RPGWatch Forums
Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 Last »

RPGWatch Forums (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/index.php)
-   News Comments (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=10)
-   -   Diablo 3 - Confirmed in Paris (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4808)

woges June 28th, 2008 12:13

Diablo 3 - Confirmed in Paris
 
Splash screen updated and the game is currently being showed in Paris and via the live stream on Blizzards WWI page (not so easy to get on due to max users). Just waiting for diablo3.com to pop up some graphics so we can update that RPGWatch picture.
More information.

Remus June 28th, 2008 12:13

Woot! … The mighty Diablo returns!

Morbus June 28th, 2008 13:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Remus (Post 84542)
Woot! … The mighty Diablo returns!

Doesn't look extremely interesting though… I hope they get the item system as right as it was in D2 :)

Alrik Fassbauer June 28th, 2008 13:58

Mass orgasm of fans throughout the web.

Roi Danton June 28th, 2008 14:28

And to my delight it's no MMORPG. Thanks Blizzard. An no, I wouldn't mind if this game is very similar to D2, because that game is just the most awesome Action-RPG out there.

DArtagnan June 28th, 2008 14:35

Blizzard games always look slightly underwhelming, initially, but they play extremely well - and win by being designed correctly and delivering a wholesome experience.

Diablo 3 looks, to me, about as good as I could have hoped for - which is saying a lot, really. For a Blizzard game, it looks incredibly good.

Can't wait.

booboo June 28th, 2008 15:38

If the game is D2 updated (as D2 updated D1, at least from what I recall) …what's so wonderful about that? Given the multitude of clones of D1 and D2 - some of which were better - and the fact that this genre has been done to death, I don't see why people are making such a fuss about this. What is it adding? What are they doing, that no one has done before? Fancy graphics are par for the course nowadays. Sure, the basic kill-pick-up-loot-level-up thing is fun for awhile…but again? Unless D3 does *something* beyond this, I see this as Blizzard cynically exploiting sentiment to make a buck - not "innovating" as they first did those many years ago. Why not try something new? I'm grateful it's not another MMORPG, but …has originality died in the game world? Yes, "tried and tested" is good commercially - ask EA - but one would think someone with Blizzard's pedigree could do better than simply replicate the same old game ideas. But we get
"We’re developing Diablo III to be the definitive action role-playing game, and a true continuation of the Diablo series. Players will create a hero from one of five distinct classes, such as barbarian or witch doctor, each equipped with an array of spells and abilities. As these heroes adventure through rich and varied settings, unraveling an epic storyline and engaging in combat with hordes of monsters and challenging bosses, they’ll grow in experience and ability and acquire items of incredible power."
Hm, sounds familiar. Also, the explanation of "what's new in D3" shows that… not much is. Different character classes and a modern 3D graphics engine. We've seen all this before.

Melvil June 28th, 2008 15:49

How did I know people on this site were going to dog what will be a polished, fun, and extremely successful game…

Arma June 28th, 2008 16:08

While there are indeed a lot of Diablo clones out there, only a handful got some of the stuff right, and none came close to actually be as good as the Blizzard title. Something being better is completely out of the question. So even if it is just a graphics update with different character classes, I'm hooked. However, it's too early given that 2010 is the earliest they will put it out to talk about what's changed and what's not.

zakhal June 28th, 2008 16:11

Diablo is absolute one of those love or hate games. I have never understood why people bother to waste time playing such simplistic mousehand wrecking game but then I have never had taste for roguelikes either. To quote somone:

Quote:

Excuse me, but I thought the point of Diablo is to slog through thousands of monsters that just keep coming. It's the Serious Sam of action RPGs.

danutz_plusplus June 28th, 2008 16:51

Awesome. I love every minute of the cinematic and gameplay video.:D God I love Blizzard.:D

magerette June 28th, 2008 17:00

Those sites seem to be pretty jammed atm. Locked up my browser on one of them, which very rarely happens—I know for those who are not fond of Diablo listening to all the hoopla may get old fast, but this is an exciting piece of news for me. I really thought this was just another tease from Blizzard, with some other game being actually announced.

I think the fact that it will be a continuation of D2 is it's strongest point. Flagship tried to make a 'spiritual successor' and had somewhat mixed success. The game doesn't need to be reinvented, just updated and expanded. The idea of allowing male and female avatars for some of the classes is a good example, along with some of the interface improvements. And it isn't just an online version—I'm a happy gamer on this one.

woges June 28th, 2008 17:04

I wonder how many Fallout fans wish Bethesda would take this approach to the sequel.

Surlent June 28th, 2008 17:19

Can't wait to break my wrists and mouse once again.

Quote:

Originally Posted by zakhal (Post 84570)
Diablo is absolute one of those love or hate games. I have never understood why people bother to waste time playing such simplistic mousehand wrecking game but then I have never had taste for roguelikes either.

Definitely, after the first five minutes of playing, the player is either an addict or bored to death.

JDR13 June 28th, 2008 17:21

I just hope it's not a multiplayer focused game with a crappy single-player game tacked on like D2 was.

I want a strong single-player experience or I won't even consider it.

magerette June 28th, 2008 17:29

They're saying it has SP capability but that's all I see atm. At least they aren't hyping it as Diablo Online as some feared. I agree with you totally as well—if the sp focus is lacking, I won't be into it either.
From the FAQ:
Quote:

Will there be a single-player component in addition to multiplayer?

Yes. In addition to battling the hordes of the Burning Hells cooperatively with friends over Battle.net, players will be able to adventure through the world of Diablo III solo. More details on both the single-player and multiplayer experience will be revealed at a later date.

curiously undead June 28th, 2008 17:45

woges that doesn't really make sense though since fallout is not bethesdas franchise as diablo is blizzards.
i enjoyed diablo 2. first online game i played. now that youtube is around i can see the cinimatics without playing. still up in the air on this one. starcraft 2 i have been wating for forever but that looks meh so far. i suppose if the soundtrack of diablo 3 is as good as 2 i'll probably buy it anyhow.

Burress June 28th, 2008 17:55

I don't see why they couldn't improve the single player game. I would be willing to bet that the majority who bought D2 didn't spend any significant time on battle.net. They would have to actually change the loot system entirely from the multi-player game though, because all loot sucks in Diablo 2 until you have put your 30 or more hours in to it. You can grind and grind and get those boss chests, to get your nice green and gold mediocre crap. Grinding is something that you have to do to earn stuff competitively with other players, there is no point in making essentially the same loot laws in the single player experience. The balancing is completely different when you don't have to take the global equipment economy of all of Battle.net into account.

If they put the resources in to making it fun to play (like Diablo 1 was) in single player, they can make the millions of buyers who don't like the online experience happy.

gaboru93 June 28th, 2008 17:55

I just read about this today! I think it made ALOT of people happy!

woges June 28th, 2008 18:02

Design is design, it doesn't really matter to me either way as I'll probably end up playing both but changing the structure of gameplay is just design choice. I don't see how that doesn't make sense because Bethesda purchased the IP.


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 00:47.
Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 Last »

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright by RPGWatch