DiabloFans

This is something that has always perplexed me, D3 came out in 2012 with RoS in 2014 that's 6 years ago for the last expansion and not only does it still receive constant updates regardless of the fact it has no in-game shop or subscription (Please tell me any other game that has this level of developement attention without any in-game shop or sub) but it also still has hundreds of thousands of people playing it to this day.

When it first came out, the content was challenging and interesting. It lasted a large majority of the player base a good month before they started to get a bit bored and the several patches to come while it wasn't the most exciting I mean I know I and many others still played it. When RoS came out it was bloody amazing, I loved everything about it and sunk huge amounts of time into it... Sure eventually I got bored but just because I'm bored now doesn't mean the games bad, no game could hold my attention for ever.

A lot of people I see who say the game was a failure either didn't play the game at all and seem to just jump on the band wagon or played the game for 800 hours and then went "this games terrible". To which I say what? Please show me the list of games you have which have no sub, no in-game shop and have still taken so many hours from you before you stepped away. There are also those that slate it for not receiving content updates that match PoE to which I say again no game without some form of in-game shop recieves such treatment so that comparison just makes no sense.

My only assumption is that people wanted it to be like when they first played Diablo 2 and got lost in the game for years. But that would simply be impossible, Diablo 2 was from a different time with less options, less resources to gain information, less saturation of the market and for many the first time they even stepped into an online world so simply interacting with another player seemed amazing. If people expected Diablo 3 to take them back to when they were 12 years old and first stepped into Diablo 2 then ofcourse it was going to fail in there eyes as this is an impossible level to reach.

Is there something i'm missing, what reasons do people have to view this game as such a huge failure while other games which have taken 1/10th of your time before getting boring are seen as massive successes (I know people who spent 80 hours in Skyrim and claim it is the best game they have ever played yet spent 500 in Diablo 3 and claim it to be a massive dissapointment), why was Diablo 3 held to a standard so much above any other Buy to Play game?

Quote from Skelos_bg»

Made up or not, the important is how accurate they are lol. D4 Beta is coming, there will be a storm after the silence.

But... If you made them up then they aren't accurate.. What are you even trying to say here?

Quote from Skelos_bg»

Quote from user-13216883»

most of their current games either dead or dying

They are all-in with Diablo 4. Right now more than 85% of their programmers work on that title. If Diablo 4 fails there will be no more Blizzard as we know it. This means two things:

- Their development on the game goes with great speed

- They'll try to release D4 as fast as possible to make up for lost profits from other games and failed projects

And Covid-19 while slowing down their development would increase their sales.

We are getting the D4 BETA after next Blizzcon for sure.

Literally every single product Blizzard has created has been a MASSIVE commercial success and I see no reason why Diablo 4 wont be to.

On Topic:

I expect D4 to come out Q2/3 2022. I would love to see a Q4 2021 release, but Blizzard themselves said at 2020 that it isn't even Blizzard soon. Outside of some very base concepts we've hardly seen anything about the game, I expect to see a lot more information at this years blizzcon, a Beta announcement at next years Blizzcon and a mid 2022 release.

Bringing in PKing like in D2 wont work in this day and age. Back in D2 people just played games for fun, so they didn't mind just making PK games and spending huge amounts of time to build a dueling character even though there was absolutely nothing to get from it.

Nowa days unless there is some sort of reward, ranking, balance etc. to it almost nobody will do it. D3 is the perfect example of this, nobody PvPs in D3. The option is there, but there's nothing to be gained from it so nobody does it. People could make rules in it enjoy it just like they did in D2 but they don't.

Personally I'd like to see a runescape Wilderness like thing built, where the enemies had increased rewards but the zones were shared and pvp was enabled meaning players actually fought over the area to get the rewards. Something like this would marry the pve-loot farming thing of ARPGs with PvP. Although I fear this would end up just getting overrun with guilds of 20+ players effectively owning the zone for themselves so don't know how you would balance that.

