DiabloFans

Now people are going to complain that the Diablo III team isn't working on the Diablo II patch >.>

After watching Xbox destroy some of the PC industries greatest titles like FEAR and the Elder Scrolls just so they could be multiplatform I would much rather have what PC gaming companies we have left stayed the hell away from console. I don't want streamlined interfaces and toned down game play mechanics just so my favorite series can play well on a controller and TV. Anyone who has a been a huge fan of games that have been hurt by this multiplatform rubbish understand what I mean.

Gametrailers just updated with some new videos from Blizzcon. Not a whole lot of new info but very entertaining and contains information about a lot of systems that didn't quite make the cut. Love the Horadric Cube one.

Blizzcon 08 Panel: Skills

Part 1 -
http://www.gametrailers.com/player/41490.html

Part 2 -
http://www.gametrailers.com/player/41492.html

Part 3 -
http://www.gametrailers.com/player/41494.html


Blizzcon 08 Panel: Runes

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/41496.html


Blizzcon 08 Panel: Death Effects

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/41498.html

Lets say you go with the Storm Skill Tree as your main tree you use. You level up and get a skill point and spend it. You can only spend it on those level 1 Storm Skills. You keep leveling and eventually you have spent 5 skill points on Storm Skills. Well next time you get a skill point you can choose any level 1 skills as well as level 2. Because you have spent enough points in the Storm Skill Tree to be knowledgeable in it you can now use level 2 skills.

Just like how if a piece of armor required you to be level 30 to use for example, your Storm Skill Tree would be required to have a certain amount of skill points used in it to use certain skills. It's not that different from many other games.



Also I want to note, even with all these skills it seems there will be more because I see no sign of Tornado and you see it used in a gameplay video and there's a related modifier. So it seems there's higher skills we still have seen.

We charge people if they want to switch servers or if they want name changes, things that aren't core to the game experience, they're really just optional things that some people want. It takes us some development work to do it, so it makes sense to charge for it. We would never do something like say to get the full game experience, you'll have to pay extra.

Ha, I was right : P This is exactly why I said everyone shouldn't get worked up when we don't even know what they are talking about yet.

Quote from "Kaleban" »

Well, we'll just have to agree to disagree then. Just for your consideration, look at the first couple of posts here:

http://www.diablofans.com/forums/showthread.php?t=15288

And tell me that the descriptions and such don't INSTANTLY remind you of WoW. Or that magic in Sanctuary has gone from Elemental to including Conjures and Arcane.

I'm honestly not bothered by it, Blizzard can do whatever they want, I'm just voicing my opinion so that hopefully, all aspects of a situation are examined. I'll never understand why forums always polarize into people criticizing and people defending, the defenders always seem to have a personal stake in the game development, while the criticizers always seem to want to just tear down.

As a fence sitter, I'll wait and see, while at the same time try to add in constructive criticism which hopefully is taken in good humour.

Lol I'm not really defending it much here, just saying I love what I see so far and pointing out a few Blizzard things as well as having a few laughs.

You don't have to show me those for my consideration though, those are my posts ;). Hope you went over the fourth one and watched the video it shows as well : )

Quote from "Kaleban" »

According to your logic, WoW is based upon Army of Darkness.

http://www.wowhead.com/?search=boomstick

There's a difference between making an homage to a former title, and basing the development of the new title upon another.

Personally I would have preferred they try to make D3 more like D1 and D2, rather than WoW, but that's just me I guess.

Lol, I said Wow is Based upon Diablo? I just pointed to something related in it. Apart from skills being called talents and having "ranks" I don't really see how it's turned into WoW, Having played the previous Diablos and many hours of WoW I can safely say that D3 looks like it's own entity and I'm very glad that we aren't seeing a blatant rehash for the gameplay elements.

