Quote from _incarnate_
Hopefully i'm not duplicating a topic here. I searched but didn't find anything.
I understand it's likely different from title to title based on the needs of the development team, but how long did the beta testing last for Starcraft 2 (or other blizzard games)? Was it something that went until the game released? Was it done in waves? Anyone have any insight on this?
I certainly am not expecting to get a key, but was curious how the beta testing might pan out.
Judging off the fact that Blizzard isn't so much looking for gameplay, or game balance testing as much as they are stability, and server testing I wouldn't expect it to be very long. There will be waves of testers brought in, seeing as in any given beta there isn't normally more than 10 waves, the rate in which they bring in new waves could be a good indicator to how long the Beta will last.
Official Blizzard Quote:
We're testing client and server stability. We want to make sure the game is running, and running well, on a wide range of systems, and the server infrastructure that runs Diablo III is completely new, so we need testing on that front as well. Quite right, we're not necessarily looking for gameplay related testing, although we do hope to see feedback on the various systems and see what people like/don't like from the first few hours of play time.
Also... we wanted to the spoilers to a minimum, and they're there, up front and center in Act 1 after the Skeleton King. So that's where we cut it off.
Official Blizzard Quote:
We have a huge and talented QA department just for purposes like these, yes, but it's still no comparison to thousands and thousands of players hammering the system. We can run simulations to see what breaks just from over-crowding, but it's ultimately no comparison to real players testing the system.
But we also do want player feedback on systems and how the game feels and plays for the content that's available. The first few hours are the most crucial for any game, so we definitely want to make sure we get them right.
This will be the most limited beta in recent memory, and because of of how new the back end is, we expect it to be the most unstable as well.
1
I hear ya about normal difficulty, but chances are it will be rather easy.
Official Blizzard Quote:
Normal is super easy. It's intentionally super easy. You will die, but you can essentially slap on gear and not think too much about it, and probably beat the game without too much trouble. There will be many people though that will get a good amount of damage and utility by keeping their follower along. But, realistically people aren't going to actively refuse the help of a follower as they play through the game the first time.
I can beat the game on normal without gemming any items. That doesn't mean gems are a waste of time as a system. One happens to be required more at higher difficulties, one happens to be more useful and fun when playing alone in Normal. There's nothing that says all of our mechanics have to be useful at all times through all difficulties and classes or else it's a waste of time, and in fact, that'd probably make things super boring.
Official Blizzard Quote:
I don't mean any offense, but you don't represent the majority of people that will play the game. For better or worse. People here, logging in with their Diablo II keys to talk about an unreleased product - - on an essentially hidden forum - - do not represent the vast majority of people that will play the game. Which doesn't mean we don't want the game to appeal to you or be a lasting game you'll want to play as long as you played Diablo II, it very much is our intent to be, but we have a broad range of Diablo fans to appeal to.
Looking at Diablo II the amount of people that bought the game, never logged on to Battle.net, and never went beyond Normal are not insignificant. In fact, they're a substantial portion of the people that bought copies throughout the life of the game. The same goes for StarCraft II. Many (maybe most) people play through the story on normal difficulty, they MAY jump into multiplayer for a bit, and then that's about it. Putting effort into ensuring their experience is a solid one is not a waste of time because some other people completely skip the story and go straight to the 1v1 ladder.
Followers fit in with that 'average' use of games very well, but their intent is to also help people expand beyond their initial intent of beating it on Normal, and then shelving the game. If the followers can get a player excited about co-op because they like playing with another character, that's a win. We also think they just add a lot to the experience up front, which is important.
And, they're memorable characters. I don't think the scope of who these people are needs to end because their health doesn't scale so we can ensure the end-game is pure and there's less visual noise in multiplayer games. We don't have any plans for them beyond what we've announced, but, I wouldn't be surprised if they became meaningful in other ways in the future. Even if they're not, if someone enjoyed playing along with them, enjoyed the dialog, and liked what they add to the single player experience (which is pretty significant) then that's not a waste of time.
1
Official Blizzard Quote:
MultikillGaming - @Diablo Will gems function differently according to what type of item you put them in?
Diablo - @multikillgaming Yes. Weapon/Helm/Everything else.
Besides that, the concepts of animation effects on weapons based on Gems is still up in the air. On a personal note I think that what ever element is most powerful on the weapon will be the one which shows through the animation/texture.
So say you find an Axe of Frost with +5 Frost damage and one socket. You add a Normal Ruby in it which adds +25 fire damage (Remember this is just an example, not factual at all). I believe the Axe will now be on fire. That brings up the question what if a weapon had 2 or more equal elemental attributes to it due to gem additions. I'd think the first attribute to be on the weapon will be the on which shows through in animation. So if the weapon had a fire attribute naturally before you matched it with an equal poison gem it would still be on fire. Just my thoughts though.