Quote from Abob»

Oh ffs these threads are absolutely riidiculous now, theres no problem with D3, theres no problem with Paragon, theres no problem with devs.

The problem with D3 is the completely deluded section of the playerbase that cant accept theyre not good enough to occupy a position as one of the top players in the region, grow the fuck up and show some godamn maturity. If youre not on the leaderboard now, you are most certainly not going to be on the leaderboard if Paragon was either removed or changed.

Well there you go, turns out there might be a problem with D3 afterall. Remove leaderboards and those idiots that cant understand they dont have a divine right to be on them dont have a reason to bitch and whine about anything and everything else.

I mean, this is just wrong. Like... It's not an opinion it's a fact that to get high on the leaderboard you have to grind Paragon because it makes you hit harder and take less damage. I'm not saying skill isn't also relevant, but no matter how skilled the player a paragon 10, 000 player will be higher than a paragon 1000 and it certainly does make the game less interesting when you outright know you wont be able to compete if you don't play 16hrs/day.

I would love to see something on the same lines as the Wilderness in RS, where the deeper you go the greater the PvE rewards but also the greater the risk of getting PKed.

Quote from WishesHeHadBeta»

Quote from Kormek»

Quote from Kori Jenkins»

Trading is back as well.

But they are looking to make the best gear BoP. Wooooooow. So WoW.

I hope they change this. Because in D2 it was always fun finding legendaries because even if you couldn’t use it, you could sell/trade it for a lot. In D3 it isn’t fun finding most legendaries because 99% of the legendaries you find either suck or are worthless and can’t be traded. Just melt down for mats.

What D2 did you play? 99% of the uniques in D2 were useless to the point where you didn't even pick them up and with the way the gaming market is I feel having everything trad-able is almost impossible personally. I'm happy that there's going to be a top top tier that you need to get yourself and think the "trade but only once" system is a really clever way of stopping people from just being gods via abusing the marketplace.

That is what happened in D3 when the AH was a thing, or what happens in PoE the value of items is determined by the marketplace and the only real way to get super rich is to spend more time trading than actually playing the game.

Quote from overrider»

Quote from Blessed Mother»

That's nothing like the Siegebreaker. Relax yourself. And if anything the Siegebreaker is like Duriel, not the other way around.

If you chose to go this route , then calm your tits bro.

Apart from the different model, looks exactly the same fight . I was expecting a fatality of some kind based on certain conditions, like a hp threshold.

And btw learn to accept the fact that your opinions are not unanimous. People can really be split into 2 categories. Those who can accept that fact and those who don't.

I'm curious, what about this fight makes u think claim this looks like "exactly the same fight"? I mean if your referring the model (i.e. that some-what centaur like appearance) then I guess.. Somewhat, but then again Duriels appearance was set wayy before Siegebreaker so I guess one could say Siegebreaker was somewhat inspired by Duriel.

Other than that though, the two fights seem completely different. Unless ofcourse your really generalizing like saying "well both fights have grabs and adds" but one could use that logic to say every boss is a carbon copy of every boss.

It's probably an engine limitation, very similar to how in WoD they had to make Garrosh heal because otherwise his health would of had to be put above the level the engine could understand.

One big, easy change I just don't understand is to make use of the campaign... Give the campaign decent scaling and loot that reflects it.

This is one thing almost every ARPG these days lacks, and that is varied content. If everyone only farms 1 way, there's only 1 build. Look at D2:

Countess farming Build, Meph build, Andy build, mlvl 86 build, chaos farming, baal runner, Key farmer, Uber runner all of which was viable for it's own unique reasons.

Not to mention the different brackets of gear going from no gear, to Vmagi to full tals to runewords to being decked out in bloody ebotdz and all that goodness... Also having the super-rare top tier items that let you do crazy things like bramble and what not letting take say Psn Nova at first a build that doesn't work is now one shotting entire screens.

