+- CDBZ Archive (http://alex.zulenka.com)
+-- Forum: Out of Character Forums (http://alex.zulenka.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Forum: The Legendary Asylum (http://alex.zulenka.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=133)
+--- Thread: Diablo 3 Announced!!! (/showthread.php?tid=42028)
Diablo 3 Announced!!! - The Not Cool Not Tapion - 06-29-2008
I agree with Burt on characters. I'm not a fan of just five classes.
Also, there are rumors that there were be more than 8 players in a game now and they are totally redoing battle.net
And to Pink, are you kidding? Diablo was good for its time, then Diablo 2 came out and it was 10x better. Same concept except it was spread out other than one town and levels under the town, more classes, more items, more skills, more everything. I think Diablo 2 is better than Diablo and Diablo 2 was the fastest and best selling game at the time. I don't know how you say it looks lame.
The only thing I don't like is how colorful they are trying to make it, which gives it that cartoony/WoW look which isn't Diablo-esque whatsoever. But all the people that made Diablo 2 are gone now, so of course it wont be the same.
Diablo 3 Announced!!! - Amadeus - 06-29-2008
Pink Underoo Wrote:i'm starting to get the same feeling about starcraft 2; this isn't going to be a new game so much as a refurbished old game. if all they're going to do is release an imbalanced version of the previous installment then i'll take a pass, thanks.
I disagree, actually. With Starcraft 2, one could say Blizzard is preety much revolutionizing the genre when it comes to the singleplayer aspect by increasing the interactivity of the player in the game. The Starmap feature, the choice of dialogue, the effect of mission choice...all of that is a preety big departure from anything done in previous RTS games. Even Starcraft, which featured one of the best storylines among RTS games, essentially followed the old formula of briefings and cutscenes. So this is definitly a major step forward for the genre as a whole.
Quote:i remember being more impressed with warcraft2 during its time than i was with warcraft3 when it was released. i mean, instead of making warcraft3 in 1998 they made starcraft: it was a sequel in spirit, but with a new story, setting, and core gameplay it was also a whole new game of its own. they built on the success of the previous game, not just the franchise, and expanded it. that was what made it great.
Funny. Warcraft 3 was far more innovative then Warcraft 2 was. Warcraft 2 was nothing but a slightly improved version of Warcraft 1 (although a significant one solely beacuse of the mouse control). Warcraft 3 was a preety major step from Warcraft 2 since it tried an entirely new concept.
Diablo 3 Announced!!! - Raditzu - 06-29-2008
The Not Cool Not Tapion Wrote:And to Pink, are you kidding? Diablo was good for its time, then Diablo 2 came out and it was 10x better. Same concept except it was spread out other than one town and levels under the town, more classes, more items, more skills, more everything. I think Diablo 2 is better than Diablo and Diablo 2 was the fastest and best selling game at the time. I don't know how you say it looks lame.
I don't think Pinky is wrong, per se. Most of the game play from D1 to D2 stayed the same. The only real change, in my opinion, was the shift from global spells to class-specific skill trees. Everything else was just icing on the cake.
Don't take that as a bad thing, though. If all you wanted from D2 was more Diablo (which was the case for me) then you got exactly what you wanted with a handful of extras.
That will probably be the same case with D3. I'm fine with more Diablo. I'm more than fine with more Diablo. That doesn't mean I'm going to expect something absolutely mind-blowing just because I like the game, though. Regardless, there's not really enough info about the game to solidly say what it will be like.
Diablo 3 Announced!!! - Pink Underoo - 06-29-2008
Raditzu Wrote:You're being awful pessimistic, considering how little info there is about D3 at the moment.The attitude of the industry is what's pissing me off. I'm not a pessimist, I'm just a realist. When you're business model is to make a game that's more like an expansion than a new product then I'm not impressed. Sure, it's a successful business model but that doesn't make it a good game - the reason I even played d2 was that it was at least significantly different than the original diablo. That's not the case here. I don't want to say that they shouldn't make a profit but blizzard has a history of making new games that are not only profitable but even take the industry forward as a whole, and revenue from wow is going to fund the company until the end of time so I just don't understand why they're regressing like this.
