I am in total agreement with SFJake here. They surely haven't been in full production of Diablo 3 for the last 6 years, its been talked about, thought about, and looked at. If they wanted Diablo 3 to be out earlier, it would have been out by now, but they had other priorities for a new type of game to their company (WoW as an MMO). To be honest, while I am not a big MMO fan (as I discovered only after having a lvl 80 DK decked out with Naxx 25 tank gear), I do think there is a lot to love about WoW if MMOs are your kind of game. Sure they have had some balance issues, but they were new to MMOs, and its coming along quite nicely if you ask me.
As far as this whole "Nothing new in Starcraft 2" crap is rediculous. What exactly did you expect? They have come up with a LOT of new concepts for different units and upgrades. Never once in SC1 do I recall there being a drop pod system. How about the ability to get resources faster (with things such as the MULEs and Dark Pylons)? Limited high resource mineral fields to ACTUALLY give you something on the field worth fighting over. Destructables? Units capable of scaling ledges without a dropship? Warp-ins? There are a TON of new things for the basic game alone, and the campaign is TOTALLY revamped now. Have you even watched any of the SC2 panels from Blizzcon 08 or are you just guessing? Not to mention they are adding on to the story line, something I have been DYING to know more about since I finished Brood War. As it stands now, SC2 looks like its going to be a major success.
And SFJake makes a very good point, how many damned good gaming companies are still around? I rented TONS of console games this summer from Blockbuster (since they have that deal where you can rent games and swap them out before their due, not to mention you can cheat their services and keep games an extra week) and I have been completely floored at how bad video games are becoming. Ghostbusters: such a brilliant game to create now that they have the proper tech for it, and they couldn't even fix half of the stupid bugs. Half the game is WAY too easy until you get the final level and then its just WHOA. Then you come to the last boss and he is piss poor simple. Rainbow 6 Vegas? That game didn't stay in my house for more than 2 days. I mainly rented it because it looked cool and it had coop (I play a lot with my friends). The coop was so piss poor shitty: you don't even get the story in coop mode its just you killing people... Force Unleashed? Its as if they didn't even test half of that game... The only two games I have played this summer that were anywhere near worth it have been Gears 2 and Prototype... I remember the days where a good number of good games existed, now half of those games that still exist have been changed so much its not even fun anymore. Blizzard is one of the last few gaming companies in existance that still bring hope of good games for this generation. I'm not even sure if I am excited about the games that we will see in the next decade when I look at the crap thats coming out any more...
That being said, let Blizzard make their damn games and be happy that Blizzard is even still around! Out of my two favorite gaming companies from my childhood (Blizzard and Bullfrog), only one of them still exists to even make good games, and I am very grateful for it.
I personally enjoyed the idea of running around killing topless titty monsters. Then again I was about 7 when Diablo 1 came out, and I had never really saw real boobs at that age. I look back at it and laugh, but it was kind of a novelty experience. In retrospect, it really fits the concept of the succubi quite well. The classic succubi lore is that they are out to seduce men. What would be more seductive, yet decently appropriate, than a demon chick showing up topless? Diablo 2 had this content as well, though it wasn't incorporated into a repeated character (mobs). It was specifically Andariel and Lilith who showed a little nipple action, which made sense being the commander of the succubi army and the mother of all succubi. I mean, its not like any of them ever had their down stairs showing (ever). Its a mature rated game with mature rated themes, and if parents don't want their kids seeing boobs then they wont buy their kids the game. That just means less kids to worry about.
I mean think about it. Godfather has some nipples in appropriate places (strip clubs). Age of Conan went far and beyond by allowing you to make your own character completely topless, on top topless NPCs. They all actually fit it pretty well for a mature rated game in my opinion. The Conan universe would have not been a real Conan universe without nipples (ever seen those comics?). Godfather just shot for realism. If your a mobster going to the titty bar, you expect to see titties, not chicks with clothes on or tape across their nipples.
