Diablo 3 Announced!!!

Message

Chief · #1 Post by **Chief** » Sun Jun 29, 2008 3:58 am

woo hooo!

check it out on the blizzard home page!

Boogeyman · #2 Post by **Boogeyman** » Sun Jun 29, 2008 4:45 am

"Not even death can save you from me!"

jpnuar1 · #3 Post by **jpnuar1** » Sun Jun 29, 2008 5:58 pm

Awesome!

I love the Diablo series, and will probably buy 3 when it comes out (if my comp can run it). I just hope this one has better voice acting than the second.

greensenshi · #4 Post by **greensenshi** » Sun Jun 29, 2008 10:04 pm

Sadly, I'm not expecting anything spectacular because... it's Blizzard. They've already got their money making machine(World of Warcraft). They can pretty much go half-assed on their other projects.

Chief · #5 Post by **Chief** » Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:04 am

they can but i doubt they will. they've always worked hard on their games before putting them out.
i think starcraft 2 and diablo 3 will be high quality! i'm looking forward to them.. but i do hope they can make an original series soon!

Music Head · #6 Post by **Music Head** » Tue Jul 01, 2008 11:17 am

I agree with Chief! Blizzard along with Valve are my favorite developers. All their games are of excellent standard. I can't wait for Starcraft 2, from what I've read and seen it's gonna be awesome. I think on the contrary; now that Blizzard is getting such a larger income from WoW, they can invest even more money into their games and get something even more awesome out. Blizzards empire is built solely upon the Warcraft, Starcraft and Diablo pillars, they're not about skimp on a series.

I hope Diablo 3 adds something new to the series. I've only played one, and not the second because I found the first to be too repetative; just walking around killing and collecting treasure. Is 2 much different to 1? If so I'll give it ago.

Gronagor · #7 Post by **Gronagor** » Tue Jul 01, 2008 1:39 pm

Hmm.... Ok. I'm not exactly sure where gs fell out off. Can't really remember a Blizzard product that were 'half-assed', but I guess he has a right to his opinion.
Should be interesting.

Edit: Ack! Looking at the webpage, this will definitely be their best game yet... ok. Don't know about the plot, but the graphics looks incredible!

jpnuar1 · #8 Post by **jpnuar1** » Tue Jul 01, 2008 4:06 pm

Music Head wrote:I hope Diablo 3 adds something new to the series. I've only played one, and not the second because I found the first to be too repetative; just walking around killing and collecting treasure. Is 2 much different to 1? If so I'll give it ago.

Well, they certainly refined the model a great deal (with set items, and unique skill trees for each class (and I beleive the 3rd installment will have class specific quests) for example), but the gist of it is still level grinding and loot acquisition. So if that style of game didn't appeal to you, you may not be all that impressed by the second and third games either.

Prio · #9 Post by **Prio** » Tue Jul 01, 2008 5:46 pm

Gronagor wrote:Can't really remember a Blizzard product that were 'half-assed', but I guess he has a right to his opinion.

First time for everything. To my knowledge, all of Blizzard's (other) products were made before WoW, not after. With WoW pulling in the money it's pulling in, they could release a string of flaming poo games from now on and still laugh all the way to the bank. Not that they will: as Music Head implied, they probably have the funding and development team to rival a small country.

this will definitely be their best game yet... ok. Don't know about the plot, but the graphics looks incredible!

It'll be the most graphically impressive yet. But that's something I can safely assume without even bothering to look at screenshots or movies. It's something I could safely assume for almost any major game studio's releases, given a sufficient span of time between the latest release and the previous release (a year, say).

Gronagor · #10 Post by **Gronagor** » Tue Jul 01, 2008 6:28 pm

Prio wrote:First time for everything. To my knowledge, all of Blizzard's (other) products were made before WoW, not after. With WoW pulling in the money it's pulling in, they could release a string of flaming poo games from now on and still laugh all the way to the bank. Not that they will: as Music Head implied, they probably have the funding and development team to rival a small country.

Maybe... but each of their games were considered landmark achievements. WoW only leeched on the success of the Warcraft and other series', and worked for them. Point is... the way they work (and appoint people) you'll never find a time where they won't try to better in all aspects of the game. They go out to find the best 2D and 3D artists, programmers etc in the market and up-n-coming via Universities and colleges.

