Let's assume for lack of flaming that Diablo 3 follows suit like D2 in terms of genre and play style. What modifications to the formula should be made? Personally, I thought it was kind of dull how it lacked plot depth. I mean, the story was powerful and everything, but it was too linear for my tastes. Not only that, but the towns really lack interactivity and there is almost nothing to spend money on after a while.
If you're the nostalgic gamer, then you'll love this. Some guy made a chest with the cover being a giant NES controller. And it's not just a façade either. He actually dismembered an NES controller and made the chest cover complete with big buttons. Just click the link and check it out.
Just stopping by again to see what's going on. I read the news a while ago of the site purchase and it got my hopes up again. The new layout is nice, by the way. And it seems like there's some higher calibur posters than that of two years ago. Glad to see it. I may drop a line once in a while. See you on the forum.
Statistics for your reading pleasure. It's interesting to look back at my previous statement in this thread and see how it's really played out. The PS3 has consistently sold out the 360 for months now. Nintendo has run out of good titles worth anticipating, and Halo is over with. I still won't get a PS3 until they make a slim one though. Especially since they've reduced chip sizes and power consumption, I see no reason why they wouldn't. That's basically Nintendo's business model: Make it, remake it, then remake it again, then give the next generation a glancing thought.
But I definitely saw the death of HD-DVD coming from a mile away. I had my money on blu-ray from the beginning.
Now we know how big of a fucking lyer Mutton needs to be to try and break me.
This is the full sentence of me on page 13 he quoted:
Haha, okay, that time I can admit, that I was yankin' your chain. I accidentally erased my post on copy and paste and I decided to mess with you. Don't take it too seriously. You'll miss the bigger issue. You're still wrong.
Point is, you're wrong if you now think that WC3 was, at any point, an MMORPG. I dare you to call up Rob Pardo. Even he would tell you you're full of shit. I implore you to find one sentence in any source that you looked over an find Rob Pardo saying something along the lines of "WC3 was originally an MMORPG". I'm not going to go the extra mile for a dolt like you. Look at it yourself, and you'll see how wrong you are. No one agrees with you. Your sources disprove that WC3 was an MMORPG, and you've copped out twice, thus far.
Anyways, I'll make my grand exit as the victor and we can return to the main topic at hand.
You have like a memory of a few minutes, i said WoW came from the further development of Warcraft 3 (the rps) like Warcraft 3 came and you started debating against that.
Okay, so you're saying that WC3 was first and WoW was second. Let's take a look back:
they ALREADY planned on making a WoW before they started with Warcraft 3.
Woah. Hold on. We've got a paradox on our hands. In otherwords, a seemingly contradictory statement. Goes to show that Doppelganger knew I was right and changed his argument so he could keep going. He might have succeeded if I didn't have such a great bullshit detector.
I'll finish this tomorrow. I've got an English final to ace in the morning. I'll leave this food for thought, so you can all see that Doppelganger loves to cop out when the going gets rough.
What The FUCK? You like pulling shit of you're ass, I NEVER SAID IT WAS ORIGINALLY A MMORPG!, YOU FUCKING MORON.
Stop copping out. You did it earlier in this thread when you said that WoW wasn't part of the Warcraft franchise, and you're doing it again with this Warcraft 3 MMORPG crap. Man up to your mistakes. Here's a reminder:
No they dont you dumbass, you think they wouldv named WoW Warcraft 3 if they wanted too? (your still not getting WoW WAS Warcraft 3)
WoW is an MMORPG. Therefore, by saying that Warcraft 3 was WoW, you're saying Warcraft 3 was originally an MMORPG, as proved by the transitive property.
Whatever, dipshit, i never took anything out of context because i only quoted hard quotes you don't like to reply on because you suck at debating.
I did reply to your quotes. Pay attention. Yeah, you did take hard quotes, and then state things that had nothing to do with what the source stated.
You really have no idea what you're debating.
Wich vague references are you talking about huh? IT IS A FUCKING INTERVIEW WITH ROB YOU IDIOT, vague references my ass, you're shit at everything.