There are a few things that scare me about western ideology. Here in America, its okay to show a child horrific murder, blood and guts splattering, and people getting ripped to bits (which is something a person should never really be forced to see). What just happens to not be okay is showing a child breasts, something they probably already saw as a child (their mom's), and will definitely see in the future. Girls are inevitably going to get them, and guys are inevitably going to look at them. If you child really wanted to use the internet to see boobs, they could always do what I did at that age and find a real porn site instead of whacking off to a video game. I thought it was pretty lame that Blizzard had to change WoW's succubus model to something more clothed (even though you could probably see more than that of a real girl by simply visiting a local beach or water park) just because of too many parental complaints. Just like I don't get why its okay to see a girl in a moderate swimsuit, but when you see a girl in moderate set of bra and panties, its absolutely unnecessary. Leave it to America, thats all I have to say about that one.
In all honesty though, wouldn't you be curious to see how boobs jiggle if Diablo 3 really will be using the Havok engine? Havok physics ftw!
So, I just saw the closed thread about people crying "Diablo 3 is becoming WoW". I personally don't share that shallow belief with anybody who has it. I personally do not like the approach the last post had, for all it did was complain about people's complaining. Instead of creating a post to mimic that tactic of QQ prevention, I have decided to create an informative list of facts and concepts to debunk the myth that "Diablo 3 is becoming WoW".
First thing is first, the high majority of WoW's mechanics were taken from Diablo 2, improved upon, and tweaked to work more for an MMO.
The only real things Diablo 3 and WoW have in common (that were not borrowed from Diablo 2 in the first place) are the Auto-stat system, respecs, dynamic combat UI, item tranfers (such as shared stash), and more use of color.
The Auto-stat system is not necessarily being stolen from WoW. WoW was actually going to let you choose your stats in the beginning (much like Diablo 2). However, the developers decided that for both Diablo 2 and WoW, the only real purpose of choosing stats was to break your character. Instead of implementing a stat respec as many games have in the past, they just decided on the auto-stat system. If WoW never existed, we would probably still have auto-stats.
WoW was not even close to the first game to have talent respecs. Many games came up with this system because they found that it was too easy to break your character. Many people also wanted to be able to play around with skills without having to reroll (which many people, including Blizzard, saw as a hassle and flaw in Diablo 2). Because of this, Blizzard implemented respecs into WoW. Even if WoW never existed, we would probably still have respecs.
WoW's UI style is probably one of the best things that will ever happen to Diablo. No longer will we be limited to our left/right mouse buttons; we now have the ability to make our combat significantly more dynamic without having to switch skills before using them. In no way or form is dynamic combat a WoW signature, everybody these days wants more dynamic combat for these kinds of games. Even if WoW never existed, we would probably still have this UI.
Diablo 2 always gave us the ability to share items between our own characters in multiplayer (thus allowing for twinking and muling), it was just a big hastle having to go through another player (or a second account) to do so. WoW, being an MMO with modern technology, easily fixed this issue via their mailing system which allowed for additional player-to-player item transfer as well. Blizzard plans to allow us to share items between characters not because it was was in WoW, but because it is more convenient and is less risky than trusting another player (as people would do anyway if the item sharing issue was not fixed). Making you go through another player just to share items with your other characters leaves a lot of room open for griefing, something Blizzard intends to cut down on in Diablo 3. The only way to truly prevent item sharing in Diablo 3 would be to make all items "soulbound", thus adding to Diablo 3's similarities to WoW and destroying the trading aspect of Diablo. If WoW never existed, we would still either be getting item sharing or doing it the old fashioned way.
Many people have taken one look at the signifigantly little amount of Diablo 3 content Blizzard has released, and immediatly state that the color scheme is becoming less "gothic" and more like WoW. The first thing you have to realize is that when going from 2D to 3D, that same classic Diablo 1 and 2 style no longer works as well as many would like it. WoW has nothing to do with that. The second thing one must realise is that all we have seen are the early parts of the game. Also, 99% of Diablo 1 took place in inside environments. The first three acts of Diablo 2 were absolutely full of color, especially the new outside environments. Diablo 3 needs color even more than Diablo 2, and so far they have did a pretty good job of it. None of this has anything to do with WoW. Lastly for color, that old and ugly "green hue" everybody sees in the WWI Gameplay Video (that many have comlained about specifically) is dead and gone. As of Blizzcon 2008, the Cathedral looks as it does in this video: very dark with warm lighting, using the green hue in 2 appropriate places linked to King Leodric to make it look spooky. As one can see, Diablo 3 now seems to really be stepping up on the "dark and scary" factor in comparison to what we have seen in the past.