I don't think it's that your childhood faves are boring, I think it's that your expectations are too high. They're not unreasonable, certainly, but it sounds like they're not very realistic given the current "attitude" of the industry.
Blizzard, at least for the most part, recognized that warcraft3 was a flop compared to their previous achievements. Injecting RPG elements like leveling, fighting neutral monsters, and items into a RTS made the game tedious, boring and random - and it wasn't even a RTS so much as a click-and-cast multiplayer RPG with minor elements. The most popular part of the game isn't head-to-head play, it's the user-created maps, and the pro gamers in war3 play it because they couldn't hack it in a really competitive game like broodwars. (which is still gaining strength 10 years after release, bw pro gamers in south korea are akin to rockstars)
And that brings me to starcraft 2. Because of the avid fanbase they're intentionally making it into a carbon copy of the original. Why even bother? If the core mechanics aren't going to really change and it's merely a reorganization of units then just release a new expansion and call it a day, for fuck's sake. I would be much more interested if they scrapped both d3 and sc2 and made a new starcraft game in the hack n' slash genre: since the story dropped off immediately after the zerg's victory you could have different zerg-infested worlds instead of different acts, there's a shitton of preexisting units to make new and unique character classes, and the plot could easily revolve around a small elite force going from planet to planet kicking names and taking butt. This practically designs itself!
Then, maybe, some years later when the rest gaming community finally becomes aware that wow is stale then blizzard could make a dark, gothic gorefest Diablo mmo. Unlike a warcraft mmo, I would actually play that. Or they could forget the borefest that was war3 and actually make a decent warcraft RTS again.
Diablo 3 Announced!!! - Raditzu - 06-29-2008
Pink Underoo Wrote:The attitude of the industry is what's pissing me off. I'm not a pessimist, I'm just a realist.
When you condemn a game before having played it or read any real reviews of it, I consider that pessimism. Yeah, D3 may be an exact carbon copy of D2, but why get upset about it before having a primary source to confirm it?
Personally, if someone's going to make another game in an established series, I don't want something different. I go play Dynasty Warriors because I know what the game is going to be like. The same goes for Diablo, or Elder Scrolls, or Soul Caliber, or Devil May Cry, etc., etc..
I don't agree that something like D3 should revolutionize the industry just because it's from Blizzard. I don't even agree that it should be that much different. That's why it's Diablo 3 and not something completely different.
I do, however, agree that the attitude of the industry blows. I'm definitely one of those "games as art" kind of guys, but the current industry is not set up to really support that. It's unfortunate. Maybe when I make billions of dollars I'll go out and fund new and unique games.
And MegaMan Legends 3.
Diablo 3 Announced!!! - Reijin - 06-29-2008
Seems all the world's "realists" tend to always find fail in the smallest amounts of information and have undying proof that the world is going to hell.
Its a cycle that's been going on as long as the world has been around. To some, that may only be 2008 years, to others a few billion.
Diablo 3 Announced!!! - Android 17 - 06-29-2008
Raditzu Wrote:And MegaMan Legends 3.
Keiji Inafune wants to make a Megaman Legends 3 for a while now.
But he doesn't have enough zenny ='(
Diablo 3 Announced!!! - Waffuru - 06-29-2008
WTT soul for megaman legends 3
=(
Diablo 3 Announced!!! - Orion - 06-30-2008
Raditzu Wrote:Personally, if someone's going to make another game in an established series, I don't want something different. I go play Dynasty Warriors because I know what the game is going to be like. The same goes for Diablo, or Elder Scrolls, or Soul Caliber, or Devil May Cry, etc., etc..
+1
That's why people get excited about it. It's the same concept, but with heaps of new shit in it. DII and SC1 were done several computing generations ago. What excites me the most is what they can do now that they couldn't do then.
EDIT: Not to mention it's a continuation of the storyline.
Diablo 3 Announced!!! - Pink Underoo - 06-30-2008
Reijin Wrote:Seems all the world's "realists" tend to always find fail in the smallest amounts of information and have undying proof that the world is going to hell.I suspected that war3 was full of fail from just reading the information that blizz had on their website, and it turned out into pretty much exactly what I expected. Same with WoW. Then, on the flip side, I've waited with great anticipation for StarCraft Ghost and accepted every delay so long as they finished the project at some point in time, only for it to be scapped in favor of campy bullshit like war3 and wow.
