Rumor Mill - Diablo 3

[whiteboyskim]

So, anyone heard any good rumors on Diablo 3 and whether it's in development? Yes, it's a slow day at work. :?

[EddieA]

The last word from Blizzard was that they were only working on one game in addition to WoW.  Since they just released WoW, I can't see them putting out another RPG in the near future, so that game is presumably StarCraft 2 or an original property.  With WoW done, it's possible that team (other than those making new content for WoW) will start work on Diablo 3.  I imagine it'll be at least a few years before we see it, though.

[whiteboyskim]

Maybe then it will at least start at 800X600 with a later patch taking it to 1024X768.

[Scuba-V]

Yeah I suspect the game that's being developed but not announced (or even announced as unannounced) is Starcraft 2.  They've continued Starcraft events with a little spike recently.  And they know that people are dying for SC2.  Plus, it's been awhile since they've done Starcraft.  Diablo and Warcraft both have recent additions and they seem to not want to do something original but rather choose to stick with the present universes.  All in all, I'd say they announce Starcraft 2 this year or next year, probably at E3 or just before.

[depward]

The last word from Blizzard was that they were only working on one game in addition to WoW.  Since they just released WoW, I can't see them putting out another RPG in the near future, so that game is presumably StarCraft 2 or an original property.  With WoW done, it's possible that team (other than those making new content for WoW) will start work on Diablo 3.  I imagine it'll be at least a few years before we see it, though.

Did they mean only on PC?  Presumably they're still working of Starcraft: Ghost right?  I've heard about that game for a long time . . . but is this in addition to that game?

[bluefugue]

Wasn't Ghost farmed out to another developer?

[AgtFox]

Wasn't Ghost farmed out to another developer?

Yes, to Swingin' Ape, makers of Metal Arms: Glitch in the System

[Thin_J]

I'm still hoping for Swingin Ape to save Ghost and make it a good game. Metal Arms was absolutely excellent.

As for what Blizzard's doing themselves, nothing would make me happier than Starcraft 2. Unless they go the Warcraft 3 route with it. I would be severely disappointed in that case.

Diablo 3? Meh. I'd probably buy it whenever it came out, but I'm not going to get excited or bother speculating on it. I'd be just as happy if they didn't bother and put their time towards something else.

[EddieA]

I didn't mention Ghost because Blizzard itself isn't doing much work on it.  I'm guessing they'll announce their new game fairly soon, since it's unusual for them not to have an announced game in development.

[Zitterbacke]

D2 caught me by it's spirit, not by it's look. Then after like 300 hours of onlinegameplay the spirit vanished from one day to the other and I quit playing it. If they manage to bring out something with comparable spirit and name it D3 I'd buy it. Well after the demo of course. No buy anymore without demoplay.

[Big Jake]

I'll admit it.  Im a whore.  While the absence of Roper and Co could be bad, I would most likely still buy D3 Day 1 sight unseen.

[Falator]

Let it die! the second was barely an rpg. It lacked any degree of depth and had minimal content (and no completing the same areas 3 times does not equal 3 times the content).

It was basically a mmorpg on a small scale with all of the massive grinding that genre is known for.

[dandylife]

And yet the item system is so compelling and rewarding and the game mechanics are so satisfying that many of us habitually and adictively play it to this day.

No accounting for taste, is there?

[DArtagnan]

Diablo 2 isn't a traditional RPG, nor was it intended to be one, and I don't remember seeing it marketed as one. It's an action/rpg, which can mean many things. Among those, an action game which loosely incorporates elements from traditional RPGs.

It's the single most addictive gaming experience I've ever had, and I still love it.

This is coming from a very jaded gamer who is quite dispassionate about the vast majority of popular titles, and who generally prefers hardcore RPGs like Morrowind, ToEE and Wizardry.

Don't know if that means anything to anyone else, but to me, it means they should f*cking make a sequel already.

By the way, if anyone should be interested, which is entirely unlikely, I'd gladly write an in-depth analysis about why I think the game "works" so damn well.

[Big Jake]

Falator: because we all have to like only what you like and nothing else?

[Falator]

Falator: because we all have to like only what you like and nothing else?

Yes.

Diablo 2 "worked" because some people liked the massive amount of grinding it included. Don't get me wrong, it was fun for a while, but it very quickly just became a grind.

The game makes ffxi look like it isn't a grind... well, not really, but sort of :lol:

[DArtagnan]

Diablo 2 "worked" because some people liked the massive amount of grinding it included. Don't get me wrong, it was fun for a while, but it very quickly just became a grind.

One man's grind is another man's entertaining gameplay.

So, basically, you're right.

I remember when I was of the opinion that my opinion was the opinion. Those were the days of bliss indeed.

[ChrisGwinn]

It depends on how you played D2.  If you played on battle.net to max out your character, doing item runs in hell, then it was a grind.  Most people didn't do that.  

If you played until you beat normal difficulty, with maybe a brief jaunt into nightmare, there was almost no grind at all.

[Lordnine]

I’m with Chris; I played through D2 on normal had a lot of fun, bought the expansion pack, brought my character over and finished it, tried nightmare for a few more levels and then moved on.

That said I’m not really looking forward to Diablo III right now though.  Starcraft 2 on the other hand…

[Falator]

I’m with Chris; I played through D2 on normal had a lot of fun, bought the expansion pack, brought my character over and finished it, tried nightmare for a few more levels and then moved on.

