Maybe I missed it but I haven't heard anything yet on the max number of players allowed in one game, so if it's already been confirmed I guess delete this.
In a post on the battle.net forums Bashiok had this to say:
The spell animations, blood, explosions, and everything else going on can create what Jay mentioned a few times as "soup". An indistinguishable mess. It's really only an issue during four player games and even then, to be honest, I personally think it's all far more readable than it was in Diablo II.
If all those animations start to become an "issue during four player games" than I think it's reasonable to assume there won't be more than four players to a game, and certainly not eight.
Notice the bold from Bashiok's quote below; pretty much confirming a limit of four to a game.
[...] we limit to 4 because we recognize that even in Diablo II 8 was way too many people, that anything above 4, even in Diablo II, made a terrible mess of the game.
It was released a wicked long time ago that it was most likely they would do around four and that they weren't completely sure yet. But, it seems like they are sticking to it..
Personally, I like the four player limit. Just wish it was five sometimes for the "one of each class" party (:
there will never ever ever be 1 of each class in a pub game
secondly
having all 5 classes at once does not give you an advantage, stop thinking it is the perfect group
Stop thinking what other people are actually thinking. Who the hell said they wanted all 5 class because its the "perfect group"? I know I like having one of each class, because I like that way. Don't judge people over speculation of their own thoughts.
there will never ever ever be 1 of each class in a pub game
secondly
having all 5 classes at once does not give you an advantage, stop thinking it is the perfect group
lol
u jst need 4 friends.. here we go.. u have a game with 5 different classes
noone want the five classes together cause of a perfect group.. but jst want to at least have the chance to see they working together.. even if its jst one time
and the other guy replys go to.. dont try to think bout other ppl ideas this way
there will never ever ever be 1 of each class in a pub game
secondly
having all 5 classes at once does not give you an advantage, stop thinking it is the perfect group
I just said it as an afterthought, half jokingly. The only reason I would like it with D3 would be to see a ton of different spells on my screen at once.
I'm satisfied with four though, seems like a good number where everyone sticks together.
4 players is perfect. plus if difficulty is increased with the addition of each new player it would make it more beneficial to stick together as opposed to going solo.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]I find your lack of faithdisturbing.
yea 4 players is a bit of a shock for me. but looking at my computer rig right now i can tell its happy that it might be able to handle 4 players at once.
maybe the reason they're sticking with four is because, not only does it play fine, but if they were to bring it up to 8 people on a screen, with all the lighting and effects, it would force fans to have to put another thousand bucks to their comp rig.... i dont know just a thought
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The one who makes it doesn't make it for himself. The one who buys it doesn't buy it for himself. The one who needs it doesn't know it when he needs it.
4 players is perfect. plus if difficulty is increased with the addition of each new player it would make it more beneficial to stick together as opposed to going solo.
If you went ahead you'd be left 4 dead*
*Sorry, just reminded me of that game by the way you phrased things.
Anyways, I think 4-5 players is a good amount
4 because it's even
5 because that's the number of classes.
I like 4 because it is a perfect size for a party.
I like 5 because you can play with more friends.
I like 8 because you can play with all your friends.
But 8 is only possible if there is a option to really reduce the effects. But I guess that it is going to be 8 players in PvP. Perhaps up to 16. Nah, 32 in a 16 v 16 mass battle!
That is some very wishful thinking.
Lol
16v16 battles would be something to behold, indeed.
4 seems like a good number to me, 5 is fine too, but hopefully with them limiting the number of players in a game, it will make the game harder...personally, I think D2 was too much of a cake walk...
Quote from "emilemil1" »
But I guess that it is going to be 8 players in PvP. Perhaps up to 16. Nah, 32 in a 16 v 16 mass battle!
So, yea...I think my computer just died thinking about a 16 v 16 mass battle...lol
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
~ Some people are still alive only because it is illegal to kill them ~
I still get this feeling it's going to be 6 people max. Guess we'll just have to see if we get an official word on it or by next Blizzcon if it is still 4 then that's a good inclination.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Weaseling out of things is important to learn. It's what separates us from the animals... except the weasel.