Just a few names and references, that can be said for any blizzard title. The gameplay looks all original and Diabloish to me

Quote from "Kaleban" »

I never said they should make no profit. In fact, from an economic perspective, nickel and diming your playerbase is MORE effective than large single purchases because its psychologically less painful to pay small amounts over time than one big lump sum. Its how many economic functions of society work.

Vivendi owns the controlling stake in Activision Blizzard. They also were one of the reasons a game series like the Elder Scrolls is seen as going downhill, since Bethesda is owned by them, and their latest release Oblivion was seen as a critical failure due to its dumbing down from previous games, following the consolization of Morrowind. However, due to the namesake and brand loyalty, it still sold well. Now though, with Bethesda developing Fallout 3, the critics and playerbase are VASTLY more cautious and nervous about the outcome.

The problem with a company having multiple successes, especially on the order of magnitude like WoW, is it starts to color their perceptions. Soon, ALL games made by them will resemble their biggest success, which will cause the playerbase to become alienated, critical consensus will reflect this, and their customer loyalty will dissappear. For some, that happens quicker than others, usually because they can see the trends before they occur.

Remember the dismal failure of Hellgate: London and that it was in large part developed by ex-Blizzard employees who had been on the original Diablo team.

As to your dog collar analogy, that's pretty flawed. What I'm suggesting is not guilty until proven innocent, what I'm saying is assume innocence while preparing for guilt. Based on the last few game releases I've personally seen, such as Spore, the games never live up to their hype, despite the tantalization provided by conventions and movie clips. Game previews are just like movie previews, they showcase the best parts without showing the sordid underbelly.

So in essence, I'm cautious and hope that D3 lives up to my expectations. Given that many of the current design decisions sound like terrible ideas and a step backwards, that's not likely. If I love the game upon release, I'll of course eat my words and apologize publicly lol. But based on what I've seen not just here but among the entire industry, I'm pretty sure my words will stick.

I can completely agree with you with Bethesda. The Elder Scrolls were never meant for console and what they did to that series with Oblivion has changed my stance with them to never buy a title until it's out and reviewed and I've had my friends opinions. Oblivion was a punch in the face to any TES fan.

As for them imitating their biggest success, apart from them putting in a couple easter eggs as always for a blizzard game (slow time and disintegrate being a nod towards SC2 and couple skills appearing from WoW) D3 appears to be very original and a nice breath of fresh air. Sure D2 with improved visuals would be fun, but at the end of the day if I want D2 I'll play D2. Blizzard is notorious for making funny references to their other franchises within each franchise. Most enjoy it, some get pissed and find it threatening.

And Hellgate: London... I don't like talking about that "game". I can agree with this failure. But that much was obvious when we saw that Flagship studios use "from the creators of Diablo" as their main marketing campaign, instead of their actual game. Flagship tripped and fell right from the beginning and was not to be trusted. In actuality very little of Flagships staff had much to do with Diablo.

Spore I never trusted from the beginning and to this day I'm glad I never bought, that game was terrible.

Still I really enjoy seeing these new concepts and innovations Blizzard are coming up with for D3 and I'm looking forward to it. I haven't trusted many companies out there from the start and the ones I have still haven't let me down. So it appears we agree with just about everything but the Diablo 3 situation lol, oh well.

Quote from "Kaleban" »

WoW is addictive yes, but many I know who play consider it work, but cannot give it up because they've already invested so much time into it. What ideas did WoW take away from Diablo I might ask? I was under he impression that MOST of WoW was taken from its namesake Warcraft, I have yet to see Baal/Mephisto as a boss, nor have I met any Barbarians or undead raising Necromancers.

You're right, I suppose there's nothing really that could be considered taken from Diablo in WoW. Blizzard doesn't make little throwbacks to it's previous titles unrelated in it's games.

Quote from "Kaleban" »

So you're against the idea of P2P and DLC, but WON'T complain about it when *laugh* Blizzard is forced into it because other companies have? Excuse my insolence, but Blizzard is one of the most successful game developers out there, with an MMO that generates immense cash flow. I highly doubt they're in the same bracket as other game developers who need to scrape and search for every bit of publisher's money they can find.