As you can see, I have spent a lot of time thinking upon this subject. I hope this post has brought light to many of the issues that still (somehow) exist within the community in regards to Diablo 3 becoming too much like WoW. All facts about the developers and their decisions (such as WoW origionally having stat-choice) have all been confirmed via Q&As, Video Interviews, and other random WWI/Blizzcon Videos. Please pass this information to anybody who still believes that Diablo 3 is becoming too much like WoW so we can all move to a new era of intelligent belief. Thank you for your time.
Leonard Boyarsky says on the Ray Gresko and Leonard Boyarsky Video Interview (at 2:05), that they are looking into ways to transfer items between characters, and he particularly mention from a higher level character to a lower level one. This may not be a direct conformation, but you can almost tell just by the way they talk about it that they are definately for sharing items between characters without the need for two separate accounts (be it your own or with a friend's).
And tell me exactly why that would necessarily screw trading. It happened before on D1 and D2, though it was more complicated and ran risks if you tried it with people who could not be trusted. They recognize that there is NO way to prevent muling/twinking without destroying trade with a "soulbound" type feature, and in fact do not seem to have a problem with muling/twinking existing.
This will not destroy trade, it did not before and will not now. Sure, people might horde items they wan't for an upcoming character, why not? That person found it, s/he has all rights to decide what s/he wants to do with it.
You guys fail to amaze me. Here comes my two cents.
First thing is first, the WD is not Necro 2.0. First off, the necro didn't have half of the crazy spells the WD has, such as Skull of Flame, Firebats, Plague of Toads, etc. This whole Necro = WD idea is based on individual ignorance passed around as theory, and all these sheep just seem to follow. Your basis of them being too similar is that they BOTH use a form of black magic, they both summon something, and that stupid wall of zombies skill (and for all we know that might not make it into final production for that very reason).
The big problem is, you cease to realize that they are truly very different. Necro had a lot to do with Bones and Necromancy. He summoned skellys and ressurected fallen creatures to do his bidding. His spells were mostly all some sort of bone or poison attack. He was also the leading Debuff class.
So far, Witch Doctor hardly has a debuff other than Mass Confusion and Horrify, which are more like offensive and time buying spells as opposed to debuffs. Also, where Necro focuses on direct bone and poison spell, the Witch Doctor focuses on very indirect and somewhat mundane magic at times. He uses a lot of Fire techniques, something unheard of to the entirely black magic Necro.
To be very honest they would fit just fine side by side, especially if Blizzard updated Necro to be something a little more modernized to fit the Diablo 3 title. They can and honestly may easily be implemented together simultaniously. Blizzard has already stated (in order to calm Necro fans) that they are definately looking toward him as a possible Expansion character, they just don't want him in the opening line up.
And as for this whole " Necro is 120" crap... Even if the Necro was 120, I bet he could still be moving along just fine. Hes a fucking Necro for christ sakes, half the necros from TONS of series turn into an effin Lich. They just don't die of old age from working with the Necromantic arts. This could easily be associated with the game. That, or you know they could just make A NEW NECRO. Its not like there is only one... There are entire sects of these people and we will probably see a few Necro NPCs when DIablo 3 first comes out. There is absolutely nothing stopping them from making a new character (lorically) to fit the same class as our previous well known white haired hero. Plus they would have to make a chick as well, so they might as well.
As you can probably tell, I highly doubt Necro is down for the count just yet. I wish people would have a little fucking faith in the developers for once instead of crying about how "Blizz ruined my Necro with WD". Your points are moot. They can still easily exist together, in fact Jay Wilson has even mentioned that they are making the Witch Doctor in a way that they CAN exist together. Its part of their design plan to leave a very sweet (necro) option open for later expansions if they choose to bring him out. If they are ALREADY planning ahead for this, chances are they won't let that go to waste...
First I want to start by congradulating Kanastag, you are officially the first person under the age of 16 that I have respected in the last year. On that not, it's time for my two dirty pennies, this has gone to far.