- Homer Simpson
Here i just need to make one statement. 8 player Cow Runs in D2. If anyof you have done this in nightmare with 8 players lvl 30 plus and they all spammed their best skill as soon as you saw the first herd of bovine, Damn you know what lag is cause seriouslly i had my comp freeze entirely from that. ehem mind you i did have a 2006 fully capable computer. that still wasn't enough to hold that all together. Now with 3d graphics that needs much more than D2 forget it four people will freeze a 2006 low grade computer the first time you use a skill by yourself. So with all of this I think 4 players is alot for an old low grade computer and five would be overkill if you had everything on low it ould still hrut your comp badly, medium grade computers shouldn't have a major problem with 4 5 might start making it lag slightly maybe a 1 second lag, medium- high Aka good processor bunch o ram single gpu good graphics card this should be able to run up to 5 players on high with minimal lag maybe even none, HIGH GRADE comps such as those with a core i7 2.80 ghz processor dual gtx260's and 12 GB of ram all on raid 0 configure of 2x 365 GB SSD's youll run 5 fine on high setting and forget it with the overclocking freaks they'll have this thing run 8 players max settings on 2560x1600 screens.. this is why i hate being unable to afford the overclocking stuff. so as to how many players actually 4 is a good number being low grade comps really cant handle much and a medium one can probably handle it medium settings and the higher ones can max everythign with all 4 players.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Not even Death will save you from Diablo Bunny's Cuteness!
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
In a post on the battle.net forums Bashiok had this to say:
If all those animations start to become an "issue during four player games" than I think it's reasonable to assume there won't be more than four players to a game, and certainly not eight.
http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=19377974424
Edit:
Notice the bold from Bashiok's quote below; pretty much confirming a limit of four to a game.
Source
Personally, I like the four player limit. Just wish it was five sometimes for the "one of each class" party (:
And suddenly more with the expansion?
there will never ever ever be 1 of each class in a pub game
secondly
having all 5 classes at once does not give you an advantage, stop thinking it is the perfect group
Stop thinking what other people are actually thinking. Who the hell said they wanted all 5 class because its the "perfect group"? I know I like having one of each class, because I like that way. Don't judge people over speculation of their own thoughts.
but i like personally 4 better than 5 exactly for that reason
theres a class you arent going to have which will it be lol
but ya some ppl will probaly pick the same classes even in private games =3
Be my Buddy =^.^=
lol
u jst need 4 friends.. here we go.. u have a game with 5 different classes
noone want the five classes together cause of a perfect group.. but jst want to at least have the chance to see they working together.. even if its jst one time
and the other guy replys go to.. dont try to think bout other ppl ideas this way
I just said it as an afterthought, half jokingly. The only reason I would like it with D3 would be to see a ton of different spells on my screen at once.
I'm satisfied with four though, seems like a good number where everyone sticks together.
Unlikely a Knight type class shows up. 4 players per game.
What else?
/nerdrage
maybe the reason they're sticking with four is because, not only does it play fine, but if they were to bring it up to 8 people on a screen, with all the lighting and effects, it would force fans to have to put another thousand bucks to their comp rig.... i dont know just a thought
If you went ahead you'd be left 4 dead*
*Sorry, just reminded me of that game by the way you phrased things.
Anyways, I think 4-5 players is a good amount
4 because it's even
5 because that's the number of classes.
That is some very wishful thinking.
Lol
16v16 battles would be something to behold, indeed.
Esepcially if they were all summon necros.
So, yea...I think my computer just died thinking about a 16 v 16 mass battle...lol
A downsize just wouldn't feel right to me.
It would be lonely.
Weaseling out of things is important to learn. It's what separates us from the animals... except the weasel.
- Homer Simpson
Just to clarify, WarCraftIII is 12 players max in a game, not 8.
But yeah, I really wish it'll be more than 4, at least 6 or 8 would be great...