Hey, I wonder whether Cyst from Hero6 is still there. Hmm... for some reason I can't remember her real name...

Edit: Hey look! She is! She's a Associate Game Designer at Blizzard! Kristen DeMeza. Seems she had an NPC in WoW named after her as well. Cool!

Wonder whether she worked on Diablo.

greensenshi · #11 Post by **greensenshi** » Tue Jul 01, 2008 8:18 pm

Alright, I'll defend my viewpoint.

Yea, Blizzard's products have been damn good. I enjoyed the games they put out. But a game like Diablo and Diablo 2 were partially meant to be multiplayer - Diablo 2 especially. However, even on their closed servers, hacked items were there, making playing with others invariably impossible. And Blizzard never cared about it. They promised things like closing exploits in their code, banning account numbers for doing things like hacking other accounts, using hacked items. They never did.

That's what my comment was directed at.

Gronagor · #12 Post by **Gronagor** » Tue Jul 01, 2008 9:00 pm

Ah. Ok. I understand.

Brainiac · #13 Post by **Brainiac** » Wed Jul 02, 2008 3:03 am

Well, this was slightly less expected than their last big announcement. Granted, people have been expecting Diablo 3 for a while now, but this announcement wasn't as blindingly obvious as, say, stating there was a major announcement due to come out of South Korea, a country where StarGraft is practically a national sport...

Gronagor · #14 Post by **Gronagor** » Wed Jul 02, 2008 6:38 am

Still, gs, their other products only had multiplayer as an after-thought. I didn't even realize they had servers available for that long afterwards.

Urgh... I've never played Diablo in multiplayer, and never will. It kinda take away the point of the game... you know... you alone in a spooky, evilly, scary place packed with demons, skeletons and other creatures of the night.

greensenshi · #15 Post by **greensenshi** » Wed Jul 02, 2008 8:17 am

How far back are you going? Before Diablo, Blizzard released strategy games. Warcraft, Warcraft 2, The Lost Vikings. Those sorts of things. Those are the only ones I can think of because that's all I've played from them. I didn't get introduced to Blizzard as a company until my brother brought home one day in 1997 a copy of Diablo.

The reason I'm rather bitter over Blizzard is that they made decent games. I won't dispute that. I'm not saying they've "half assed" their way through all their games, I'm just saying that they now have millions of active accounts on World of Warcraft, each paying $15 a month. They're making money, and they were clearly working on this game, and just seemed to give up on Diablo 2 and the battle.net closed servers. I really miss Diablo when I could join a game and not worry if people were "legit" or not.

Gronagor · #16 Post by **Gronagor** » Wed Jul 02, 2008 8:54 am

Well... I don't think you can go much earlier than that. Could be wrong, but wasn't Warcraft I their first game? I think that was in '94/'95?? Hmmm... like I said. Could be wrong.

Thing about Blizzard is that they focus on only their brands, and try to get out the best possible game. Hmmm... Did they make many other games outside Warcraft, Diablo and Starcraft?

But I understand what you're saying about the online playing problems.
It must be extremely frustrating.

Edit: Ok. I'm wrong. Blizzard released a few games before becoming Blizzard, but since it changed hands as well back then, I'm not sure whether you can really see them as Blizzard games (even though they probably still have the licenses for the games)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ga ... ent#Titles

Hmph... just thought of something. Do you think it is possible that VU would transfer the Quest for Glory series to Blizzard? Just thought about it since they're still an active studio where Sierra is currently just a fancy logo to put on products. Not sure this would be a good idea since Blizzard's style of games are completely different, although the same type of 'theme'. Ah. Just thinking out loudly. Ignore this paragraph. :p

Brainiac · #17 Post by **Brainiac** » Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:31 pm

Gronagor wrote:Urgh... I've never played Diablo in multiplayer, and never will. It kinda take away the point of the game... you know... you alone in a spooky, evilly, scary place packed with demons, skeletons and other creatures of the night.

And cows. Don't forget cows.