Its a cycle that's been going on as long as the world has been around. To some, that may only be 2008 years, to others a few billion.
It's not just me being cynic because I've seen the same tendency from developers like SquareSoft years before they fell apart altogether. Square used to regularly issue legendary genre-defining titles like Chrono Trigger, Secret of Mana, Vagrant Story, Final Fantasy Tactics, Super Mario RPG, and Xenogears to name a few. Even their lesser titles - Brave Fencer Musashi, Parasite Eve - were still on par with the best that their top competition could muster. At least when they made numerical sequels like with Final Fantasy they had the good sense to make each game it's own. Now they're responsible for the likes of FFX-2 and another mind-numbing cash-cow of a MMO in a sea of mind-numbing cash-cow MMO's.
So when I say Blizzard is regressing it's because they are. I'm a consummate gamer, not the kind that enjoys games because commercials, magazines, and the developers tell me to and I'm not one who hates games just because they're part of an old franchise - I got more out of MegaMan X than the whole NES series that preceded it, and the same with Final Fantasy 6 against the first five. I mean, if Rare had taken the Donkey Kong franchise and just made another ladder-climbing arcade game instead of Donkey Kong Country you couldn't have paid me to play that shit, but they didn't: they took an old icon and did something good with it. But apparently I'm just "expecting too much" and merely "finding fail in the smallest amounts of information". Pardon me for seeing the forest behind the trees. =\
Diablo 3 Announced!!! - Raditzu - 06-30-2008
You're saying that Blizzard is failing for making a Diablo game that plays like a Diablo game. That just kinda sounds retarded.
And you're pretty much getting all up-in-arms because you don't think anyone here agrees with you. I promise you're not the only "consummate gamer" on the site.
Diablo 3 Announced!!! - Waffuru - 06-30-2008
You also have to consider that their costs have gone way up. The cost of a next-gen console game or a current generation PC title is way more the games you mentioned.
They have to do what's best for the share holders and that means churning out games they know will sell, not new innovation games that might struggle to earn back their initial cost. You might not like it but they have to run it as a business and it's hard to pitch the titles with huge risks over the games like Diablo 3 or another stupid World of Warcraft expansion that they know will make a killing even if they just stuff the box with a week old turd.
Maybe you should just quit video games all together.
Diablo 3 Announced!!! - Reijin - 06-30-2008
You said in the first paragraph that you set yourself up for being disappointed and suddenly you were disappointed. At the same time, yeah, all those games rocked. Part of why they canceled SC:G though (disappoints me as well, a lot) is due to the other company not producing things on a quality that they were expecting... the very exact thing that you are complaining about not being taken into account. I'm pretty sure they didn't just scrap the project in hopes of seeing tear stricken faces on Christmas morning.
I honestly think that you are just setting the bar of expectation on a level of LEGENDARY and getting upset when you find very few games meeting that line. There's a reason those games stand out against the rest; they are exceptions to the normal generic crap that's put out. Games become legendary when they break new grounds and find a niche not being done, and then other games emulate that. They can't just "try something new" every single time and expect it to be awe inspiring. As awesome as Nintendo is, lots of people complain that they don't do things at all traditionally anymore and seem like there is a gimmick in every box. It works for them, but in general... not so much.
And as mentioned, they are a business. They have to make profit. I don't believe they are being "money greedy" so much as that they are trying to move up as a business. Its what people go to school for and work hard for, to move up in the world and stabilize your life. I know everyone assumes those guys are straight each pocketing the "300 million dollars made this year!" each and running around with cash toilet paper, but its not true. If that many fans are crying out for older legendary games to be updated to the new eras, then there's a ton of profit in that. They also probably extremely enjoy updating those older games and seeing what they can do. You know, sorta like we are taking the framework of crap like DBZ and Naruto and trying to find new ground ourselves. I'm sure every time they work on those games, they have that same rush we did trying to create new systems. Its not like they aren't out to enjoy playing the games themselves.
Diablo 3 Announced!!! - Pink Underoo - 06-30-2008
Of course their costs are higher, but for what? Better graphics and a complicated physics engine? Watch the d3 gameplay demo again, once the Witchdoctor gets to that stone bridge he just stops as if that view is an end unto itself. If I wanted to watch something I'd go see a movie, not buy a video game. I've never been one to fawn over pushing technology in a video game because I know this is where it leads: developers transform into code monkeys that have no soul.