Well, just ask yourself what could the term "monetizing features" POSSIBLY refer to. Obviously it means in past games features that were included as part of the base program are to be made a cash cow, whether that means extra storage, character slots or what have you. Which in my mind is simply abuse of the playerbase, with the kind of revenue stream Blizzard has its very little to them to have an extra couple of character slots or a few more pixels of in game storage.

The fact that these might be the types of features "monetized" (and I find it tough to imagine what else that could refer to) is them simply just looking to take the average gamer by the ankles, hold them upside down and vigorously shake them until every last cent tumbles into their holds.

It's not about how rich Blizzard is, they could be pulling in 10x as much as they are from WoW as it is. But if they are not gaining decent revenue from Diablo 3 then why would they make it in the first place. What you're saying is that since they are filthy rich they should just make D3 and make no revenue off it? There is no sound business strategy there. That negates the point of the product to begin with for them, regardless of if they need the money or not.

And when I say "must be preparing to do because other companies have" I mean that in the most sarcastic sense possible.

Do I think they should try to make a profit off D3?
Yes, that's the point of it to begin with for them and secures the future of the franchise.

Do I think they are attempting to cash cow Diablo until they've sent us all into poverty like you seem to believe?
No, Blizzard has always been reasonable to the consumer and it's the reason they are where they are today and they know it. Building trust with your consumers helps your company more than cheating them out of a couple bucks ever will and they know that and is why they are where they are now. It's the same principle with Valve, be honest with your consumers and don't cheat them, in the end you'll have a larger userbase and sell a substantial amount of more products now and in the future. This business tactic has worked for both companies, the two biggest heavy hitters in the PC gaming industry, and unless suddenly the entire management team has been switched with greedy morons who can't see the big picture there's no reason why this won't continue in the future. Do you know why all those other companies are so small comparatively? For the stupid mistakes and errors of short-sighted judgement regarding consumers, over-hyping and over-pricing mediocre (at best) products to try and milk our wallets.

What kind of effect do you think alienating and using the guilty until proven innocent method will have on said business/consumer relationship? It'll drive a wedge between the two and you'll get exactly what you're so adamantly attacking.

Blizzard has always delivered quality products well worth their fee and that's why they're filthy rich. If they do something I'll trust them until they show me a reason not to.

That's just a matter of opinion and choice though. What you suggest is like putting a shock collar on a loyal dog and shocking him repeatedly simply because he has teeth and could potentially bite you in the future, it's not my style.

And no I'm not blindly following them, I will assess any choice they make and choose my stance with them accordingly.

Quote from "sonicpld" »

Ent1ty - i know some really good specialists which could be interested in your current mental state ...

ahaha, good stuff.

Quote from "Ent1ty" »

geta life kiddies...... lmao i played diablo 1 and 2 and LoD and uhm excuse me if im wrong wizard goes a ck tot he basics um which everone wanted a good gamme like d1 BACK TO THE FUCKING BASICS YOU NOOBS...grr you peole piss me off so much..you whine and omplain about the class nme...will it affect you..no one is gunna say
Person1: hey what clas r u?
Person2: I'm a wizard...
Person1:LMAOO WIZARD WHAT A CORNY NAME


noone is gunna do that so get over yourselves and for those that say its the same ol shit if ya havent noticed there were only two totally new classes from D1 to D2 (not including Expansion) if you don't understand me then you might wanna get a brain cuz the barb is pretty much the warrior the rouge is pretty much the zon and the sorcerer is the soreceress. and obviously with gender specific names the only three i can think of for a mage is wizard elementalist or vizjerez...but first of elementalist deals witht he elements not so with a wizard.. a wizard you think of a powerful arcane being not someone making mountains to provide barriers.. so SHUT UP ALL WHO HATE THE CLASS NAME BECAUSE YOU HAVE NO LIVES ITS OK TO HAVE AN OPINION BTU WHEN YOU BITCH AND WINE ITS NOT COOL

Well I think I understand most of that... an entertaining read...

