Diablo III --Impressions start on page 36 --

[Blackjack]

All that makes me even more confident of a... 2013 release target.  

Seriously though, now it sounds like this could be out before SWTOR and Guild Wars 2. Which I never would have believed. I'm still not sure I do... 

[EngineNo9]

If I had to guess, I would bet on an early 2012 release. 

[CeeKay]

follower system video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JdJasi2QS80&feature=player_embedded

[The Rocketman]

Sounds very nice. But that Templar looks like a class I would have enjoyed playing, too bad it's a follower.

[Lord Percy]

Stop posting things that are not the release date, you're getting my hopes up each time his thread is at the top of the page.

[CeeKay]

Stop posting things that are not the release date, you're getting my hopes up each time his thread is at the top of the page.

bump


 

[Lord Percy]

 

[Blackjack]

follower system video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JdJasi2QS80&feature=player_embedded

Since Blizzard had that YouTube video removed (I guess Blizz has its own official channel there), try:
http://www.youtube.com/diablo#p/u/0/MSc0agGNJkw
-or-
Diablo III: Followers (including FAQ)
http://us.blizzard.com/diablo3/world/systems/followers.xml

*And this just in... the game won't be coming out any time soon, or even later. "Eventually" remains a strong possibility!  

I'm starting to think this, SWTOR and Guild Wars 2 will all release on the same date next year. How gauche.   And maybe I'm naively optimistic...

[Purge]

It'll be released?

[McBa1n]

Man, I was excited as heck when they said they were going to do this game. But like Diablo 2, it's years after when it should've been released. I dunno, with what blizz has done with Starcraft and WoW, I have lost ALL interest for now, sadly. SC2 is o.k., but nothing really all that groundbreaking compared to the hype and WoW: Cataclysm is an overglorified game polisher that really didn't add anything worthwhile to a stagnating MMO. I dunno what's happened with Bliz, but their stuff is getting progressively less innovative and creative - and show stopping. It seems most of their ideas are jacked from other things and they're not as much of a leader as they were 10 years ago. It's kind of depressing. They were always a 'gold standard' dev house. I loved d1 and d2 so much. I have still been playing d2 on the ladder again. I dunno, I just am not excited anymore. The game could've been out 5 years ago when it was overdue. D2 was so f'n amazing (and eventually only playable for maybe a few weeks on end before boredom set in, but I always went back). Hopefully D3 will be more like D2 and less like WoW, and I'm hearing more of the ladder and that scares the crap out of me. I think WoW's dev team leaders are utter garbage.

[Ridah]

That's a pretty grim assessment of the situation McBain... Although I agree that Blizzard hasn't done anything particularly groundbreaking since the original WoW, you can't be mad at them for refining already proven formulas, ala Cataclysm and SC2.

I have faith in Blizzard with Diablo 3, I had a lot of fun with it at Blizzcon and am hoping the PVP aspect of it turns out well.

[rittchard]

If you've watched any of the gameplay videos (particularly each of the class's skill videos), I can't see how any fan of Diablo wouldn't be excited about Diablo 3, but to each his own.  Just being able to play a Diablo game that looks this damn good makes me drool.  5 classes, and male/female models, billions of possibilities for customization - BRING IT ON!

[jersoc]

yeah, diablo 3 is going to be worth the wait. I also played at blizzcon and while the basic ideas are still diablo, there's quite a few nice changes. the game seemed a lot harder from the get go. I had no idea what difficulty we were on, but solo mobs would take a while to kill. But there was 4 players, so the mobs scale to that, remember.

SC2 is wonderful, but I guess that's more personal on how you feel about RTS. The game is casual enough that anyone can play and hardcore enough that major tournaments have sprung up.

I'll agree with cataclysm though. But I suspect lots of it just fatigue. The game is 6 some years old now. That's a long, long time to be playing 1 game, let alone a MMO. They would seriously have to step up the game at this point. Maybe this will finally make other mmo developers to stop copying the damn game.

Blizzard was never one to create totally ground breaking games, well outside Diablo that pretty much save them. And well, they more or less bought that game. What they do is strip out the suck, sprinkle in some fun and make it run on a TI82 calculator.

[ibdoomed]

and make it run on a TI82 calculator.

Bingo. Please tell me it runs higher than 800x600!

[EddieA]

Here's a page on runestones with video clips showing how they affect skills.

[skystride]

That's a pretty grim assessment of the situation McBain... Although I agree that Blizzard hasn't done anything particularly groundbreaking since the original WoW, you can't be mad at them for refining already proven formulas, ala Cataclysm and SC2.

I'm a bit mad at Blizzard.  Assume they are also in the business for the love of games and not just money.  They are in an enviable position from the perspective of most other developers.  They can create so much more than polished versions of existing games.  Instead we have indie developers risking it all to make creative stuff.  Most of the big boys are happy to rake in the safe cash. 

