Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Carcanken]

So I've only recently found out about it, and I havent played any of the diablo games whatsoever, but I managed to find a video on Diablo 2 which got me interested, then I read a comment about 3 and watched a gameplay video for Diablo 3 and it looked really great.

Does anybody have an idea when it comes out?

[freeformschooler]

Probably three, four years if Starcraft 2 is anything to go by. :U

In all honesty, I really have no idea. You'll probably want to actually play Diablo one or two before you jump to buying the third, though. There's no guarantee you'll like or dislike the style.

Agree 100%. A lot of regular RPG gamers will probably be disappointed with the lack of much character customization if they're not new to the series, among other things.

[Vherid]

Beta should start in a month at most.

[Burnt Pies]

They've said around 6 months after the Beta test begins, and the beta test is supposed to be starting 3rd quarter 2011... so, first half of next year?

They don't really do concrete dates until 2-3 months before release, due to missing a lot of them when they gave dates earlier.

[Carcanken]

So im guessing I should just buy Diablo 2.
How much is it & is there a monthly fee?

[Burnt Pies]

Cheap, due to its age, and No, no monthly fee. It's not an MMO.

[Rex_Nex]

Yea, despite it's looks, the Diablo series are not MMOs. They are hack-n-slashers with singleplayer and multiplayer play. Customization isn't nonexistent; every piece of armor (And in Diablo 3, there should be hundreds) changes the way you look, so your armor set determines your looks. And, of course, your class determines how you look also. I love Diablo 2, but it's very easy to hate it for the same reason I like it.

D2 should be cheap, yes. Consider grabbing its expansion while you're at it; it's worth it for convenience, the slew of features it adds, and the potential for the use of mods.

Depends. If you wan't to get it in a box from blizzard, you're looking at 40$ for Diablo 1/2/LoD Expansion. Buy it on Amazon or something if you do; and make sure it has a valid CD key; if not, you'll have to buy one (They are like 5$, so not a huge deal).

[EuchreJack]

I'd suggest just buying the boxset.  All the Diablo you could ever hope for, and they probably sell for like $20.

[IronyOwl]

According to a leaked internal release schedule, D3 was slated for the end of 2011. There's no way to know if that was realistic or still the plan, but under Activision I would tend to assume they'll lean towards releasing on schedule and fixing/adding/polishing things later.

[Neonivek]

There is something odd about Diablo 3... as much as the annoying changes bothered me (and they REALLY did... The story and atmosphere of diablo, the first, is officially dead at this point in my eyes, mind you Blizzard is infamos for being unable to keep up continuous narratives very well... and yes I seen the pretty pony Diablo 3 mural and frankly the sad part is that despite being a satire on the criticisms of Diablo 3, it actually works just as well as a satire on the changes in Diablo 3) there is just something about the game that seems off. I can't put my finger on it though, something that tells me it may not be up to the task of being Diablo 3.

Though I THINK it is because I am being bogged down by the news casts which constantly throw half-baked game mechanics at you. So I think my mind is being averted by the suck so I can't see the awsome.

[nenjin]

I think it will be alright in the end. Not really a fan of the WoWification of the series, but their priorities are different than they were 10 years ago. They're investing more heavily in the visual aspect of Diablo than they ever have, right down the vendors with their over-hyped change in appearance as the game progresses.

That said, we're going to get more dynamic stuff happening during game play than we ever got with D2, as in Dungeon environments where there's more than Gargoyle Statues and exploding barrels to pay attention to. Enemies will have more refined and varied attack options too, beyond D2's "guys that shoot stuff."

Whether it all really adds a new layer of depth, or is just a gimmick that gets featured early and then is cast aside, remains to be seen. But based on how the boss battles are shaping up, I think they're going for a more, I hate to say, WoW-boss fight approach. Guys will do moves and things rather than just chase you around and each one is going to have a different, more specific strategy. I fully expect some portion of the D2 fanbase to lose their minds over this.

[Neonivek]

Yeah make no mistake Diablo 3 will be good.

It is just seeming weaker compared to Diablo and Diablo 2's otherwise quite solid release.

A game that feels like it should be better.

That said, we're going to get more dynamic stuff happening during game play than we ever got with D2

No that is quite sad what happened with Diablo 2... the first Diablo had quite a few enemies with varying tactics. Just compare D1 Succubi with D2s

Whether it all really adds a new layer of depth, or is just a gimmick that gets featured early and then is cast aside, remains to be seen.

My issue is that while yeah it likely added a new layer of depth (I have no doubt enemies will be much more diverse and tactical), it may not have added a new layer of "fun" so to speak. Sometimes the best games are shallow but VERY good at what little they do (a "Tight" game).
-Or in otherwords: A Well baked 1 layer cake is much better then a 100 layer burnt cake catastophy.

In otherwords, Diablo 3 is sort of looking like a goo. Though once again... I just can't put my finger on why... I mean, I was looking forward to Diablo 3 for a long time.

[nenjin]

What will clinch it for me is how all that jazz works in a large group. Like, take FEAR 1 for example. Great game, good AI, lots of extra goodies to make a FPS more fun....but at most you ran into a small squad of guys at a time. So the whole game became fighting a room at a time against 3 to 4 guys hiding in it. The limitations on it made all the extra jazz less impressive or sustaining. If D3 ends up giving us smaller packs of guys at a time, or starts breaking up encounters more deliberately, I'm going to be a little disappointed.

[IronyOwl]

There is something odd about Diablo 3... as much as the annoying changes bothered me (and they REALLY did... The story and atmosphere of diablo, the first, is officially dead at this point in my eyes, mind you Blizzard is infamos for being unable to keep up continuous narratives very well... and yes I seen the pretty pony Diablo 3 mural and frankly the sad part is that despite being a satire on the criticisms of Diablo 3, it actually works just as well as a satire on the changes in Diablo 3) there is just something about the game that seems off. I can't put my finger on it though, something that tells me it may not be up to the task of being Diablo 3.

Two things that might help:

1. Don't try to compare it directly to its predecessors, else it'll turn into a mash of "In my day...!" A lot of the things D2 did were arguably inferior to the way D1 did them, for instance, but were fine or even better when you looked at it on its own rather than in comparison to how awesome the original was.

2. Ignore continuity. You'll save yourself a lot of sanity assuming it's a completely new story/world/etc with some similarity to that other game's, rather than noting everything about the setting and world that they changed or added or removed with varying finesse.

[nenjin]

I just mourn the loss of grittiness. D1 had a look that, in the day, really got my imagination going. D2 didn't, but it made up for it by offering a lot more variety while still being fairly grimdark.

I look at D3 and can't help but be annoyed by some of the aesthetic changes. I'm not too thrilled about health being turned into a game of Pacman, but I understand why they went with someone like floating health orbs, to get away from the potion issues of D2. It's an abstraction though that makes me think: arcade game, not Diablo.

Too bad I spent myself on being pleased about things in D3 years ago, because I don't want to give the impression I'm hating on the game. Just some of the design choices that come from companies as big as Blizzard. Sometimes they're so eager to fix problems or innovate that they abstract too much for my taste in an effort to be accessible and "clean." Other times they're just way too hung up on their trademark look. I really look forward to a Blizzard offering where the art team is totally new and isn't taking any direction from the WoW Handbook.