That said I’m not really looking forward to Diablo III right now though.  Starcraft 2 on the other hand…

I have the same feelings for diablo 2 actually. The game was actually a pretty fun action rpg LITE if you do as you said, but if you do that, the game is over with extremely quickly.

[lokiju]

I still can't believe that Starcraft 2 hasn't been seen or announced yet.  The original was a great selling game from what I remember, and is still huge in Asia.  It also has a GameRankings average of like 93%, and Brood War has 92%.  There seems to be little risk in getting Starcraft 2 developed.  It WILL sell well.

[Big Jake]

I would belive SC2 is quietly being worked on (a la Half Life2 was).  The 3d models they had buried on the Warcraft 3 disc is not something I figured they'd do without a reason.

[wankerjr]

I would belive SC2 is quietly being worked on (a la Half Life2 was).  The 3d models they had buried on the Warcraft 3 disc is not something I figured they'd do without a reason.

Really? Where?

[Sepiche]

I would belive SC2 is quietly being worked on (a la Half Life2 was).  The 3d models they had buried on the Warcraft 3 disc is not something I figured they'd do without a reason.

Really? Where?

If I recall you just nee dto beat the last battle in the original game on hard.  Then in the credits one of the scenes will show SC style units.

s

[ChrisGwinn]

I’m with Chris; I played through D2 on normal had a lot of fun, bought the expansion pack, brought my character over and finished it, tried nightmare for a few more levels and then moved on.

That said I’m not really looking forward to Diablo III right now though.  Starcraft 2 on the other hand…

Uh, actually....  I kinda didn't actually do that.  I seem to be unable to kick my D2 addiction, and I don't mind the grind that much.  I played a lot of that game, and I had at least a couple of characters beat it on Hell.

[blindgeek]

Diablo and Diablo 2 were about as RPG as Gauntlet, and thats what made them FUN!  It was never really about being an RPG, it was about item collection and KILLING demons!  In those respects the Diablo games succeeded brilliantly.

[leo8877]

Yeah one of the end scenes of WC3 was a space battle with marines, zerglings, and space orcs (lol).

I'd love to see SC2, it's going to be done, just a matter of time.  I am also suprised that it hasn't been annouced yet.  They had two WC titles going at the same time (TFT and WoW), why not to SC titles.  Hell, one is not even being developed in-house.

WoW has to have it's own team in addition to the team that did WC3.  As far as I know, Blizz North hasn't annouced anything that they're working on.  That's the group that does Diablo, IIRC.

[tiny ogre]

The 3d models they had buried on the Warcraft 3 disc is not something I figured they'd do without a reason.

There's actually a single player level in WC3 where you can get Hydralisks as controllable units.  One of the Night Elf levels.

[EddieA]

"As far as I know, Blizz North hasn't annouced anything that they're working on. That's the group that does Diablo, IIRC."
I would assume they're the ones working on StarCraft 2. Since WoW was launched last month, I'm guessing they won't go too long without announcing what they're working on.

[bluefugue]

FWIW, my experience of Diablo 2 wasn't the fierce addiction I get with certain games (Rome Total War and Avernum 2, to name a couple), but more a sense of "eh, may as well keep playing."  As long as I'm clicking away, I may as well click some more.  Blizzard obviously did a good job of refining that whole skinner-box-pigeon-pushes-button-gets-goodie gameplay style, and I don't mean to say that condescendingly -- game design is all about creating these psychological hooks I think...

I didn't finish D2, just because, having turned it off one day, I couldn't be bothered to boot it up again.  But it was fun while it lasted.

[Rich in KCK]

I loved D1 and would have loved D2 if it weren't for stupid ass save system it used.  Just because I ran out of time before I found the next portal back to town and had to save meant that when I fired it back up I would have to hack my way through all the damn monsters again.  Which would be fine if I was in it for the loot but I was actually playing for the story and the action was there to supplement it.  I liked the mindless hack 'n' slash aproach to the combat but not as the main feature of the game.  Just that one simple decision to respawn all the monsters ruined it for me.  I never even tried the MP because I wanted to finish the SP first and only got to the start of act 3 when I gave up.

[SuperHiro]

I'm actually pretty ambivilant about Starcraft 2.  Which really surprises me.

I wouldn't mind if Blizzard kept the orginal three races (I mean it's just so exquisitely balanced at this point why screw it up?).  Maybe they would add subfactions to give slightly different looks/faction-specific units.  I loved WCIII to death but I don't think a hero system will work.  

Frankly, I lost a lot of my Starcraft II steam with Dawn of War.  Now THAT'S how Starcraft II should play.  I have to say, I would be VERY VERY interested to see what Blizzard does with squad-based interfaces.

[dandylife]

I'm kinda hoping that, instead of yet another squad based, small army tactics game, Blizzard goes for an epic strategy/macro tactics experience with Starcraft 2.  It seems like a kind of natural evolution.  With Starcraft 1, Blizzard refined the traditional real time strategy game to perfection.  With Warcraft 3, Blizzard solidified the small army/micro tactics RTS genre.  Now it's time for something new.  I want Starcraft 2 to be, more or less, a game that feels like Starcraft, but with tons of units on the screen.  Share nothing in common with the complicated strategy games like Rome: Total War, but give me a battlefield on that scale with that many units.  Macro tactics/strategy RTS is a natural evolution for Blizzard.

[Zitterbacke]

Sounds like you should try WH40k:Dawn of War

[dandylife]

I did.  Blah.  Not for me.