- Registered User
Member for 11 years, 5 months, and 27 days
Last active Tue, Apr, 6 2010 16:11:19
- 0 Followers
- 162 Total Posts
- 1 Thank
Apr 8, 2009Maybe unsocketing it will lower the items max durability by a good amount? Prying those gems and stuff out could rellly cause damage to the weapon. That way, you can redo mistakes or upgrade when you want to, but it won't stagnate the economy like Daemaro said.Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
Apr 8, 2009Posted in: Diablo III General DiscussionQuote from "Airandius" »Meh, they are still working at the game, I would really dislike it if we don't have socketed items where you could put in gem anymore. It was what made Diablo 2 a bit different from some other games that looked like Diablo.
I'm sticking with my idea to put in charms in the talisman. It would own, and be much better then to put gems in it.:)
Agreed, we all know that they have so much stuff left to reveal. But the best thing about socketed weapons was runewords. Gems never really did it much for me (minus topazes for mf of course) Since runewords are out, I wouldn't really be that mad if socketed items in general were removed, sad as it is to say
But if gems basically act as charms, then they would just be charms with a different name Also, if I remember correctly, when you mouse over it, doesn't it just say "Chipped star topaz" and nothing else? So maybe different combos of gems will do different things, and you won't know till you mess around with them
Apr 7, 2009As far as I know, we haven't seen any screenshots of socketed items, have we? Or screens of the gems in anything. So what if the chipped star topazes and all them go in the talisman, and it gives you charm-like bonuses that way?Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
It makes sense. They got rid of runewords, and I haven't seen any jewels yet, so what else would there to put in socketed items, other than gems? And unless they change the effects of the gems, they aren't going to do much good in items. So maybe there won't be any socketed items at all, which would leave the gems to go in the talisman...
The holes in the talisman do kinda match up with the size/shape of the gems.
Apr 7, 2009A little research goes a long way. So far they have said we'll have around 4 people per game. So no, nothing like WoW.Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
It will be on Battle.Net, though. It will be different from the old one, but I'm certain you will still be able to communicate with lots of people, just only play with around 4 at a time.
Personally, I hope they up the game to 4 other players, 5 total, so you can have at least one of each class in a party. I dunno how often it would work that way, but it would be nice to have the option.
Apr 7, 2009I'm hoping that when we do get to visit it, it will be a vast trading port in town, and outside town you will have to travel to a bunch of the little islands surrounding it to seek out and destroy enemies that have been attacking the city.Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
And maybe some sunken ships with treasure in them!
Apr 7, 2009Here's an artwork for it.Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
Apr 7, 2009Posted in: Diablo III General DiscussionQuote from "Doppelganger" »Imo.
I don't like the painting of the character in the skill tree, its not really ditracting or anything but it also doesn't add anything, i would much rather see a plain stone motive or something similar as used in the inventory.
The glassy icons (inventory, skilltree and such) are a nice idea, although not really well executed, now they really look like cartoon icons, they need a lot of work. Also, i don't really know if they are even needed, i mean its not like we can't already deduce that the inventory screen is in fact an inventory screen), so maybe tone them down a bit.
Dimensions of items are way off imo, sure they don't need to be realistic (as that would make rings and amulets extremely tiny in comparison to armor and weapons) but still, pants look like that of a midget compared to the giant boots beneath it, the glove looks as if they could cover an entire arm compared to the armor next to it, the amulet looks like a frisbee compared to everything else and the ring looks as if it could kill a person by throwing it at them. Also, i feel that the weaponslot is too much downwards, it feels weird with the human figure between them (which seems to float in relation to them). It still needs a lot of work.
Lastly i would like the demon and angel actually holding the bulbs.
I pretty much agree with everything said here. Hopefully it will change as the game progresses, as I'm sure it will.
Also, anyone else notice that it's a right-handed glove on his left hand?
Apr 7, 2009I hope they put 1handed non-throwable spears into the game. I loved jabazons, but i didn't like that I had to use a throwable jav, since it's actuall melee damage was so low. Plus it couldn't get sockets, so runewords were out. Or still make it throwable, but the difference between throw damage and stab damage not so big so melee combat with it would still be more effective.Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
Apr 7, 2009I'm assuming that since the outdoors are static, when you make a new game the outdoors will already be explored on your map once you have explored them once? Or will you have to try to memorize it hehe.Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
Apr 6, 2009Posted in: Diablo III General DiscussionQuote from "Hyperversity" »No control of story? Your choices - whether they're skill point allocation or positioning of your character - directly affect the outcome of the story in the most direct way in that if you can't beat a certain level then you cannot advance the story.
Whether you advance in the story or not is not a valid arguement for saying you have an effect on the storyline.
What he means is that you would be given a fork in the path to choose. You make one choice, the story progresses one way. If you chose the other way, a whole different story developes. Rememeber the old Goosebumps books? Where they said "If you want to go down the tunnel, turn to page 154" or "If you want to run like a bitch, turn to page 178". Like that.
It's not like "If you want to continue in the story, turn the page" "If you don't want to continue the story, close the book"
Apr 6, 2009Posted in: Diablo III General DiscussionQuote from "Airandius" »I just find D2 wayyyyy to small, when you look at it, it's not all that big. I hope D3 will be longer.
Does anybody know if terrains are actually randomized? Cause I'm still not sure about it. I hope it does randomize.
Yeah, Blizz said it will be more randomized than D2 was, at least in the dungeons. I think they said they are still working on exactly how to randomize the outdoors.
- To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Apr 5, 2010Posted in: NewsQuote from "Bridge_Burner" »A superstition I had way back when I was playing a lot and had my mf characters around 2002 was to never make a town portal on the same level as a boss. So for example I always did meph runs and I would set my tp on the durance level 2, never level 3. Don't know if that ever acctually did anything though! haha
Lmao, yeah I did that too. And some people would get HEATED if you opened one up in Baal's Chamber.
Apr 3, 2010Posted in: NewsQuote from "Gulliver" »Also I remember that while doing MF boss runs I wouldn't let my merc do the final blow because I feared that the MF bonus wouldn't apply in that case. That can't be really be called a superstition though because we know from facts that your MF does apply for merc kills too. Or am I wrong?
Actually, if a merc makes the kill, he gets your mf plus his. So it's actually a little better to let him make the kill
Nov 19, 2009As angry as I am am about all the delays with the next patch and D3, I keep telling myself to remember Fable.Posted in: News
I followed Fable for YEARS, thinking about how awesome it was gonna be. When it finally came out... it sucked. Hard. Maybe to some people that hadn't followed it from it's infant stages it seemed like a good game. But if you went back and looked at what it was supposed to be, it just flat out wasn't. Why? Because they realized that what they had promised would take a looong time to do right. Instead of pushing the release date back and working to release their vision in all it's glory, they chopped the game to hell, and released the aborted version. Look up Project Ego (Fable's original name) and see what I mean. It will anger you.
That being said, I agree that Blizzard just creates hype then leaves us in the dark, but I just tell myself to be patient. If they release it too soon, it will be like Fable and fall into obscurity. No one wants that. I want a game that will be fun to play years from now, not some crap slapped together to make a deadline. It will be worth it in the end...
- To post a comment, please login or register a new account.