Gronagor wrote:Hmph... just thought of something. Do you think it is possible that VU would transfer the Quest for Glory series to Blizzard? Just thought about it since they're still an active studio where Sierra is currently just a fancy logo to put on products. Not sure this would be a good idea since Blizzard's style of games are completely different, although the same type of 'theme'. Ah. Just thinking out loudly. Ignore this paragraph. :p

I choose not to ignore this paragraph. And you're forgetting that VU will be merging into Activision Blizzard, so "transfer" the game series is basically irrelevant.

Pidgeot · #18 Post by **Pidgeot** » Wed Jul 02, 2008 5:01 pm

Gronagor wrote:Thing about Blizzard is that they focus on only their brands, and try to get out the best possible game. Hmmm... Did they make many other games outside Warcraft, Diablo and Starcraft?

They've made 8 games outside of those series (most notably the Lost Vikings games and Rock 'n' Roll Racing), but nothing since Warcraft II in 1995.

Source

greensenshi · #19 Post by **greensenshi** » Wed Jul 02, 2008 5:48 pm

Brainiac wrote:And cows. Don't forget cows. Tongue

Oh secret cow level. How I missed you and your mooing.

But seriously, if Diablo 3 turns out to be one damn top notch game, then I will gladly admit I'm wrong. As it stands, we'll see how they do when they realize they have money. Loooooooooooooots of money.

Quest For Glory Fan · #20 Post by **Quest For Glory Fan** » Wed Jul 02, 2008 11:00 pm

Seeing as how I'm the self proclaimed number one blizz fan here I think that D3 will be absolutely stunning and better than it's predecesor (sp?) in every way. Although I'm sure you already assumed that. It's weird though that because of WoW (sparking from someone who plays guild wars I might add) people are assuming that they can ruin this series and still be fine because of the 6 million * $12-$15 they make a month from a successful franchise. There was even hinting that D3 was well into development but was scrapped because of WoW taking all the resources although that exact thing happened with Starcraft.

Starcraft was more successful than WC and Diablo but SC2 seems a ways off but no one is thinking "Oh there going to botch up the job on SC2 because WoW is already out" The reasoning is that it's just stupid as hell. What kind of company, especially based on a trinity of series, ignores the other franchises because one is more successful? Do you think Myamoto was sitting at his desk writing Zelda/Metroid thinking "You know what I've already made the most successful game ever I think I'm just going to stick with Mario. Forget these other games." Granted Nintendo doesn't charge monthly for games but they almost do considering how many Mario titles get spit out each year (not to mention they have the top selling console [source])

I just don't understand all the Blizz hate because they are successful.

greensenshi · #21 Post by **greensenshi** » Wed Jul 02, 2008 11:27 pm

I'm confused; where in my posts did I claim I hate Blizzard or WoW because it's successful? To me, it looks like I was providing some perhaps harsh and blunt skepticism that this release would be subpar because the most important thing to a business is money. And that's what WoW generates for them in the spades.

If you want, I'll PM you my reasons for why I play Guild Wars over Wow. I won't discuss them here because it's off topic and serves no purpose to the thread.

Quest For Glory Fan · #22 Post by **Quest For Glory Fan** » Thu Jul 03, 2008 9:07 am

I think Gw vs Wow is appropriate in a blizzard thread, I played both and the monthly fee is the only reason I can come up with that makes it better than WoW in my opinion. The thing about it is Diablo was always branching into a MMORPG that's what it was for it's time. Diablo one they had some fiddling with it and had 4player online then with D2 they had up to 8 player per server support and then WoW came out. In a sense Diablo was Blizz getting it's feet wet in a non RTS online community. In any case I think credibility is important to a company like blizzard because they do have competition with things like Comand and Conquer or EverQuest or even Age of Conan and spitting out a garbage game at this point would not only hurt that game but all of their franchises.

think about it, when Leisure Suit Larry came out and said "From the people that brought you Police Quest" they put more than just themselves on the line but another franchise as well and in turn all of Sierra. If people hated LSL they wouldn't go back and think "Maybe I should try PQ or any other Sierra game" because all the experience they've had with that company would have sucked. I think the Same amount of effort is going to go into making D3 as there was in any other Blizzard product except for WoW simply because (I don't know for sure) it won't be as expansive as WoW and therefore less prone to bugs and such.

Diablo 3 Announced!!!

Diablo 3 Announced!!!

A bit less expected