The Diablo III Thread

[Lucandrake]

Man, this game is going to be released in 2015, the world ends sooner then that .

[Wizard]

Needs come out December 21, 2012.

[Chaotica]

It's far too early to poke criticism, and there's no doubt that I am excited about the release, but I must say, from the blossoming Diablo 3 website that I just looked at last night, I was left feeling unimpressed. Black Knight articulated my shortcomings with what I saw, but I will reiterate what I felt in my own way, in order of what annoys me most;

 

1. It...um...well...doesn't look very dark or gothic at all. Excuse me if I'm wrong, but the dark, brooding and bloody nature of the first two Diablo games were the key to its main aesthetic. In fact, the dark fantasy world, perpetually containing bloodstained walls, sealed chambers strewn with corpses and the frequent appearance of random pike-mounted heads, was Diablo's main, almost sadistic, aesthetic. Where has that gone?

 

2. The game seems to have shifted from a traditional Anglo medieval landscape to a more Eastern or Oriental setting, and if this is so then it is a move that I dislike. Not to sound racist, but I have always felt that Eastern influences in games with a medieval setting usually don't fit in well. I felt this way when Dungeons and Dragons amalgamated the Oriental into their game world, and also in Baldur's Gate II, where I thought that such influences (such as the katana blades, and, I believe, the fighting monks) were out of their place. Diablo has always found its home in a traditional Anglo medieval setting, but the website makes Diablo III look distinctly Eastern, Oriental or, by the looks of the helmets that the soldiers are wearing as the gaze into the fire, even Mongolian-esque.

 

3. The Witch Doctor looks interesting, but if he is indeed the Necromancer's replacement then that is a dumb move.

 

4. The graphics look too World of Warcraft. I don't understand why Blizzard is using the same (or a similar) graphics engine to release sequels to cherished Blizzard series. Surely Diablo 3 and Starcraft 2 deserved their own engines, and if not both of these games, then at least one of them. All the games that Blizzard are going to release from, say 2003 to XXXX (insert date of Diablo 3 release) are going to look the same, with their squeaky clean, overly luminous and brightly coloured comic-book like graphics, which might look lovely for the colourful surrounds of the Warcraft universe, but feel foreign in the realm of Diablo. However, it's early days yet so that's why this point is the lowest on my list.

Edited June 29, 2008 by Chaotica

[Wizard]

It's just art assests that make the game look like WoW. Something they've done since WC3 and after wards was the cartoony asthetic that appears in WoW and the ill fated SC:Ghost. Remember when SCG was more Splinter Cell then the cartoon look? Think of it like that.

 

I miss Grimdark Diablo, they're adding more High Fantasy elements, but still making it dark, which would be Dark High Fantasy :V

[OverlordMondo]

Am I the only one who liked Diablo because of the gameplay, rather than the art and lore?

[BlackKnight]

Am I the only one who liked Diablo because of the gameplay, rather than the art and lore?

Yes, the 10 or so million others must just not be as sensible as you are.

[Wizard]

Am I the only one who liked Diablo because of the gameplay, rather than the art and lore?

I played it for the gameplay. I didn't really give a damn bout the story until I beat the game and the xpac.

[OverlordMondo]

Am I the only one who liked Diablo because of the gameplay, rather than the art and lore?

Yes, the 10 or so million others must just not be as sensible as you are.

Well, seriously, you guys are all complaining about how terrible the art or lore is, and how they flocked everything up. I haven't seen a single comment on gameplay, even though there's a very good ten minute video with commentary focused solely on gameplay.

 

So here, I think the gameplay looks like Diablo, which is going to be fun. What are your thoughts?

[Lucandrake]

Dude the game looks amazing, your all complaining about cartoon appearance and the lack of blood, when in the game play video, the witchbitch gets beheaded like a slut in the corner of a liquor store on 8th street!

 

About story, come on, you don't even know it yet >.<.

[L.S.D]

I will reserve my judgement until I get to play it. But I do feel pissed that i couldn't use Necromancer since I've been using it since day one.

[OverlordMondo]

I've only really played a Necromancer since the synergy patch. Everything else seems so confusing, but with the Necromancer, I just put all of my points into my bone spells, sans bone armor, and I'm good to go.

[L.S.D]

I've only really played a Necromancer since the synergy patch. Everything else seems so confusing, but with the Necromancer, I just put all of my points into my bone spells, sans bone armor, and I'm good to go.

Lol, I always use Bone Arrow to get through

[Smilee]

Dude the game looks amazing, your all complaining about cartoon appearance and the lack of blood, when in the game play video, the witchbitch gets beheaded like a slut in the corner of a liquor store on 8th street!

 

About story, come on, you don't even know it yet >.<.

I thought the barbarian dude gets his head bitten off?

 

That's one thing that I'm concerned about. I know it won't be sensible for them to include instant kill moves for bosses, but from the game play video it looked like a kill-sync a la DoW where a character getting killed by another monster goes into a kill animation. The problem was that during these kill-syncs the character that started the animation was invincible for the duration.

[Lucandrake]

After the beheading you see the female witchdoc on the floor under the boss, and then he just turns around and the dead body goes flying like a ragdoll.

[Inky]

all this D3 talk has me itching for some D2. I wonder if it runs on vista..... and if I can play online with out a disc...