Diablo III

Gamer talk.

Moderator: Dex

Post Reply
AngelBaby
little. yellow. feisty.
Posts: 1880
Joined: 07 Aug 2006 07:35
Location: Cloud 9
Contact:

Diablo III

Post by AngelBaby » 30 Jun 2008 11:03

oh HELL yeah.

:dance:

Hellfyre
Posts: 6
Joined: 30 Jun 2008 11:14

Re: Diablo III

Post by Hellfyre » 30 Jun 2008 11:28

Oh, hell yeah is right! This just made my year!

UncleMao
Posts: 251
Joined: 18 Aug 2006 11:24

Re: Diablo III

Post by UncleMao » 30 Jun 2008 21:55

Goodbye job. Goodbye productive life. Goodbye breakfast.

Hello necromancer. Hello golems.

-sobs-

BLIZZARD! WHAT ARE YOU DOING WITH MY STARCRAFT: GHOST??

efilflah
Posts: 439
Joined: 16 Aug 2006 09:19
Location: Cardiff, Wales

Re: Diablo III

Post by efilflah » 01 Jul 2008 03:06

My mate used to love Diablo 2, but I could never get into it, mainly because I only ever got 5 minutes on it before he'd kick me off it.

So can someone tell me why this game has such a huge following? Not like, because I can't see why anyone would like it, but because I literally have no experience with the series.

Hellfyre
Posts: 6
Joined: 30 Jun 2008 11:14

Re: Diablo III

Post by Hellfyre » 04 Jul 2008 22:15

Would have figured someone would have answered your question sooner, but since no one has I'll try.

The main reason that people keep playing Diablo 2 even after almost 10 years is simple: LOOT! Diablo 2 perfected the Vegas-like odds and thrills that kick into action when you kill a monster and the phat lewt drops. People grind trying to get that elusive item that will complete that set of armor they are wearing that will give them extra bonuses. Never mind that Blizzard says that there's only a 1:480,000 chance of it dropping people play on. They figure if it won't drop for them they will at least be able to get something to drop that they'll be able to trade to someone on Battle.Net that will fork over what they desire in exchange for it.

Most of the addictive behavior you see in today's MMORPGs was pioneered by the venerable Diablo 2. If you are a gamer, you owe it to yourself to play it at least once. You might not like it, not everyone does, but it's hard to argue that it is indeed a gaming classic that everyone should experience as so many games since has been built upon its foundation.

smash
Posts: 1332
Joined: 06 Aug 2006 03:43
Location: Cloud 6
Contact:

Re: Diablo III

Post by smash » 05 Jul 2008 00:59

Hellfyre wrote:Would have figured someone would have answered your question sooner, but since no one has I'll try.

Most of the addictive behavior you see in today's MMORPGs was pioneered by the venerable Diablo 2. If you are a gamer, you owe it to yourself to play it at least once. You might not like it, not everyone does, but it's hard to argue that it is indeed a gaming classic that everyone should experience as so many games since has been built upon its foundation.

I'm a gamer, but not as hardcore as most. However, my friends would not let me play diablo2 until I played 1. I wasn't interested in that, and they wouldn't loan me a copy. So I never played.

efilflah
Posts: 439
Joined: 16 Aug 2006 09:19
Location: Cardiff, Wales

Re: Diablo III

Post by efilflah » 05 Jul 2008 03:49

I very much like my games to be cinematic and story driven. One of my favourite games ever is System Shock 2, mainly due to the perfect balance in the pacing of the action and frequent "quiet parts". The great thing about that game was how it let your mind wander. You'd sometimes go for like half an hour before even seeing a bad guy, and even then you'd probably only have 5 bullets in your gun, so you were praying for those headshots. It never got boring because the audio logs would keep you company along with the radio taunts and support from other characters as you roamed the ship.

I'm currently playing through Bioshock (SS2's spiritual successor), and whilst I can see the SS2 in it (audio logs and all), I can't help but feel they put in way too much action. I'm enjoying it though, just seems there's always some splicer attacking me when I'm trying to soak in the atmosphere.

