DiabloFans

First of all, no one said there are 5 spells. There are much more than that. In fact, if you look at

http://www.diablowiki.com/Barbarian#Abilities

you'll get an idea of how many passive and active abilities there are.

Second, runes change the way spells behave. So, for instance, you could (potentially) have a rune that freezes all enemies when they're hit by Whirlwind. Or maybe sets them on fire. Or maybe it lasts a little longer. Or it knocks enemies back. Or it leaches health. Or the cooldown is reduced. Or it confuses enemies.

Third, the game isn't anywhere near to being finalized, so the sheer amount of changes being made every day invalidates the argument altogether.

But now you'll respond with a pedantic and trivial claim that the game, in some mystical form or shape, has simply displeased you. And I am OK with that, but just as long as you stop using crappy reasoning, like you've been using for the past 5 pages.

Well, I guess you should go back to Modern Warfare 2 because obviously Diablo III doesn't have enough useless crap packed into every facet of the game.

There was no Wizard in Diablo 1, only a Sorcerer. And Blizzard only confirmed that no class, other than the Barbarian, was returning from Diablo 2.

The possibility of a class coming back from Diablo 1 still exists. My bets are on Rogue, or some redux of the rogue in a hunter/ranger type deal.

You'd rather have 40 useless spells than 5 useful ones? Agent, it's clear you're upset with the direction Diablo III has taken, yet you are concerned with voicing that opinion with pretty much zero thought taken into the matter.

Quote from "dorgeismydog" »

development wise, theres two things game companies agree on, do the FIRST stage last because you know where you can bring it, (ex gears, god of war and many rpg action explorer type)

obviously they arent going that way because weve seen so much of act 1 already. the other second aspecct is, do the finale last because you know where you can bring it. so why would they cement FIRST what diablo is without knowing the extent theyre going to go on all of the game?

Two things game companies can agree on:

1) Do the first stage last, where you can "bring it."
2) Do the last stage last, where you can "bring it."

It isn't Belial. It's Diablo. This is clearly evident and your logic is taking weird paths.

Look at those sweet greaves.

Perhaps a warrior under the influence of some type of Confuse ability, or maybe he's lashing his minions into action. Definitely looks like a bigger and male version of whatever it looks like its attacking.

Just a group of people who play together. People who know each other usually work better together. I might join one in the future when the game is actually released.

Who says there's not going to be a monster life bar? It's right there at the top, as it's always been.

I think it'd be interesting to have one unique monster that was hard to find and more difficult than any other monster, but all it drops is a piece of crap item that serves only to let other people know you've killed it.

I think Hell should not be able to do solo, or just VERY VERY time consuming and challenging for solo builds. Perhaps give those who play SP a reduced Hell challenge, so it's actually possible.

The difficulty is pretty spot on in Diablo 2, I feel. If the economy is fixed and not everyone has uber phat lewt from the get go, I imagine Hell would be pretty challenging for even experienced parties. I am sure they've made extra challenging events with Achievements for those who will ultimately surpass all previous challenges, kind of like how World of Warcraft instances always have extra hard achievements.

Actually, the Rogue has the fastest and most powerful physical hits in Diablo 1.

But nothing beats a Sorcerer with maxed Apocalypse.

I dunno, bro. Fantasy doesn't exactly equate to logic.

Why are you getting disappointed with Diablo 3 before it even comes out? Just have fun when it does and don't worry if it's not living up to your conceived notions.

Bad Company 2 :3