1
Here's to hoping for an announcement of an Auction House system soon..
1
If you haven't seen yet Blizzard recently released a demo of Skill Runes, here is Force's video compilation of the five class/skill demos Blizz put out with details on how each rune effects the skill.
2
In general though 4 players (while admittedly a low number seeing as a lot of people would love to play D3 with 7 friends) benefits the game. To this day my favorite D3 video content out is (drum roll)
Not even because it focuses on the Monk, (I'm a Barb guy! :barb:) but because it has tons of HD footage of 4 classes mowing through mobs. It gives a great feel for how while 4 sounds like a low number, the power and visual effects of each player really dose fill the screen nicely when all 4 players are on screen. Non of the classes even have pets or summons on screen. Imagine 4 Witch Doctors each with 3 zombie dogs, and a Gargantuan. At that point not only is it a problem for you to distinguish things currently, but it also could cause major FPS (Frames Per Second) drop. I remember in D2 a single summon Necro during a Baal run would cause my decent PC to drop to like 3 FPS, making the game hard to play, and horrid to look at. Between the Sorcs casting spells, the Barbs casting buffs, the Pallys with their auras, everyone with a mercenary, it was just a mess.
All and all 4 players, while it has its down sides, will greatly benefit the game.
1
As already pointed out by Scyber, the Wiki is only listing the known class specific weapons. I can assure you, as an example, a Wizard will be able to use a one handed sword if you wanted to. While Blizzard is indeed putting effort into making each class take advantage of certain weapons, it's just not tasteful to only allow a class to use suiting weapons, and surly would be opposed to in the development board.
As Graad_87's links detail, the animation team treats each weapon animation with its own flavor. Taking into account what class is using it, what spell is being cast, how that character as a person would use this weapon. Also seeing as Bashiok mentioned the animation team being ahead of schedule, and how a lot of the class - weapon restrictions are being removed (Likely do to the fact that they're ahead) this farther supports the possibility that such builds as a Melee Wizard may be possible with enough knowledge of the class, and even how the skill runes effect that classes skills.
1
Edit: Found the part of Blizzcon on this. Start the video at 4:31 to skip right to this topic of how armor changes it's look from class to class.
Its from about 4:31 - 5:24 that they talk about this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s61E86c1YnQ&feature=channel_video_title
As seen in the video above, there are class defined armors, as in the stats are aimed more for one class than the others. Sure other classes can wear it, but it likely won't suit the stats you need.
As for tiers of armor, yes there are A LOT, 16-18 sounds right from what I remember. I can't find the section of Blizzcon where they mentioned this, he'' honestly I'm not sure if it was Blizzcon where I heard this, but I know for a fact that there are a lot of tiers, 16-18 sounds right.
1
4 Players max, so sure. A recent Blue post from a few weeks ago was on that topic. Our Spells will be in all their glory.
Not gonna lie, the video Force posted is only in 480p, the 720p and 1080p options are just stretched in the HD codec.
The best quality videos of the Skills can be found on Diablo 3's facebook page. You can clearly see the difference in detail and clarity when HD is enable for the facebook videos.
1
So what you're saying is, they shouldn't promote their game by announcing raw numbers in which make thousands of people wonder what that number could mean? Interesting marketing strategy you have their, sounds effective. Stick to what we know, which as of now if next to nothing since the game has yet to go through BETA testing. Brilliant.
Again, NO ONE (In this discussion at least) has EVER stated how many of these builds will be "enjoyable", especially from an official source. Only that from a raw, factual instance this number stands true in that, if a difference is taken as its literal term, there are 96+ Billion possible combos per class.
You're putting words in which were never said into the mix.
Any person at all experienced with Diablo will know right off the bat that 99% of those builds, come end game be forgotten, and swapped with the most powerful builds, thanks for that.
From a marketing standpoint, and a general interest of the RAW MAXIMUM BUILDS POSSIBLE, the number is wonderful. It provokes thought, and wonder about the game, mostly to those who are unexperienced, but also in general as a freaking huge number affiliated to ONE class, only counting TWO factors, skills, and runes. Excellent marketing, as was seen by the reaction of the crowd after the number was shown on the projector.
You keep saying how it means nothing, this isn't true. It means there are 96+ billion builds per class. What it doesn't mean, and what NO ONE HAS EVER SAID (In this discussion), is that there will be 96+ billion viable builds per class. Again at this point NO ONE can estimate the amount of viable builds, seeing as there has been NO BETA TESTING. Even if testing was done, logic dictates that per class maybe 50 builds will be viable against each other come end game.
Once again, the number is only a raw format, and doesn't imply or represent anything other than the FACT that there is indeed 96,886,969,344 different builds per class. No one ever said that even 1 of them were viable.
Goodnight.
1
Not gonna lie though, only made it through 11mins..
... "May 9th, they will announce the Beta, guarantee it."
Here, I found a face palm for you..