Why doesn't Blizzard try to make original stuff?  Even if they took a risk and failed, it would barely hurt their profit margin.  I suppose their reputation is at stake but with all their money, I'm pretty sure an original title would get the crap tested out of it and would almost certainly succeed.

[Thin_J]

Why doesn't Blizzard try to make original stuff?  Even if they took a risk and failed, it would barely hurt their profit margin.  I suppose their reputation is at stake but with all their money, I'm pretty sure an original title would get the crap tested out of it and would almost certainly succeed.

Two reasons: They don't need to and their fanbase doesn't want them to.

You're part of a pretty friggin small minority if you don't really love at least one of Blizzard's games. I hate WoW and despise what they did with Warcraft 3, but Starcraft 2 is pretty much perfection in RTS form.

I'm expecting Diablo 3 to be pretty great. It's looked great so far every time they've shown it. I see no reason to doubt it now.

[skystride]

Why doesn't Blizzard try to make original stuff?  Even if they took a risk and failed, it would barely hurt their profit margin.  I suppose their reputation is at stake but with all their money, I'm pretty sure an original title would get the crap tested out of it and would almost certainly succeed.

Two reasons: They don't need to and their fanbase doesn't want them to.

You missed my point, of course they don't need to.  I was hoping that as game developers, they would want to.  ArenaNet could make a clone of Guild Wars and it would be a commercial success, but instead they chose to make GW2.  It's a much riskier proposition.  Why are they doing that?

Also how do you know their fanbase doesn't want them to also make original titles?  I'm a Blizzard fan and I want Diablo 3 but I also want Blizzard to push the envelope a bit.

[The Grue]

I'm a Blizzard fan and I want Diablo 3 but I also want Blizzard to push the envelope a bit.

+1 on this.  I love what Blizzard does with these key franchises, but I want them to make something totally new, too, seeing as how they have amazing artists and programmers.  They are, supposedly, doing this with Titan, but the problem is I don't want them to do it with an MMO (unless it is sci-fi, in which case the world needs more of those).

[jersoc]

SC2 pushed the envelope in terms of mechanics. It's extremely noob friendly, but still very much in depth to allow pros to do some crazy amazing strats. Game is only a year old and people are still learning everything. The map creator is ridiculous too. You can make some mods you never thought you could from an RTS game.

Sounds to me you guys just want a new IP, understandably so.

[rittchard]

SC2 pushed the envelope in terms of mechanics. It's extremely noob friendly, but still very much in depth to allow pros to do some crazy amazing strats. Game is only a year old and people are still learning everything. The map creator is ridiculous too. You can make some mods you never thought you could from an RTS game.

Sounds to me you guys just want a new IP, understandably so.

I think it's more than just new IP some of us are interested in.  I for one would certainly not be interested in a WoW MMORPG retread that was just the same gameplay in a new IP shell.  SC2 may very well be a great game, maybe even the best traditional RTS ever, but from a casual fan's perspective, there didn't appear to be anything innovative or genre-changing/challenging in it.  To me it still played out as a traditional RTS, just as WoW plays out as the best traditional MMORPG.  And Diablo 3, I have no doubt whatsoever, will be the best traditional ARPG.

So I am in full agreement with skystride, I would love to see what a company with Blizzard's resources could do in creating a brand new genre, or at least truly pushing the envelope in blending or changing an old genre with their legendary Blizzard polish.  As an example just off the top of my head, how about a full, deep, sci-fi SANDBOX world/planet MMO game?  Mix elements of Shadowbane, Horizons, Rift, EVE, Starcraft and mash it all together.  I won't even call it an MMORPG as I'd want Blizzard to coin a new genre.  Heck, if they could even perfect the Sandbox genre game that would even be a bold step, because no one has been successful at it.  Long story short, I'd like to see them get out of their comfort zones and take some non-traditional risks.  As Sky said, they are one of the few companies out there that could actually afford it.

[jersoc]

Titan will be pretty different than from WoW, I'm willing to bet. For starters I'm 99.999% certain it's going to be F2P. In fact, blizzard would be dumb not to make it be. My guess is whatever it is will be more action oriented and not so much fake turn base. Think Terra or Vindictus. It's almost more than likely future based, but definitely not SC since they said it's a brand new IP.

Still bummed I most likely got screwed out of seeing it last blizzcon. Stupid filler shit with the geek is.

A casual fan should see plenty change in SC2. First like I said, it way, WAAAY more noob friendly. Workers you dont have to control much, then auto optimize on minerals up to 16 for the max saturation. The gases tell you how many workers are collecting. High ground matters now, although this new to SC2, but yeah not really the genre, but I bet more people experienced it here. Blizzard doesn't hide any info either. The ladder system is pure genius. I really regret now asking how long it took them to implement it. I mean just thinking about it boggles the mind really.