You highlighted portions of Rob's interview. Although they stated one thing, you jumped to conclusions, and then some. Therefore, your conclusion is extremely vague in comparison to what Mr. Pardo said. Get with the program.
DEBATE ABOUT WHAT? WHAT THE FUCKING HELL ARE YOU DEBATING AGAINST? DIPSHIT.
Cop out. I guess I can call you chicken shit, since you're so scared to admit that you're wrong. Just a page ago, you were debating against what I said.
And if you weren't saying that Warcraft 3 was an MMORPG, originally, this argument would never have occurred, as I did enter this debate by saying that Warcraft 3 was never an MMORPG, to which you replied with much refutation, thus proving that you were arguing that it was an MMORPG.
I'll disregard everything else you said to me, because it was nothing but stupid insults.
You should take a vacation and only come back when you learn not to cop out of your original argument. Either admit that you were wrong or take the fallout of the argument that you created.
I will do the same, but whatever you do you're ass is burned anyways
Good luck with that, because you've failed with that, thus far.
Because that quote is from the first interview you idiot, you know before they had to go into "one" of the "two" directions.
But you said the game was originally an MMORPG. So wouldn't it make sense for the first interview to talk about the first version of the game? But it looks like he called it a role-playing RTS, not an MMORPG.
Statements? They where hard quotes you idiot, i didnt make statements.
THEIR statements, you dumb fuck. Do you try to be ignorant or does it just come natural?
What?
You even don't know what your debating dumbass, lol.
Get this, previous "craft" games= RTS. No balancing of genres here dumbass, ya know balancing like they where going to do in the first quote you quoted?
Going even further away from previous "craft" games= NOT RTS. Funny how WoW, ya know the last "craft" game released, is not a rts game huh? No balancing of genres here dipshit.
You like destroying yourself, lol.
And yet you can't back up your claims without extremely vague references. Just because World of Warcraft is an MMORPG doesn't mean that it is a development of this supposed original project. You have no proof. No one agrees with you. You have lost. Miserably.
How more obvious can it be huh?
Uh, let's start with something like this, "Warcraft 3 was originally an MMORPG". You've failed to prove it and are therefore, defeated.
LOL, that quote is before the "significant" changes Rob talks about, you know, the first interview? HAHAHA.
That was in his first interview, you fucking retard. I think you need to start wearing a helmet. Just because your mom dropped you on your head as a baby on numerous occasions does not mean that you should continue to do it to yourself afterward.
Rob talkes for 10 BLEEDING PAGES about the difference of the direction they did go into with Warcraft 3 and the direction they didn't go into with Warcraft 3, aka WoW.
And he summarized it in the beginning. And I did quote it, and I noted that he was talking about that "role-playing strategy game". And he was talking about whether or not to continue developing it as part of the RTS series, or take it to the next level. He never once said it was an MMORPG. Ever. The fact that he didn't is all I need to show that you're wrong.
Yea ofcourse, be as ignorant as ever Mutton i dont care you're a moron.
Funny that you actually expect him to say the "first" direction (funny little detail huh? "first") was WoW, very funny and sad at the same time.
Speaking of ass, you're one is as lame as shit, asstwat.
But you do know why that is don't you?
Its because you suck shit out of you're ass, as a matter of fact you suck so much shit out of you're ass that your face is on permanent suckass-mode and it makes you look like a moron.
You look like the moron you see when you look into a mirror, you know -the reflection of you- a moron.
You have some dickless shit going on there in you're failed posts.
By the by, do you use a pincet and magnifying glass when you try to wank it?
Seriously, i see more cock at a tupperwareparty.
I once beat a horse to death with my cock i would crush you like the little shit you are.
How can someone be that naive?
Maybe its from getting you're brain fistfucked by me all the time.
Now that we're on the topic of pain, does it hurt a lot when you shove that keyboard up your ass?
Cause it seems only shit is touching your keys, ya know.