I think I agree? If you are saying you don't mind the class name and people are shouldn't get so worked up over then yes, I agree,

Quote from "Thasador" »

Skill Runes are in full force now and showing great results for Diablo 3. I was able to collect several different runes for skills with great outcomes. Runes such as allowing for multiple shots...increasing damage...and so on. Great stuff here.

Awesome :D, the one I'm most curious about is what kind of modifications runes do for the Slow Time skill. My mind keeps drawing a blank. Perhaps a bubble that slows objects and does damage over time to enemies?

Quote from "Kaleban" »

No I'm really not. I fully understand the situation, I'm just saying that its a slippery slope, and once people accept the idea of DLC and P2P, that a monthly "Battle.Net maintenance fee" is not far behind.

By adamantly reinforcing the idea that the playerbase will not accept that, its possible to avert such a disaster before its considered. However, complaints lodged AFTER THE FACT are impotent at best.

And given the state of the economy, and the industry's move into microtransactions as a money machine, its not hard to imagine Blizzard creating a deception of optional when its actually required.

Monetizing Features doesn't translate to downloadable content and P2P to me, sorry. They haven't asked anyone to accept the idea of either one of those things and I am against DLC (for a fee) and P2P when it comes to Diablo specifically. I'm not going to complain to Blizzard about something they haven't done and that they must be preparing to do because others companies have.

I can understand people voicing their opinion that they are against a monthly fee, hell I completely agree. What I can't understand is people making empty threats and screaming at Blizzard for something they haven't done and have yet to say they are thinking about doing. They didn't once say they are considering DLC or P2P.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Quote from "Schpwuette" »

Yah, for example:

And yet I can't see 'energy twister' anywhere else.

Going back and watching the game play video for the Wizard you do see her use tornadoes to take down some towers and kill enemies. Interesting.

Quote from "Kaleban" »

The problem isn't what they're considering charging for, its that they ARE considering it at all.

Look at Guild Wars. It still is running, off of expansion money, pretty sizable playerbase for a startup, and the only things they charge for are additional things like character slots that are permanent and give no additional advantage to those who do not similarly pay.

I've said in multiple posts that I don't mind pay for content that renders no in game advantage and is more or less cosmetic in nature. But paying a monthly fee is out of the question, given the scope of the game. You pay $15 a month for WoW, and its a massive free-form world with up to 40 man raids and huge diversity.

Diablo will at MOST be a 4 man instanced game and a GUI chat service. Not to mention that I'm not all that impressed by the game's graphics or GFX, when compared to current generation games.

Maybe people's expectations have been lower considering all the dreck that is passed off as games these days, but when you're up against next gen games like Call of Duty, the Tom Clancy stuff, and a bunch of competitors who want your market share, you'd think the game they release would be more than just a graphically different WoW with all instance play in small parties.

If you all want to just sit back and take it be my guest, but I will use my right to say what I want and complain about what I see as a step backward, not forwards, and hopefully effect the outcome positively. If Blizzard decides to go with a P2P format, then they lose me as a customer is all. I'm sure its no big deal to them, they've got 9 million people who are slaves to their power. But I can at least make my point.

You seem to be getting the wrong idea about what was said.

However, the developer did note that Blizzard will likely monetize unknown features of the game. "We are going to monetize features so that we get to make them," said Wilson. "We kind of have to."

They are not saying that they are going to charge a monthly fee for Diablo 3. They are saying there are possibly features (and I mentioned above about those features having no compromise to the game and you yourself mentioned additional character slots) that could require a fee. Actually they never even used the term monthly fee/subscription here and were talking about specifically features the entire time.


For all we know this could be purchasing additional character slots for your account.