Blizzard seems to make what the fans want. My one concern is because of WoW we'll never have a real wacraft game again. I hope I'm eventually wrong as WC is my favorite universe out all the 3. Even if blizzard is on fanfare lore mode about it. I'll pretty much welcome any game blizzard makes.

They already took a HUUUUUUUUUUGE risk with WoW and their next MMO by making a brand new IP. They are taking risks, just maybe not in the games you want. WoW sold under a million the first year, remember that. I mean, I'm not trying argue they shouldn't take risks, but rather they have. Hell, we don't see prototypes. I bet so many ideas were scrapped from diablo 3. Hell, I remember lots of ideas that never made into WoW. The gurubashi arena was originally going to be just that, an arena in which you could place fake bets(well in game gold, but I bet the ESRB didn't like that too much). Remember ghost(ok, not developer) and warcraft adventures? They take risks and kill it if they aren't up to their standards.

[skystride]

SC2 is the first Blizzard game I never even finished.  I'm sure a lot of people who aren't heavily into MP RTS were disappointed with SC2.  I guess it was underwhelming compared to a lot of innovations we've seen in other RTS.

Diablo 3 on the other hand should be fine following the formula since I don't feel that the ARPG genre is as saturated as the RTS genre.  I can count good ARPGs on one hand; there's not much competition.  RTS, there's so many...

[rittchard]

SC2 is the first Blizzard game I never even finished.  I'm sure a lot of people who aren't heavily into MP RTS were disappointed with SC2.  I guess it was underwhelming compared to a lot of innovations we've seen in other RTS.

Diablo 3 on the other hand should be fine following the formula since I don't feel that the ARPG genre is as saturated as the RTS genre.  I can count good ARPGs on one hand; there's not much competition.  RTS, there's so many...

The interesting thing with the ARPG genre is that (and I've said this before in other threads) really NO ONE in 10+ years has been able to give us everything Diablo 2 did in an updated format/graphics.  This is very much an anomaly in the gaming industry, where pretty much every genre has seen considerable changes and improvements with new releases.  Look at what Diablo 2 offered:

- Randomized maps that don't feel horribly repetitive
- Full multiplayer, closed/secure servers
- Tons of randomized loot, uniques, rares, socketed etc etc
- 7 unique classes, each with 3 skill trees for crazy customization

There is no single game that gave us all of this again.  Ever.  Even the best of the best ARPGs were lacking in at least one department (usually the multiplayer aspect).  The one game that was closest was Hellgate London, and we all know how that turned out.  Some of the F2P games like Dungeon Runners and Warrior Epic made an attempt, but just didn't quite do it.  Even the newest releases like Torchlight 2 will struggle to deliver all of these features (I believe they are releasing with only 3 classes).  The F2P Path of Exile (which I'm following very closely) is going to make an attempt but I have major doubts whether they can do it.

So basically Diablo 3 is going to be pretty much in its own class if/when it ever releases. 

[Harkonis]

- Randomized maps that don't feel horribly repetitive
- Full multiplayer, closed/secure servers
- Tons of randomized loot, uniques, rares, socketed etc etc
- 7 unique classes, each with 3 skill trees for crazy customization

Most of those should be easy for a company to do, and I'm surprised someone hasn't.  However the closed servers requires resources most devs probably can't/won't be able to handle without a subscription.  Which reminds me, I think there might be a couple Asian games in the F2P or Sub model that have all four.  I know of one that has 3 of the 4 at least.

[Thin_J]

SC2 is the first Blizzard game I never even finished.  I'm sure a lot of people who aren't heavily into MP RTS were disappointed with SC2.  I guess it was underwhelming compared to a lot of innovations we've seen in other RTS.

Diablo 3 on the other hand should be fine following the formula since I don't feel that the ARPG genre is as saturated as the RTS genre.  I can count good ARPGs on one hand; there's not much competition.  RTS, there's so many...

The innovations and changes made to the formula in other RTS games have all been things that lower the skill ceiling. None of them would have been viable changes for Starcraft unless Blizzard wanted to piss off and alienate the largest competitive gaming scene in existence.

You're in the minority. Doesn't make your opinion invalid, but it does mean expecting them to massively change the formula with soemthing like Starcraft 2 is totally unrealistic.

[skystride]

You're in the minority. Doesn't make your opinion invalid, but it does mean expecting them to massively change the formula with soemthing like Starcraft 2 is totally unrealistic.

Based on people I know, it doesn't feel like I'm in the minority.  For example, a really close friend of mine was as excited as me to buy SC2.  A long time ago, I introduced him to SC1.  Before that he had never played a RTS.  He fell in love with the game and still blames me for his low exam marks due to too much SC.  Anyway, he was pretty meh with SC2 as well.  I'm sure many people from this forum feel the same way.

[rittchard]

You're in the minority. Doesn't make your opinion invalid, but it does mean expecting them to massively change the formula with soemthing like Starcraft 2 is totally unrealistic.

Based on people I know, it doesn't feel like I'm in the minority.  For example, a really close friend of mine was as excited as me to buy SC2.  A long time ago, I introduced him to SC1.  Before that he had never played a RTS.  He fell in love with the game and still blames me for his low exam marks due to too much SC.  Anyway, he was pretty meh with SC2 as well.  I'm sure many people from this forum feel the same way.

I wanted to love SC2 but the gameplay in all honesty felt like a retread and nothing at all special.  I kept thinking something was going to "wow" me (no pun intended), or that it would just suck me in some other way, but it never did.  Only made it through half the missions before I lost interest.  Another friend of mine played the whole thing just to finish the story and then he promptly uninstalled it.  I forgot what the reasoning was but he just wasn't thrilled with it.

[rittchard]

- Randomized maps that don't feel horribly repetitive
- Full multiplayer, closed/secure servers
- Tons of randomized loot, uniques, rares, socketed etc etc
- 7 unique classes, each with 3 skill trees for crazy customization

Most of those should be easy for a company to do, and I'm surprised someone hasn't.  However the closed servers requires resources most devs probably can't/won't be able to handle without a subscription.  Which reminds me, I think there might be a couple Asian games in the F2P or Sub model that have all four.  I know of one that has 3 of the 4 at least.

Yeah I think the one you introduced me to did, was that Warrior Epic?  But even still maybe I should add the qualifier that it's a really solid, well-balanced loot and level game.  I think the Asian ones I played either the loot was boring or the classes/customization were boring.

[CeeKay]

Diablo III: The Mouse!

[rittchard]

Diablo III: The Mouse!

Ugh, I thought this was gonna be an awesome D3 news announcement coinciding with E3, the relaunch, and the 10,000th view of this thread.  Color me disappointed.

[CeeKay]

well, the release date is going to be-  no, can't say 

[Gratch]

Diablo III: The Mouse!

People still use wired mouses?  Huh...

[CeeKay]

Diablo III: The Mouse!

People still use wired mouses?  Huh...

well they're less likely to run out of juice at the wrong moment, or get lost.

[Roguetad]

Diablo III: The Mouse!

People still use wired mouses?  Huh...

well they're less likely to run out of juice at the wrong moment, or get lost.

If you want maximum elite precision for the ultimate extreme gaming, wired is the way to go...or so I've read.  The MS Sidewinder I've had for the past few years is wired, but that's because it's extreme.  Unfortunately, in my hand it's a complete waste.  I got it is a gift.  It even comes with weights that can be added to the mouse to adjust the weight, because as I've mentioned, it's extreme precision.

[rittchard]

Diablo III: The Mouse!

People still use wired mouses?  Huh...

well they're less likely to run out of juice at the wrong moment, or get lost.

If you want maximum elite precision for the ultimate extreme gaming, wired is the way to go...or so I've read.  The MS Sidewinder I've had for the past few years is wired, but that's because it's extreme.  Unfortunately, in my hand it's a complete waste.  I got it is a gift.  It even comes with weights that can be added to the mouse to adjust the weight, because as I've mentioned, it's extreme precision.

I actually went back to wired mouse and keyboard as well for the most part.  I hated running out of batteries in the middle of something.  Eventually I had no choice on mouse when I went to the Evoluent Vertical mouse (which btw I recommend for anyone having carpal tunnel issues that are particularly focused in your hand joints).

[baelthazar]

Diablo III: The Mouse!

People still use wired mouses?  Huh...

well they're less likely to run out of juice at the wrong moment, or get lost.

Not to mention that wireless mouses can result in latency problems that wired mouses don't have. Why does Razer still make most of their mice wired? That's right, hardcore livin'.

[Exodor]

[
I actually went back to wired mouse and keyboard as well for the most part.  I hated running out of batteries in the middle of something.  Eventually I had no choice on mouse when I went to the Evoluent Vertical mouse (which btw I recommend for anyone having carpal tunnel issues that are particularly focused in your hand joints).

I switched  back to a wired mouse when I discovered the Mionix Naos 3200   

I never understood the need for a wireless keyboard.  I inherited one at work and after replacing the batteries monthly I gave up and switched to wired.

[Tals]

Going slightly off topic but I'm not aware of a wireless mouse that doesn't suffer lag in fps games - am I wrong?

[baelthazar]

Going slightly off topic but I'm not aware of a wireless mouse that doesn't suffer lag in fps games - am I wrong?

I think the Razer wireless mouse - the Mamba - has a higher wireless polling rate that reduces lag/latency. That being said, it may still be noticeable in FPS (I've never tried it).