I got hooked on CS when it first came out (Beta 5.2 FTW, not that shitty source version), I don't think I could handle being addicted to another game, so I think I'll give the Diablo series a miss if it's the virtual crack you say it is.

User avatar
exelis
Posts: 563
Joined: 04 Aug 2006 21:40
Location: Outside of Boston, MA

Re: Diablo III

Post by exelis » 05 Jul 2008 04:50

Recently e-mailed to me by a good friend:
Diablo 3 was announced over the weekend if you haven't heard.

That means in 4 years it will be ready to play!!!

Remember you were going to send me Diablo 2 in 1997-98, when I was in Japan, and it wasn't out until 2000?
That being said, it does look dead sexy. I can't wait to play. Maybe they'll make socketed items a bit less nerfy.

AngelBaby
little. yellow. feisty.
Posts: 1880
Joined: 07 Aug 2006 07:35
Location: Cloud 9
Contact:

Re: Diablo III

Post by AngelBaby » 05 Jul 2008 09:17

smash wrote:I'm a gamer, but not as hardcore as most. However, my friends would not let me play diablo2 until I played 1. I wasn't interested in that, and they wouldn't loan me a copy. So I never played.
Lose. :(

Hellfyre
Posts: 6
Joined: 30 Jun 2008 11:14

Re: Diablo III

Post by Hellfyre » 05 Jul 2008 23:03

I can see why (at the time) your friends would have wanted you to play Diablo 1 first. In Diablo 2 there are lots of references to the first game. Without playing the first game there are a few WTF and "Why should I care about this?" moments in the second game.

Diablo 2 is one of those rare games that is as fun now as when it first came out many years ago. It's only failing is an out-dated graphics engine by today's standards.

And as for waiting four years or whatever till Diablo 3 comes out I'm cool with that. Blizzard has a solid rep for not releasing any game till they feel it's ready and most of the bugs have been squashed. They are a rare company in that when I bring home a Blizzard game & I pop the disc into my PC I know I won't have to rush off to their web site right after installation to download a 9 GB patch because the game was rushed to market.

User avatar
exelis
Posts: 563
Joined: 04 Aug 2006 21:40
Location: Outside of Boston, MA

Re: Diablo III

Post by exelis » 06 Jul 2008 10:45

Diablo and Diablo II's graphics engines were "out of date" when they hit the shelves. I was working in a software store after Diablo came out and I'll never forget the idiot that told his son to "get a better game, with real 3D graphics". I wanted to punch the dumbass for perpetuating the idiotic fallacy that games aren't good without good graphics. I suppose the public is happy to sacrifice imagination for superior thumb dexterity these days, though. :rolleyes:

Phife
Posts: 158
Joined: 04 Aug 2006 22:27
Location: Somewhere West of Phoenix
Contact:

Re: Diablo III

Post by Phife » 23 Sep 2008 21:47

The latest news is that none of the classes from D2 are returning, save the Barbarian, which we saw in the demo vid. The lead designer said that people were going to hate him when they announce the next class.

I wonder what it will be?
Nada.

AngelBaby
little. yellow. feisty.
Posts: 1880
Joined: 07 Aug 2006 07:35
Location: Cloud 9
Contact:

Re: Diablo III

Post by AngelBaby » 01 Nov 2008 18:44

Phife wrote:The latest news is that none of the classes from D2 are returning, save the Barbarian, which we saw in the demo vid. The lead designer said that people were going to hate him when they announce the next class.

I wonder what it will be?
So far we've got Witch Doctor (meh) and Wizard (this is different from Sorceress how?)

Oh, and apparently they are finally not restricting gender to specific classes. You can play any class as male or female. FTW.

AngelBaby
little. yellow. feisty.
Posts: 1880
Joined: 07 Aug 2006 07:35
Location: Cloud 9
Contact:

Re: Diablo III

Post by AngelBaby » 24 Sep 2011 13:10

Holy crap...is it rly possible that I started this thread over THREE YEARS AGO?

And now I read this news.




:cry:


Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests