• 0

    posted a message on How Do You Think Diablo Will Return?
    No. Don't come back, Diablo. Please, die. :)
    [shotdead]
    Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Getting rid of a old class?
    Quote from "ryanmax24" »
    include LOD in your comment it makes 7.


    Exclude it (as he did) and it is 5.
    LoD is an expansion. Obviously, if they do 7 characters in the original, 2+ will be extra hard in the expansion. This is super-advanced long-term thinking, guys.
    Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on mercenary ideas
    Can you edit in a poll? :cute:
    But anyways, I don't really care whether or not mercs are back.
    Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on I Hope They Make A Boss Who..
    This is dumb. I smash my head into my desk.
    Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Diablo III - More Details
    Quote from "Kilvoctu" »

    Words are important, Didn't your English teacher tell you that?
    And if you're really a Diablo fans, the worst-case scenario would most logically be 'you'll get used to the system'. Besides, Blizzard won't screw up. It's impossible.


    Drops seems to be more slang than a proper word.
    I don't recall Blizzard North to have used the word "drops" either, before the "influence of WoW".
    Also, the worst case scenario is that the game will be a screw-up, and we won't play, Diablo fan or no. But, as you say, it's unlikely, to say the least, that that scenario will occur.
    Posted in: News & Announcements
  • 0

    posted a message on Wondering about health orbs
    Quote from "rejam" »
    Just because it is Diablo doesn't mean it has to be mindless.
    I am all for requiring some thought and tactics if you get through to Hell.

    Sometimes having to retreat a little, use different abilities, a few tactics etc. instead of mowing down everything, while spamming potions, until you get to a boss sounds appealing to me.
    It is Hell after all and by having it play a little differently to NM and, in turn, Normal adds more variety and longevity.

    Potion cooldown and the limited healthorbs could help provide this.
    Sure, if you played like always, taking a lot of damage in the process, you would be required to make more trips to town to heal, but that would just be one playstyle. Others may play it safer, taking less damage, so they can get by on the healthorbs and a potion here and there, thus requiring fewer trips to town.

    Can I have more playstyles please, instead of spammable potions?


    And as Polo said, I also think having some areas where TP are unavailable would be interesting. I think it is hard to ever feel in danger or get nervous about tackling a set of mobs when you are always free to click a button and run away instantly.


    You have to understand, the characters would have to be greatly improved in order to fight without potions and TP. Especially for boss fights. In Diablo 2, I am certain that I couldn't have beaten the game without the aforementioned two.
    Also, TP was, in effect, disabled at the area where the ancients resided. It's been done before, with half-successful results; the player could just TP right before the ancients anyways.
    Running away is, and has always been an option in DIII. If not with TP, it is usually possible to just escape into the previous level.
    Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on What entirely new character class would you like to see in D3?
    Elemental Magi FtW!
    (Same thing as sorc, but looks way cooler, with a big, colossal robe/cloak, a hidden face, glowing red eyes, a halo, a devil's tail, an eagle's wings, sunglasses, a scarf, one of those ninja-cloths that covers the mouth, and a unicorn horn!)
    So_badass TT_TT.
    :cute:
    Posted in: Unannounced Class
  • 0

    posted a message on Does anyone feel the game going to disappoint?
    Quote from "Raazul" »
    a little gameplay trailer showing off 2 characters, 2 weapons, 1 set of armor, a few enemies and a handful of spells...


    Understatement of the minute.
    Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Flagship Studios Closing
    Quote from "Oakwarrior" »
    Generous? With what?


    Generous with... nothingness! Ohohohohohoho:cute:
    Posted in: General Discussion (non-Diablo)
  • 0

    posted a message on Flagship Studios Closing
    Quote from "Oakwarrior" »
    Congratulate them for what? Being greedy? Overly ambitious?:(


    I wouldn't say that, rather, overconfident, perhaps.
    Posted in: General Discussion (non-Diablo)
  • 0

    posted a message on Does anyone feel the game going to disappoint?
    Quote from "EcK" »
    seriously, could ppl stop talking about 'how a game will be' based upon not much to nothing. 'i know it's true, i FEEL IT'
    NAH! WRONG! BAD BAD ! Feelings don't make SENSE, so stop being an emo and create constructive posts that could help blizz into making a better game. Nobody likes a whiner.


    ...
    Le Sigh.
    The line between constructive posts and whining is paper thin, and this is not a constructive post.

    I seriously do not want to debunk another post, but here goes...
    It's NOT based upon "not much to nothing."
    They released a GAMEPLAY VIDEO about GAMEPLAY. There is a TREND that GAMEPLAY VIDEOS will reflect GAMEPLAY for the GAME. [SO extremely irritated]
    Those that post sh!t like I "FEEL IT" are obviously not posting the right thing.
    Those that post reasons for their statements ARE. Although I do not agree with those that disagree with the current art direction, I do not deny that some of them do NOT base their statements solely on so-called "Feelings". Degrading well founded statements to whining is hardly constructive.
    I WANNA FEEL THE THUNDER I WANNA SCREAM! [shotdead]
    :cute:
    Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Does anyone feel the game going to disappoint?
    Quote from "Kalyptein" »
    "(often initial capital letter) noting or pertaining to a style of literature characterized by a gloomy setting, grotesque, mysterious, or violent events, and an atmosphere of degeneration and decay: 19th-century gothic novels."

    "Prominent features of Gothic fiction include terror (both psychological and physical), mystery, the supernatural, ghosts, haunted houses and Gothic architecture, castles, darkness, death, decay, doubles, madness, secrets and hereditary curses." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gothic_novel

    Yeah I'll give you an over reliance on Gothic Architecture (although I still think it features a fair bit in D2 and hence why I find it to be an important factor in D3 - which is there).

    I really thought that the opening dungeon met these criteria. This is of course subjective, as is your opinion if you happen to disagree which makes both of our arguments moot.

    edit: you lot really don't seem to specify on what you think is right or wrong (which makes it impossible to refute any of your claims since you actually make none). Using the general trend on this forum I think you are both in the "WoW hater" camp, correct me if I am wrong please.


    What? I am in the "WoW hater" camp because I pick out an objective mistake?
    OK, here's my elaboration.
    Gothic has many definitions. The one used in context of Diablo 3 is gloomy/horrifying.
    Gothic architecture is a STYLE OF ART from the 12th to 16th century, which has nothing to do with neither gloom nor horror.
    This is NOT subjective.

    I searched and could not find any of those 14 definitions to reference the size of shoulderpads, green light sources in dungeons, or a lack of bunnies and rainbows during the Gothic era. It is 100% OK for some people to find fault in all of these artistic details in Diablo III, but "gothic" is not the word they are looking for as best I can tell.

    Oh. My. God.

    Firstly, to clarify, I think that the direction that DIII is absolutely A-OK!
    However, there are too many posts (on both sides, to be fair) arguing for the current art direction that are just so... asinine (tee-hee asinine)!

    This post is (A) Feigning ignorance to post incorrect claims or (B) Being ignorant. I'm telling it as it is right now, so I apologize that it seems insolent - I'm an impudent person (though I like to call it bluntness, honesty, et cetera).

    There are two ways to show the asininity (tee-hee asininity) of this post.

    A (parody)
    Cute
    I searched and could not find any of those X definitions to reference the rainbows, pink fluffy ears, or a lack of gruesomeness and manslaughter. It is 100% OK for some people to find faults in fluffy wuffy bunnies, but "cute" is not a word they are looking for as best I can tell.
    B (debunk)
    Big shoulderpads supposedly look unrealistic and consequently cartoony, which contradicts gothic.
    Green light is not traditionally gothic.
    Bunnies and rainbows are not traditionally gothic.
    Yes, gothic is the word they are looking for. It means gloomy/horrifying, which is what they want in the game.
    These points should be understood and accepted before further debate.
    Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on anyone annoyed with the little floating numbers?
    So basically, toggle = end of story. :cute:
    [/thread]
    Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Does anyone feel the game going to disappoint?
    Quote from "Kalyptein" »
    And yet you still don't give your own definition. My original reference to gothic architecture (which really is the primary thing in anything "Gothic" since it's the setting) was because someone earlier said D3 did not feel "Gothic", when infact it's full of all things Gothic, unless you're cryptic, secret meaning of Gothic is something completly different to mine.

    If this debate is going to go any further you're going to have to explain yourself a wee bit instead of just saying "no, thats wrong".


    I'm not saying this subjectively.

    Objectively, the title "gothic architecture" doesn't infer that the architecture is "gothic".

    So, I can "just" say "no, that[']s wrong".

    EDIT: OK, here's my elaboration.
    Gothic has many definitions. The one used in context of Diablo 3 is gloomy/horrifying.
    Gothic architecture is a STYLE OF ART from the 12th to 16th century, which has nothing to do with neither gloom nor horror.
    Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Flagship Studios Closing
    Quote from "ollo" »
    No, no, time = money, and therefore you can proof mathematically that women are evil:
    http://txfx.net/2004/09/11/women-evil/


    Women are evil, it doesn't have to be proven mathematically. :cute:
    However, according to Einstein's fourth law of psychology, evil is akin to badass. :cute:
    Posted in: General Discussion (non-Diablo)
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.