In all honestly, I have no reason to find Blizzard incapable of a feat such as D3 on a console. They are Blizzard, they can do anything. Its like Disney World magical every day in their offices. Look at WoW, they successfully made the most addictive drug America has ever seen, and on top of that they can't test for it, it can't be sniffed out by dogs, it has not/will never catch judicial attention, it can be given to children, AND it is relatively cheep and easy to make...
I'm sorry, that was a terrible joke, let me put on my serious face.
Without at least a mouse and keyboard (as opposed to a controller), Diablo 3 would not make any type of decent console game. It in no way or form has to do with limited commands: using a classic Phantasy Star Online style controller setup (where the command of your primary buttons change when holding down a trigger), you could easily get 16 different commands that were simple to figure out and remember (by utilizing all 4 buttons now found on the top of both X-box and Playstation controllers with the same style system).
The most epic downfall of Diablo 3 as a console game is its point and click nature, one of the biggest things that make it Diablo. Even if you were to control all movement with an analog stick, you would still need a pointing device in the UI for certain spells and abilities. I mean, you sure don't expect a console to read your mind and cast Leap Attack, Hydra, or Skull of Flames exactly where you want it, do you? Any other targeting system other than a point and click would break the game or just be lame as hell.
So you think a pointing device should be implemented into this theoretical console version? That is a mistake. You are either back to point and click or your second stick controls targeting while primary stick controls movement. Either way its going to be stupid on a console, every game I have seen with point and click on an analog stick is crap. Sorry, but Halo Wars sucked fat sack, mainly because it was a console game. That game would have made way more sense on a computer. Even Blizzard themselves tried and failed a similar system, anyone remember Starcraft 64? It was crap compared to the original PC version. Asian kids must have got a kick out of that one. Using an analog stick as a mouse is like using a rubber glove as a condom, why would you try to mimic something that is already being made? Unless your just that desperate for a condom...
That being said, its mouse and keyboard or go home, making it viable for only ONE console in production, the PS3, as it is the only console that will accept a mouse and keyboard. The cheapest PS3 isn't exactly cheap starting at $399 new. Not to mention if you want those nice graphics your going to need a decent tv. Lets not forget the mouse and keyboard that doesn't come with your PS3. Or you could just drive to your local Best Buy and pick up a half decent Asus laptop that would run Diablo 3, play and burn CD/DVD, let you surf the web, or turn it into a workhorse for any sick computer fetish you may have (from photoshoping to hacking). Tell me exactly where you got your money's worth taking the PS3 route. It seems people these days tend to lack a sense of value.
Blizzard has made good games ever since the first of their games I started playing when I was younger (Diablo 1 was my first). A friend of mine in like third grade showed me it, and while we were young we played the hell out of that game just because we had nothing better to do. I have a lot of confidence in what Blizzard is working on now when it comes to both SC2 AND Diablo 3. Both were games I (and many others) have dreamed of since the last games, and now those dreams are becoming a reality. Now I have continued the legacy by bringing one of my friends (who hasn't played games in forever) back into the gaming world with Diablo 2, and he is just about as ready for D3 as I am.
As far as specific Diablo 3 things I would personally like to comment on:The fact that you are actually making this. Its been a long wait, and honestly you let technology progress just far enough to make Diablo the game it has always deserved to be. Now you can make a real gem of a game.
You have revamped every aspect of this game so much its incredible. Just being in 3D makes this new Diablo 3 a beast. The images have revamped, even if some seem too bright and colorful, you can really get that feel that evil is invading the world in many ways, some areas just aren't as heavily effected yet. I think in time you will all do your part in making the game really feel like evil is here, and it awaits us all.
The characters so far are pretty spiffy. Can't say I am a big fan of Barb or Wizard (never been my kinds of classes), but the WD is really cool. I really can't wait to see your ranged character, all of us ranger lovers are awaiting something truly epic, and epic is Blizzard's middle name. I'm not sure what awaits for our other class, maybe it will even beat WD and your ranger, especially were it to be something like the Druidish looking figure from your previous art. I am currently loving leveling my werewolf on D2.