I mean what you write is like licking the dry pussy of your mom, painfully embarrassing when talking about intellect and sense.
You didn't even need to quote me before saying this. None of it countered anything I said. It's funny how you're so bad at debating, that all you do is just spout bullshit about peoples moms, asses, twats, etc. Last I checked, this was not a shit-flinging contest. So, either start acting like you've got some damned sense or lock yourself back up in that monkey cage from whence you came.
I can go on and on.
About nothing. And that's about all you've been doing throughout your time in this debate.
----------------------------------------
By the way, high five to Fingolfin. Once again, you come through with common sense and legitimate arguments. This one goes to you buddy:
Quote from "boomer" »
Just curious, is doppel saying that WoW is not part of the Warcraft Franchise? (His posts are mostly incoherent)
He's saying that Warcraft 3 was originally an MMORPG, even though Rob Pardo said, originally, that it was a "role-playing strategy game", but the game came closer to being a strategy game as it lost some of the RPG elements that it had.
Rob practicaly says the other direction they DID go into was WoW, (he is talking continuesly about TWO "directions" with Warcraft, how big of a fucking moron do you have to be to not get this link?) or are you guys so bleeding ignorant you even diminish or just as well completely ignore WoW's existence?
Oh, I'm sorry. Did you say practically? Because that's about as far as you've managed to go. However, I'm directly proving that it wasn't an MMORPG. You're just pulling assumptions out of your ass just because they said the game had too many RPG elements. Two directions doesn't ultimately mean MMORPG vs. RTS.
As far as your argument goes, it's always "practically this" and "almost that" and "kind sorta other things". I want to see him say "It was originally an MMORPG. If you can't do that, then you've lost. Because I can use your quoted sources to prove just the opposite. Directly, as opposed to indirectly.
From now on, every time you pull an assumption out of your ass, I'm going to refer to it as a dingleberry. So keep your dingleberries to yourself.
Mutton and Fingolfin, you're pathetic.
I found all of your insults to be rather pathetic. As opposed to proving me wrong, you spend every sentence trying to insult me. You didn't succeed, though.
I'll start by using your quoted sources against you.
Rob Pardo, producer and senior designer on Warcraft III, emphasized that Warcraft III will not be a real-time strategy game. He called it a "role-playing strategy game."
I found it funny how you highlighted his emphasis. But left in the next sentence that declared it an RTS. Good move, jackass.
In addition, GameSpot learned recently that the game is undergoing a significant change in direction. Specifically, Blizzard decided to reiterate conclusively in the game's design that Warcraft III will be first and foremost a strategy game and not a role-playing game.
Coinciding with the first source quote, Blizzard was saying that it was an issue of balancing the elements of both genres. It wasn't one or the other. Way to take their statements out of context.
[moving from project lead to technical lead]
Absolutely irrelevant and just shows how horrible you are at finding supporting evidence of your claims.
trying to make [the engine] flexible enough so that other teams in the future could also use the engine.
Once again, doesn't mention either. Doesn't prove anything. All it tells me is that wanted to make a flexible engine that they could recycle.
Well, I don't want to get into the limitations so much. When we first started working on the game, we had lots of talks over the past months, trying to figure out exactly what we wanted to do with it, how different we wanted it to be from our previous 'Craft games or how much the same....
The last sentence has a strong emphasis on the balancing of genre elements. You've succeeded in proving my point.
It really showed off the engine at a beautiful angle, but what eventually ended up happening to us was that we got to a point where we had to take the design in one of two different directions. We either had to make it even more RPG-like and cut back on the scale of units, how many characters there were, and things of that nature,
Okay, I think you've given me more than ample evidence to prove that you're wrong. You've saved me the trouble of sifting through pages of interviews and articles.
They said "even more RPG-like". That means "like an RPG", not "is an RPG". Once again, proving my point.
or we had to go the other direction and move the camera up, allow free scrolling, and go more toward what we've done previously in our real-time strategy games.