Compare this to Diablo 3, where you get your DB build which is just a gotta go fast buiid. Honestly every classes varient of this feels the same, and then your pushing build. You can't balance abilities to create varied builds, there will always be 1 build that's better but if you have varied content that is what creates varied builds.

Quote from Skelos_bg»

This is going to be an INSANE BLIZZCON, best ever!

The good thing is, it's gonna be insane one way or another. Either the announcements are gonna be terrible and it's gonna be a riot of Hong Kong & meme questions or there gonna be amazing. I'm not actually sure if i'm more excited for them to announce stuff or not XD

Quote from OdZoo»

I'm not much for remasters, for me they bring very little. Also Blizzard has explicitly said they do not have any plans to remaster or -make Diablo 2. But they also stated that they have no plans of bringing Diablo 3 for Nintendo Switch yet here we are. They also have said "Multiple diablo projects" to be in the works, this and the huge demand for Diablo 2 remaster could mean it is indeed coming.

As for Diablo 2 remake, that could be cool, yes. Maybe then I would be inclined to trying D2 as well.

The nature of Metro's tweets makes me question their reliability. It is true that he leaked Ashe quite accurately, but he might just be riding on that reputation.

If I had to guess what'll happen, is that IF Diablo: Immortal is released before Blizzcon, they are revealing D2 remastered, and a demo will be playable there. However if Immortal isn't released, that might be the playable thing they'll have in the showfloor.

Wait, what? When have they explicitly said Diablo 2 wont be getting a remaster?

Reuse the Campaign in some way it's a huge amount of unused content, maybe let it scale like GRs do with similar rewards? I loved a lot of the boss battles and what not and wish there was a challenging, rewarding version of it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6KUJqnlkdwM

Just watch that, gives you a nice lil list of builds. LoN is in the lead for a lot of classes, albeit only slightly. I do feel like there moving towards the idea of sets being a stepping stone and using LoN to add more value to collecting ancients which personally I feel adds new life to the game given how quickly they give you your set now.

Sets are still relevant because you've gotta do a fair bit of farming to have a full ancient set, and depending on the class you pick you may not be swapping until every slot is ancient. I expect soon they'll try to bring sets up to match LoN but I hope they don't as LoN is significantly hardly to get a full set for and as such deserves to be the next tier in power.

So I see a lot of people arguing "how can you be so against a game that isn't even out yet", but the problem isn't the game itself. Diablo Mobile could be kinda fun, and it makes sense from a organisation PoV because it's an untapped market if u get a good game in that genre on mobile. The problem is the delivery.

So first, we've got the fact they clearly and intentionally hyped up a Diablo announcement with tweets, videos and making it first in line on the main stage. Sure this got downplayed a little, nobody expected D4 but it was still hyped. Second we've got Blizzcon, which is a place their fans go to some of which pay thousands to get to... Blizzard fans are prominently PC gamers, because thats where their games are and most PC gamers are of a more "hardcore" variant as such not really into mobile games (and even if they was, it wouldn't be at the forefront of there desires).

Ok, so we've got a bunch of hyped up PC gamers spending thousands to go support there favourite dev and what does the dev do... It announces a mobile game. How out of touch with your audience do you have to be to think this is a good idea? To think the reaction is going to be good? To think this is what the people want? They even said it on stage "we're trying to reach new audiences". Well that's great, but you DON'T do that in a convention that is filled with your current audience that spent thousands to go there.... You do that outside of these conventions.

So this leaves 2 questions....

1. Is Blizzard so ludicrously out of touch with it's audience that it genuinely thought announcing a mobile game in this situation was a good move.

2. Does Blizzard are so little about it's current audience/Diablo in general that it knew this would be the reaction and did it anyway?

Either way you look at it, this is bad.

TL;DR

Mobile game isn't the problem, the delivery and the concerns that brings regarding the company are.