The new mechanics are killer. I seem to see more monsters with much better AIs and battle strategies, and tons of new abilities that will make killing those monsters all more fun and dynamic. Death things are what makes Diablo spin, and seeing all the new death art is fantastic. I hope to see tons of fun kills in D3 with the new abilties and physics engines.
All in all, I would just like to thank all of the Blizzard crew for their hard work and dedication that they have put into not only Diablo 3, but all the games they have made to this day (even though I think WoW really didn't meet par for my Bliz expectations). Your team has amazing talent, and for that reason alone I trust Diablo 3 will be the best game it could be. Besides, thirds a charm.
I am in no means expecting Diablo 3 to be everything I wish for. Actually, thats kind of a lie, I really just want Blizzard to make the damned game so I can play it however they decide to make it, but other than that, no. Instead, I tend to try to get in to the shell of the diablo 2 developers. I watch the art, watch the interviews, read the blue posts, and decide for myself what I think Diablo 3 will represent. By trying to get in to the skin of the animal, I better predict what I think Diablo 3 will turn out to be.
I am not trying to tell you that you are wrong, simply that I personally feel you are looking at this process all wrong. Blizzard doesn't hope to make a new Diablo 2, they hope to make Diablo 3, a much richer and exciting game with more dynamic gameplay and features that reflect the industry standards that Blizzard feels work well in many games, whether they made them or not.
Diablo 2 was a game that forced you to figure out a very specific talent style that really worked. Diablo 3, as Blizzard has mentioned AND shown to us through interviews and game play demonstrations, will be all about making the game fell how you want it to feel, even if you messed up and want to go back and change something. THAT is why they are implementing respecs, not because they feel it is some ackward band-aid fix to rushing, though in a sense respecs does fix both issues. The biggest issue of Diablo 2 was merely that it didn't reach out to enough players, which they are trying to improve on with Diablo 3.
While for some, respecs may seem like a burden to this game, I assure you they will play into the game just fine. I think it is safe to assume that EVERYBODY on the Diablo 3 developing team plays video games, even if a few of them tend to stick to Blizzard games. They know the industry, they know the game style, and they know what works for everyone and makes games like this fun. THAT is why they want to give us respecs in our new Diablo.
I hate to mention this, especially this being my second post, but I think everyone on this forum is too wrapped up on what is "Diablo". Anyone who says "Respecing would not be Diablo" makes a fool of themselves in my eyes every time I see it.
I started playing Diablo when a second Diablo was a joke of a notion. Back in those days, there was NO TALENT TREES. Though I quit Diablo long before Diablo 2 came out, were I part of the D2 discussion (much as we are the D3 discussion), I would have utmost and entirely shunned the idea of a talent tree to begin with. In the first Diablo, you did have some stupid tree telling you what you can and cannot do. In fact, all three classes were capable of of all types of combat, however each class was stronger in one particular style.
The point I am making is that, though at the time I would have shunned the idea of talent trees to begin with (for the same fact that it woudln't feel "Diablo"), it actually turned out pretty darned fun. That being said, I think we ALL need to stfu about what is "Diablo" and what is not. That is not for us to decide, that is for BLIZZARD to decide. The day Blizzard hires you, then you can decide what is "Diablo" or not, but until then spare us the head ache. It does little for us all, respec is coming and Bashiok confirmed it. If respecs are not "Diablo" enough for you, than maybe you are the one who doesn't know what "Diablo" really is.
That being said, I think we should all accept what Blizz is offering us. Diablo 2 changed the way the game was played forever in comparison to Diablo, and if Diablo 3 changes the whole game again, do you really think it will mean that the game will be any less fun?
1
As far as this whole "Nothing new in Starcraft 2" crap is rediculous. What exactly did you expect? They have come up with a LOT of new concepts for different units and upgrades. Never once in SC1 do I recall there being a drop pod system. How about the ability to get resources faster (with things such as the MULEs and Dark Pylons)? Limited high resource mineral fields to ACTUALLY give you something on the field worth fighting over. Destructables? Units capable of scaling ledges without a dropship? Warp-ins? There are a TON of new things for the basic game alone, and the campaign is TOTALLY revamped now. Have you even watched any of the SC2 panels from Blizzcon 08 or are you just guessing? Not to mention they are adding on to the story line, something I have been DYING to know more about since I finished Brood War. As it stands now, SC2 looks like its going to be a major success.
