode, and then said, 'What the fuck am I doing? This is stupid.' Though I didn't know it at the time, it's MMO lite, and MMO's are already white washed bullshit to begin with.

I don't know why would anyone want to redefine diablo franchise. I only want it to grow, leaving the same old core intact -- exactly what Blizzard is doing.

You seem to be all about keeping games unoriginal and repetitive, especially Blizzard games.

 

[kingcomrade]

Mention being able to select multiple buildings or more than 12 units at the same time in Starcraft 2 to him.

 

[Norfleet]

Mention being able to select multiple buildings or more than 12 units at the same time in Starcraft 2 to him.

There's an example of Blizzard making crap RTSes, yes. When you consider the technology for selecting an arbitrary number of units AND setting their rules of engagement was done in Total Annihilation, Starcraft just seems decidedly primitive and crude. It really offers nothing technologically that hadn't already been done better.

 

[Chefe]

If SC2 didn't look like Warcraft III in space, then people wouldn't be so eager to see Diablo 3.

Fuck you, Blizzard.

 

[Damned Registrations]

I'm always amazed at how shitty Bnet's design is. Such incredibly basic functions aren't available, like being able to run a search on game names, or joining the same game as someone on your friends list without counting the number of exclamation marks put after the name. On top of that, the way to handle lag is retarded. The game can be effectively paused 40% of the time and you still won't have any chance to kick the lagging fuck. If theres more than one, it's even worse. Muting people doesn't actually affect their general chat in game, so you have no way to ignore their stupid spam. They also don't give a fuck at all about people using it as their personal advertisement service. I see the same damned accounts posting the same damned scams/hacks/websites every week. At least there are programs like linkchecker and banlist now, but I shouldn't need third party software to join the same game my friend is in, or keep someone I know is a fucking cheater out.

 

[DoppelG]

Ugh, Blizzard is about gameplay. You all seem to grasp for straws trying to discredit Blizzard. True, their last few games haven't been all that, atleast imo, but still if there's one huge gamedeveloper that still somewhat takes time to create quality games and (i suspect) actually cares about what they are doing then its Blizzard. Ofcourse they're loaded, but that doesn't automatically mean their games suck.
Blizzard games "unoriginal"? Get a clue.

 

[kingcomrade]

Blizzard games "unoriginal"? Get a clue.

 

[Kraszu]

Mention being able to select multiple buildings or more than 12 units at the same time in Starcraft 2 to him.

There's an example of Blizzard making crap RTSes, yes. When you consider the technology for selecting an arbitrary number of units AND setting their rules of engagement was done in Total Annihilation, Starcraft just seems decidedly primitive and crude. It really offers nothing technologically that hadn't already been done better.

Like reading about crpg on TES forums.

Crpg fans criticize game developer of diferent genre to not drastically change it, oh the irony.

 

[Kaiserin]

Blizzard games "unoriginal"? Get a clue.

Perhaps you're the one who needs a clue. I never said 'Blizzard games are unoriginal.' I said, "You seem to be all about keeping games unoriginal and repetitive, especially Blizzard games." Responding to what's written is magic secret of internet fora.

That means that I think Attrokus wants to keep them unoriginal, and repetitive.(IE "I don't know why would anyone want to redefine diablo franchise. I only want it to grow, leaving the same old core intact -- exactly what Blizzard is doing")

 

[Atrokkus]

There's an example of Blizzard making crap RTSes, yes. When you consider the technology for selecting an arbitrary number of units AND setting their rules of engagement was done in Total Annihilation, Starcraft just seems decidedly primitive and crude. It really offers nothing technologically that hadn't already been done better.

It's a different kind of RTS, and it's a good one -- it just focuses on more player control in terms of micro, AS WELL as strategy, which makes the game much more competitve and intense. If it's not your cup of tea -- just shut up and play TA. What is wrong with people today...

You seem to be all about keeping games unoriginal and repetitive, especially Blizzard games.

What? I'm all for keeping franchises consistent throughout, without twists and turns of genres and the like. Why don't you call Black ISle's games repetitive? Fallout 2 was pretty much like Fallout 1 in everything, no innovation at all. Same with, i dunno, Baldur's Gate series. At least in terms of raw gameplay, combat and the like.

 

[DoppelG]

Blizzard games "unoriginal"? Get a clue.

Perhaps you're the one who needs a clue. I never said 'Blizzard games are unoriginal.' I said, "You seem to be all about keeping games unoriginal and repetitive, especially Blizzard games." Responding to what's written is magic secret of internet fora.

That means that I think Attrokus wants to keep them unoriginal, and repetitive.(IE "I don't know why would anyone want to redefine diablo franchise. I only want it to grow, leaving the same old core intact -- exactly what Blizzard is doing")

Oh ok, sorry then, maybe i'm the only one who sees the irony with statements containing "repetitive and unoriginal" when talking about sequels of a well established franchise.

Again, you all seem to just flail your arms in the air in a wild and uneffective manner and thus failing to hit anything.

@ above me, you misquoted.

 

[Atrokkus]

Whoops my bad. wrong nick

 

[Vault Dweller]

DiabloII.net claims that they have "confirmation from inside sources" that Diablo 3 will be announced on Saturday. There is also a teaser at the official site. Let's hope it's not a MMO game.

 

[Raapys]

Naah, wouldn't they be making WoW 2 if they were gonna make another MMORPG?

Although strictly speaking, with the money they make in a year they could spit out as many high-budget titles as all the other companies put together.

 

[Jaesun]

I don't think it would be a wise decision to make a competing product to their already successful cash cow WOW, so I highly doubt it will be another MMOG.

 

[Texas Red]

I don't think it would be a wise decision to make a competing product to their already successful cash cow WOW, so I highly doubt it will be another MMOG.

But they may be worried that some new MMOG will take WoW's position.

Who cares about Diablo 3? This is like Duke Nukem Forever: the game gets a billion threads on any boards yet it's only a generic clone shooter.