Rare made Goldeneye back when FPS was just not done on console. They also made awesome shit like DKC that I mentioned before, Blast Corp, Killer Instinct (another one of those genre-changing games), Banjo Kazooie, etc - they didn't need to spend five million dollars to make a blockbuster. They still don't, but for some queer reason that's what they're doing. Now they're making games like Perfect Dark Zero. It wasn't unplayable, in the same way that wow isn't unplayable and I'm sure d3 won't be unplayable, but they literally took the preeminent franchise in quality console FPS - the original Perfect Dark and it's spiritual predecessor Goldeneye are the reason why FPS is now so popular on consoles - and they turned it into a wanna-be. Some people will blame Microsoft, and a lot of original developers that made Goldeneye and PD jumped ship a while ago, but I don't care because the end result is what it is.
And I'm not saying that 100% of the industry is worthless, just that most of it is. Most of everything is crap, and that will always be true. But when I see industry leaders wallowing in their present success and adopt a "we're awesome so let's milk our best franchises forever" attitude, which is what causes developers to leave and ultimately to the company's downfall, I tend to stop buying their games immediately. I already stopped playing video games (at least new ones) and the next one I plan on buying is ufc 2009, which isn't coming out until next year. It's just that Blizzard is in the best position they've ever been in to do great things right now and they're going out of their way to drop the ball. I get frustrated every time I see it happen now, and I'm seeing it more and more often.
Reijin Wrote:Part of why they canceled SC:G though (disappoints me as well, a lot) is due to the other company not producing things on a quality that they were expecting... the very exact thing that you are complaining about not being taken into account. I'm pretty sure they didn't just scrap the project in hopes of seeing tear stricken faces on Christmas morning.I talked to a pro gamer who went to one of the Blizz events where they had a hands-on demo of SCG and he said it was awesome. They wouldn't have had to put it on a secondary developer if they had just finished it, but they waited so long that a whole new generation of consoles was made and the new developers couldn't update the code fast enough. You don't make a new console overnight. They could have just released the game on the older consoles because at the time when the project was killed they were still around. I understand that Blizzard has high expectations for the games (which is why I have high expectations for Blizzard) but they essentially sabotaged themselves here.
Diablo 3 Announced!!! - Raditzu - 06-30-2008
Pink Underoo Wrote:and they're going out of their way to drop the ball.
You seem to be the only one here who thinks that.
Diablo 3 Announced!!! - Nappa - 06-30-2008
Hey.
Hey.
STFU guys.
You're cluttering my fanatical love-making thread with your petty discussions.
GTFO and let me hump Diablo III's web page in peace.
Diablo 3 Announced!!! - Reijin - 06-30-2008
Eh, until Tom Chilton gets hit by a bus I'm not keeping my expectations all that high in some fields.
Diablo 3 Announced!!! - Amadeus - 06-30-2008
Reijin Wrote:Eh, until Tom Chilton gets hit by a bus I'm not keeping my expectations all that high in some fields.
Please do not tell me you are one of those people that took the warrior joke too seriously.
EDIT: Oh and Pink, I have recently found out that Blizzard is working on a Gas mechanic to keep macro challenging. So much for the "carbon copy" theory.
Diablo 3 Announced!!! - Orion - 07-01-2008
Pink Underoo Wrote:Of course their costs are higher, but for what? Better graphics and a complicated physics engine? Watch the d3 gameplay demo again, once the Witchdoctor gets to that stone bridge he just stops as if that view is an end unto itself. If I wanted to watch something I'd go see a movie, not buy a video game. I've never been one to fawn over pushing technology in a video game because I know this is where it leads: developers transform into code monkeys that have no soul. .
Funny. Almost everyone these days seems to think that good graphics = good game. On so many sites, especially ones rating Wii games, they say that the graphics is crap so I shouldn't play it. Developers can't have it both ways.
Diablo 3 Announced!!! - Bojack - 07-01-2008
Ok, this looks pretty cool. BUT WHAT DO I CARE, MY COMP WONT BE ABLE TO RUN IT.
;_;