And SFJake makes a very good point, how many damned good gaming companies are still around? I rented TONS of console games this summer from Blockbuster (since they have that deal where you can rent games and swap them out before their due, not to mention you can cheat their services and keep games an extra week) and I have been completely floored at how bad video games are becoming. Ghostbusters: such a brilliant game to create now that they have the proper tech for it, and they couldn't even fix half of the stupid bugs. Half the game is WAY too easy until you get the final level and then its just WHOA. Then you come to the last boss and he is piss poor simple. Rainbow 6 Vegas? That game didn't stay in my house for more than 2 days. I mainly rented it because it looked cool and it had coop (I play a lot with my friends). The coop was so piss poor shitty: you don't even get the story in coop mode its just you killing people... Force Unleashed? Its as if they didn't even test half of that game... The only two games I have played this summer that were anywhere near worth it have been Gears 2 and Prototype... I remember the days where a good number of good games existed, now half of those games that still exist have been changed so much its not even fun anymore. Blizzard is one of the last few gaming companies in existance that still bring hope of good games for this generation. I'm not even sure if I am excited about the games that we will see in the next decade when I look at the crap thats coming out any more...
That being said, let Blizzard make their damn games and be happy that Blizzard is even still around! Out of my two favorite gaming companies from my childhood (Blizzard and Bullfrog), only one of them still exists to even make good games, and I am very grateful for it.
1
I mean think about it. Godfather has some nipples in appropriate places (strip clubs). Age of Conan went far and beyond by allowing you to make your own character completely topless, on top topless NPCs. They all actually fit it pretty well for a mature rated game in my opinion. The Conan universe would have not been a real Conan universe without nipples (ever seen those comics?). Godfather just shot for realism. If your a mobster going to the titty bar, you expect to see titties, not chicks with clothes on or tape across their nipples.
There are a few things that scare me about western ideology. Here in America, its okay to show a child horrific murder, blood and guts splattering, and people getting ripped to bits (which is something a person should never really be forced to see). What just happens to not be okay is showing a child breasts, something they probably already saw as a child (their mom's), and will definitely see in the future. Girls are inevitably going to get them, and guys are inevitably going to look at them. If you child really wanted to use the internet to see boobs, they could always do what I did at that age and find a real porn site instead of whacking off to a video game. I thought it was pretty lame that Blizzard had to change WoW's succubus model to something more clothed (even though you could probably see more than that of a real girl by simply visiting a local beach or water park) just because of too many parental complaints. Just like I don't get why its okay to see a girl in a moderate swimsuit, but when you see a girl in moderate set of bra and panties, its absolutely unnecessary. Leave it to America, thats all I have to say about that one.
In all honesty though, wouldn't you be curious to see how boobs jiggle if Diablo 3 really will be using the Havok engine? Havok physics ftw!
1
- Many people have taken one look at the signifigantly little amount of Diablo 3 content Blizzard has released, and immediatly state that the color scheme is becoming less "gothic" and more like WoW. The first thing you have to realize is that when going from 2D to 3D, that same classic Diablo 1 and 2 style no longer works as well as many would like it. WoW has nothing to do with that. The second thing one must realise is that all we have seen are the early parts of the game. Also, 99% of Diablo 1 took place in inside environments. The first three acts of Diablo 2 were absolutely full of color, especially the new outside environments. Diablo 3 needs color even more than Diablo 2, and so far they have did a pretty good job of it. None of this has anything to do with WoW. Lastly for color, that old and ugly "green hue" everybody sees in the WWI Gameplay Video (that many have comlained about specifically) is dead and gone. As of Blizzcon 2008, the Cathedral looks as it does in this video: very dark with warm lighting, using the green hue in 2 appropriate places linked to King Leodric to make it look spooky. As one can see, Diablo 3 now seems to really be stepping up on the "dark and scary" factor in comparison to what we have seen in the past.