How do you take this as them saying MMORPG or RTS? I really don't see how or why you came up with this story, but you've managed to make me believe you are even more retarded than I previously believed.
But I believe the finishing blow was my first source quote. You should have nothing left to say about that:
He called it a "role-playing strategy game."
I think I'll repeat it 3 more times for clarification:
He called it a "role-playing strategy game."
He called it a "role-playing strategy game."
He called it a "role-playing strategy game."
Just so you understand that this says it all. And by all, I mean everything that coincided with my points.
Now that the screenshots bring it up, God of War graphics would be great for this game. Given, certain things would have to be simplified. Possibly make the game a bit darker to make it more thematic and less difficult to process. If only I could revote, I would pick God of War 2. By the way, I played it and beat it. That is a great game. Freaking great. Plus, I'd love to see someone like Diablo rendered as vididly as the bosses in the cinematics of this game.
What I enjoy about Diablo 2 is that I can sit down and play 1 hour, tp to town and leave the game and I won't feel like I have missed *the* opportunity of completing that quest.
What? That doesn't make sense. You don't miss quests when you log off, just like in the case of Diablo 2.
There's been a lot of this stuff popping up. But as likely as it sounds, there is always the slight chance that it isn't in the making and they're making some sort of side-project. But I like to believe it's Diablo 3
0
0
http://www.nintendowiifanboy.com/2008/05/09/nes-coffee-table-is-so-much-more/
0
0
Statistics for your reading pleasure. It's interesting to look back at my previous statement in this thread and see how it's really played out. The PS3 has consistently sold out the 360 for months now. Nintendo has run out of good titles worth anticipating, and Halo is over with. I still won't get a PS3 until they make a slim one though. Especially since they've reduced chip sizes and power consumption, I see no reason why they wouldn't. That's basically Nintendo's business model: Make it, remake it, then remake it again, then give the next generation a glancing thought.
But I definitely saw the death of HD-DVD coming from a mile away. I had my money on blu-ray from the beginning.
0
Point is, you're wrong if you now think that WC3 was, at any point, an MMORPG. I dare you to call up Rob Pardo. Even he would tell you you're full of shit. I implore you to find one sentence in any source that you looked over an find Rob Pardo saying something along the lines of "WC3 was originally an MMORPG". I'm not going to go the extra mile for a dolt like you. Look at it yourself, and you'll see how wrong you are. No one agrees with you. Your sources disprove that WC3 was an MMORPG, and you've copped out twice, thus far.
Anyways, I'll make my grand exit as the victor and we can return to the main topic at hand.
0
Okay, so you're saying that WC3 was first and WoW was second. Let's take a look back:
Woah. Hold on. We've got a paradox on our hands. In otherwords, a seemingly contradictory statement. Goes to show that Doppelganger knew I was right and changed his argument so he could keep going. He might have succeeded if I didn't have such a great bullshit detector.
I'll finish this tomorrow. I've got an English final to ace in the morning. I'll leave this food for thought, so you can all see that Doppelganger loves to cop out when the going gets rough.
0
WoW is an MMORPG. Therefore, by saying that Warcraft 3 was WoW, you're saying Warcraft 3 was originally an MMORPG, as proved by the transitive property.
I did reply to your quotes. Pay attention. Yeah, you did take hard quotes, and then state things that had nothing to do with what the source stated.
You highlighted portions of Rob's interview. Although they stated one thing, you jumped to conclusions, and then some. Therefore, your conclusion is extremely vague in comparison to what Mr. Pardo said. Get with the program.
Cop out. I guess I can call you chicken shit, since you're so scared to admit that you're wrong. Just a page ago, you were debating against what I said.
And if you weren't saying that Warcraft 3 was an MMORPG, originally, this argument would never have occurred, as I did enter this debate by saying that Warcraft 3 was never an MMORPG, to which you replied with much refutation, thus proving that you were arguing that it was an MMORPG.
I'll disregard everything else you said to me, because it was nothing but stupid insults.
You should take a vacation and only come back when you learn not to cop out of your original argument. Either admit that you were wrong or take the fallout of the argument that you created.
