I'm pretty sure it originally existed due to some bugs that involved getting items from single player into the ladder via the TCP/IP options (which is also why they have removed TCP/IP from resurrected).
Naturally I am nowhere near smart enough to understand how any of that works but I do know it was a thing.
This is around the time Lost Ark is coming out... Man please don't overlap these releases 
Activision is so terrified of creating something interesting that they created a horribly boring Eth idea that impacts nothing, means nothing, sabotages established systems, and in the end is the weakest garbage they could attempt
Diablo as a series needs to be Old Yellered at this point. 4 looks unbearably bad. Just let it die in it's sleep, which is a better death than it's giving WOW
Seize Kotick's wealth and bury him alive btw
"Member for 13 hours 45min". Literally a person just making a fake accounts to shout non-sense. Nothing to see here people, please move along.
That is a list of legendaries that will effect the player I.E. if you put Nemesis on your follower you the player gain the effect.
I mean I wonder if LoN set will buff the followers damage, as all other sets in the game tie to an actual ability while LoN just increases all damage if it does work your follower could end up hitting pretty hard.
I wonder if you'll be able to use LoN on your follower to amp up there damage?
I would actually like if they didn't go the "no-changes" route on this, I like the fact it's not a from the ground up remake but if there doing ladder resets I would love to see some actual patches put into the game. They can take from what Path Of Diablo clearly did right with so many things (esp adding some end-game content).
I'm gonna buy it either way ofcourse, but if they don't give it a Path Of Diablo style treatment I can't see the game being anything more than a nostalgia trip because games & players have evolved.
The PvP conceptually sounds amazing but the problem is every time world PvP is attempted it just boils down to "large premade groups roam about farming players".
I would have much preferred an option to turn PvP on/off and be able to do it throughout the entire game, it'd feel more fluid. I hope the game has a dedicated duel option to, the dueling-world is what kept D2 alive.
Quote from Fearxhorizon»
The graphic engine looks like d3. its trash. get rid of it and make a true diablo game. thank you sincerely the diablo community
the items looks like d3.( overpowered garbage) And im sure the drop rate will be awful too. ( Should copy d1-d2 )
open world diablo ? no thank you
make the game scary . diablo 3 wasnt scary at all make the game in a scary atmosphere
Make the game Pc only . Diablo is a PC game not a console game yes blizzard you want money but if you want to make a good game you need to focus on one port. not 6 at the same time. if you want to dissapoint all your hardcore diablo 2 audience go ahead and release this trash Also. id like to point out that they copied duriel , andariel, Lilith . and others stuff maybe this game is 0 creativity
I enjoy how at the start your like "Make the game a carbon copy of d1/d2, stop trying to innovate with the gear/drop rates/open world etc." and then in the second part you've gone "look all you did was copy Durial, Andy and Lilith.. This game has 0 creativity". Do you even know what you want or are you just complaining for the sake of it?
As a serious response, it's a Diablo game... Reusing the prime evils etc. is part of it it wouldn't make sense to create all new threats as THAT wouldn't be a Diablo game then.
Also, D2 items were OP did you not play D2? They just didn't feel as OP because the game was so easy you could clear it naked.. In top gear you could 1 hit everything and 3 hit bosses. You could clear screens of mobs by walking past them. I also feel that D3 has one of the most "scary" zones out of all which was the area in Act 3 with those giant demons chained to walls, moaning in pain... Nothing in D1/D2 had that level of horror.
This whole skill system looks and the idea of it sounds awful. I don’t understand why they can’t copy d2’s skill tree, update and expand on that? It had synergies, play style choices and increased your power as you leveled. Sure items really improved your character but skill points were just as important. If I wanted a great frozen orb sorc I would max ice shard(for the synergy) and max frozen orb. I would have to commit to that build and I was rewarded in power for doing so. This whole new system seems like they’re trying to reinvent the wheel when the wheel is already damn near perfect.
See I whole-heartedly disagree and feel Diablo 2s skill system was boring to borderline pointless because of exactly as you say "I wanna play a frozen orb sorc I max orb & frost shard". I much prefered D2 before synergies when I could have fun variable builds that utalised hydras, forb and lightning. Now you spend all of your points specializing in 1 ability because you spend 20 points in the ability itself and the other 60 in it's synergies which just leaves me with thinking what even was the point? May as well have just hit lvl 30 and it said "do you want to be Forb, Fireball or Lightning" and then those spells just get progressively stronger as you level as it'd be the exact same thing.
Skill trees should be about interesting, impactful decisions where you go "Oh I want this but then I can't have that". If it's bland and cookie-cutter then it may aswell not exist.
So even if it's a good idea, because it vaguely looks like it's similar to something in D3 that makes it bad? D3 did a lot of things right.
Are these just templates and there going to add the appearance in later... Or is this really how the sets look? Isn't everything but the barbs helm just the low level armour appearance??
Reiteration or Trial and Error is generally how game development works, almost no company goes "well the games gonna be ready in 3 years time but we've already nailed down how every mechanic is going to work". They try stuff, see how it plays and then try other stuff... I mean are you honestly complaining about the fact they want the communities opinion as they iterate on ideas?
While the event bosses look very cool, I fear they will end up similar to every game that does event bosses. That is to say, they'll have a no-lose scenario, effectively no matter how big and cool and amazing it looks you can't actually fail at killing the boss, as such it's just a bunch of people whacking at a health bar for 5min util you get loot.
I do like the idea of free for group content like this, but inherently it's impossible to make it challenging because it's just a bunch of random uncordinated people it's the LFR of such games. Looks pretty but is ultimately not very engaging. It also devalues gear because your going to kill the boss either way and in a very similar time.
Maybe if they have a system where the better you perform, the better your rewards are?
Bloody hell, so S18 was only like 7 weeks long? that's crazy short right, season 17 was 14 weeks.
It's sad when u think that at Blizzcon the community dev said "big things are coming to D3 next season, but we're not ready to talk about that yet". And that big thing was an always-on unique and bigger numbers... This is like 5min work? They already have a Kanui Cube so the tech to give characters a unique affix without having it equipped already exists and otherwise there just making the numbers bigger.
This is what they "wasn't ready" to talk about yet? Again making out there's some big stuff coming and then we get something that looks like a private server patch.
/e Also I presume we're gonna go up to T20 now? :'D
0
What I don't get with this stuff is, why not just add a toggle? Like I've never understood why more games don't just have an "advanced UI" option. Have these things on my default but then the gamers who are like "I dislike this" just let them go into options and turn it off? It would take next to no work to create and I see pretty much zero downside as this benefits those who doesn't like such things while having 0 effect on those that do.
1
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?
0
But... If you made them up then they aren't accurate.. What are you even trying to say here?
Blizzard is still by an absolutely massive country mile the highest valued games company in the world. They are worth more than double what EA Games is worth, what on earth makes you think they would disolve if D4 wasn't a success or even that it wont be.
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.
0
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.
0
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.
0
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.
0
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.
1
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.
0
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.
0
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.
0
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
0
Wait, what? When have they explicitly said Diablo 2 wont be getting a remaster?
0
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.
0
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.
1
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.