As you can see, I have spent a lot of time thinking upon this subject. I hope this post has brought light to many of the issues that still (somehow) exist within the community in regards to Diablo 3 becoming too much like WoW. All facts about the developers and their decisions (such as WoW origionally having stat-choice) have all been confirmed via Q&As, Video Interviews, and other random WWI/Blizzcon Videos. Please pass this information to anybody who still believes that Diablo 3 is becoming too much like WoW so we can all move to a new era of intelligent belief. Thank you for your time.1
And tell me exactly why that would necessarily screw trading. It happened before on D1 and D2, though it was more complicated and ran risks if you tried it with people who could not be trusted. They recognize that there is NO way to prevent muling/twinking without destroying trade with a "soulbound" type feature, and in fact do not seem to have a problem with muling/twinking existing.
This will not destroy trade, it did not before and will not now. Sure, people might horde items they wan't for an upcoming character, why not? That person found it, s/he has all rights to decide what s/he wants to do with it.
3
First thing is first, the WD is not Necro 2.0. First off, the necro didn't have half of the crazy spells the WD has, such as Skull of Flame, Firebats, Plague of Toads, etc. This whole Necro = WD idea is based on individual ignorance passed around as theory, and all these sheep just seem to follow. Your basis of them being too similar is that they BOTH use a form of black magic, they both summon something, and that stupid wall of zombies skill (and for all we know that might not make it into final production for that very reason).
The big problem is, you cease to realize that they are truly very different. Necro had a lot to do with Bones and Necromancy. He summoned skellys and ressurected fallen creatures to do his bidding. His spells were mostly all some sort of bone or poison attack. He was also the leading Debuff class.
So far, Witch Doctor hardly has a debuff other than Mass Confusion and Horrify, which are more like offensive and time buying spells as opposed to debuffs. Also, where Necro focuses on direct bone and poison spell, the Witch Doctor focuses on very indirect and somewhat mundane magic at times. He uses a lot of Fire techniques, something unheard of to the entirely black magic Necro.
To be very honest they would fit just fine side by side, especially if Blizzard updated Necro to be something a little more modernized to fit the Diablo 3 title. They can and honestly may easily be implemented together simultaniously. Blizzard has already stated (in order to calm Necro fans) that they are definately looking toward him as a possible Expansion character, they just don't want him in the opening line up.
And as for this whole " Necro is 120" crap... Even if the Necro was 120, I bet he could still be moving along just fine. Hes a fucking Necro for christ sakes, half the necros from TONS of series turn into an effin Lich. They just don't die of old age from working with the Necromantic arts. This could easily be associated with the game. That, or you know they could just make A NEW NECRO. Its not like there is only one... There are entire sects of these people and we will probably see a few Necro NPCs when DIablo 3 first comes out. There is absolutely nothing stopping them from making a new character (lorically) to fit the same class as our previous well known white haired hero. Plus they would have to make a chick as well, so they might as well.
As you can probably tell, I highly doubt Necro is down for the count just yet. I wish people would have a little fucking faith in the developers for once instead of crying about how "Blizz ruined my Necro with WD". Your points are moot. They can still easily exist together, in fact Jay Wilson has even mentioned that they are making the Witch Doctor in a way that they CAN exist together. Its part of their design plan to leave a very sweet (necro) option open for later expansions if they choose to bring him out. If they are ALREADY planning ahead for this, chances are they won't let that go to waste...
1
In all honestly, I have no reason to find Blizzard incapable of a feat such as D3 on a console. They are Blizzard, they can do anything. Its like Disney World magical every day in their offices. Look at WoW, they successfully made the most addictive drug America has ever seen, and on top of that they can't test for it, it can't be sniffed out by dogs, it has not/will never catch judicial attention, it can be given to children, AND it is relatively cheep and easy to make...
I'm sorry, that was a terrible joke, let me put on my serious face.
Without at least a mouse and keyboard (as opposed to a controller), Diablo 3 would not make any type of decent console game. It in no way or form has to do with limited commands: using a classic Phantasy Star Online style controller setup (where the command of your primary buttons change when holding down a trigger), you could easily get 16 different commands that were simple to figure out and remember (by utilizing all 4 buttons now found on the top of both X-box and Playstation controllers with the same style system).