0
0
Good luck with that, because you've failed with that, thus far.
But you said the game was originally an MMORPG. So wouldn't it make sense for the first interview to talk about the first version of the game? But it looks like he called it a role-playing RTS, not an MMORPG.
THEIR statements, you dumb fuck. Do you try to be ignorant or does it just come natural?
And yet you can't back up your claims without extremely vague references. Just because World of Warcraft is an MMORPG doesn't mean that it is a development of this supposed original project. You have no proof. No one agrees with you. You have lost. Miserably.
Uh, let's start with something like this, "Warcraft 3 was originally an MMORPG". You've failed to prove it and are therefore, defeated.
That was in his first interview, you fucking retard. I think you need to start wearing a helmet. Just because your mom dropped you on your head as a baby on numerous occasions does not mean that you should continue to do it to yourself afterward.
And he summarized it in the beginning. And I did quote it, and I noted that he was talking about that "role-playing strategy game". And he was talking about whether or not to continue developing it as part of the RTS series, or take it to the next level. He never once said it was an MMORPG. Ever. The fact that he didn't is all I need to show that you're wrong.
You didn't even need to quote me before saying this. None of it countered anything I said. It's funny how you're so bad at debating, that all you do is just spout bullshit about peoples moms, asses, twats, etc. Last I checked, this was not a shit-flinging contest. So, either start acting like you've got some damned sense or lock yourself back up in that monkey cage from whence you came.
About nothing. And that's about all you've been doing throughout your time in this debate.
----------------------------------------
By the way, high five to Fingolfin. Once again, you come through with common sense and legitimate arguments. This one goes to you buddy:
He's saying that Warcraft 3 was originally an MMORPG, even though Rob Pardo said, originally, that it was a "role-playing strategy game", but the game came closer to being a strategy game as it lost some of the RPG elements that it had.
0
Oh, I'm sorry. Did you say practically? Because that's about as far as you've managed to go. However, I'm directly proving that it wasn't an MMORPG. You're just pulling assumptions out of your ass just because they said the game had too many RPG elements. Two directions doesn't ultimately mean MMORPG vs. RTS.
As far as your argument goes, it's always "practically this" and "almost that" and "kind sorta other things". I want to see him say "It was originally an MMORPG. If you can't do that, then you've lost. Because I can use your quoted sources to prove just the opposite. Directly, as opposed to indirectly.
From now on, every time you pull an assumption out of your ass, I'm going to refer to it as a dingleberry. So keep your dingleberries to yourself.
I found all of your insults to be rather pathetic. As opposed to proving me wrong, you spend every sentence trying to insult me. You didn't succeed, though.
I'll start by using your quoted sources against you.
I found it funny how you highlighted his emphasis. But left in the next sentence that declared it an RTS. Good move, jackass.
Coinciding with the first source quote, Blizzard was saying that it was an issue of balancing the elements of both genres. It wasn't one or the other. Way to take their statements out of context.
Absolutely irrelevant and just shows how horrible you are at finding supporting evidence of your claims.
Once again, doesn't mention either. Doesn't prove anything. All it tells me is that wanted to make a flexible engine that they could recycle.
The last sentence has a strong emphasis on the balancing of genre elements. You've succeeded in proving my point.
Okay, I think you've given me more than ample evidence to prove that you're wrong. You've saved me the trouble of sifting through pages of interviews and articles.
They said "even more RPG-like". That means "like an RPG", not "is an RPG". Once again, proving my point.
How do you take this as them saying MMORPG or RTS? I really don't see how or why you came up with this story, but you've managed to make me believe you are even more retarded than I previously believed.
But I believe the finishing blow was my first source quote. You should have nothing left to say about that:
I think I'll repeat it 3 more times for clarification:
Just so you understand that this says it all. And by all, I mean everything that coincided with my points.
0
0
0
0
I have no idea who this is.
0
What? That doesn't make sense. You don't miss quests when you log off, just like in the case of Diablo 2.