The most epic downfall of Diablo 3 as a console game is its point and click nature, one of the biggest things that make it Diablo. Even if you were to control all movement with an analog stick, you would still need a pointing device in the UI for certain spells and abilities. I mean, you sure don't expect a console to read your mind and cast Leap Attack, Hydra, or Skull of Flames exactly where you want it, do you? Any other targeting system other than a point and click would break the game or just be lame as hell.
So you think a pointing device should be implemented into this theoretical console version? That is a mistake. You are either back to point and click or your second stick controls targeting while primary stick controls movement. Either way its going to be stupid on a console, every game I have seen with point and click on an analog stick is crap. Sorry, but Halo Wars sucked fat sack, mainly because it was a console game. That game would have made way more sense on a computer. Even Blizzard themselves tried and failed a similar system, anyone remember Starcraft 64? It was crap compared to the original PC version. Asian kids must have got a kick out of that one. Using an analog stick as a mouse is like using a rubber glove as a condom, why would you try to mimic something that is already being made? Unless your just that desperate for a condom...
That being said, its mouse and keyboard or go home, making it viable for only ONE console in production, the PS3, as it is the only console that will accept a mouse and keyboard. The cheapest PS3 isn't exactly cheap starting at $399 new. Not to mention if you want those nice graphics your going to need a decent tv. Lets not forget the mouse and keyboard that doesn't come with your PS3. Or you could just drive to your local Best Buy and pick up a half decent Asus laptop that would run Diablo 3, play and burn CD/DVD, let you surf the web, or turn it into a workhorse for any sick computer fetish you may have (from photoshoping to hacking). Tell me exactly where you got your money's worth taking the PS3 route. It seems people these days tend to lack a sense of value.
1
1
I am not trying to tell you that you are wrong, simply that I personally feel you are looking at this process all wrong. Blizzard doesn't hope to make a new Diablo 2, they hope to make Diablo 3, a much richer and exciting game with more dynamic gameplay and features that reflect the industry standards that Blizzard feels work well in many games, whether they made them or not.
Diablo 2 was a game that forced you to figure out a very specific talent style that really worked. Diablo 3, as Blizzard has mentioned AND shown to us through interviews and game play demonstrations, will be all about making the game fell how you want it to feel, even if you messed up and want to go back and change something. THAT is why they are implementing respecs, not because they feel it is some ackward band-aid fix to rushing, though in a sense respecs does fix both issues. The biggest issue of Diablo 2 was merely that it didn't reach out to enough players, which they are trying to improve on with Diablo 3.
While for some, respecs may seem like a burden to this game, I assure you they will play into the game just fine. I think it is safe to assume that EVERYBODY on the Diablo 3 developing team plays video games, even if a few of them tend to stick to Blizzard games. They know the industry, they know the game style, and they know what works for everyone and makes games like this fun. THAT is why they want to give us respecs in our new Diablo.
1
I started playing Diablo when a second Diablo was a joke of a notion. Back in those days, there was NO TALENT TREES. Though I quit Diablo long before Diablo 2 came out, were I part of the D2 discussion (much as we are the D3 discussion), I would have utmost and entirely shunned the idea of a talent tree to begin with. In the first Diablo, you did have some stupid tree telling you what you can and cannot do. In fact, all three classes were capable of of all types of combat, however each class was stronger in one particular style.
The point I am making is that, though at the time I would have shunned the idea of talent trees to begin with (for the same fact that it woudln't feel "Diablo"), it actually turned out pretty darned fun. That being said, I think we ALL need to stfu about what is "Diablo" and what is not. That is not for us to decide, that is for BLIZZARD to decide. The day Blizzard hires you, then you can decide what is "Diablo" or not, but until then spare us the head ache. It does little for us all, respec is coming and Bashiok confirmed it. If respecs are not "Diablo" enough for you, than maybe you are the one who doesn't know what "Diablo" really is.
That being said, I think we should all accept what Blizz is offering us. Diablo 2 changed the way the game was played forever in comparison to Diablo, and if Diablo 3 changes the whole game again, do you really think it will mean that the game will be any less fun?