Diablo 3

[Enhance]

Diablo 2 was released in the mid 2000's. A year later they released the expansion pack. Now, over a decade later, they're finally releasing one of the most anticipated games in gaming history - Diablo 3.

 

Needless to say, I've been looking forward to this game for a long time, and it's been a long time coming.

 

Who else is going to be wasting away this summer with this game?

[308_Husker]

Count me in on it. I played the beta when they opened it up last weekend and while the gameplay is addicting, it looked like it had turned too 'cartoonish'. The company that made Diabo 1 and 2, Blizzard North, was shut down in 2005 by the main Blizzard company, so I'm wondering if that has something to do with the change in appearance.

 

I love the Diablo series, but I'm a fan of Blizzard in general.

[bleedinghuskerred]

That's the second time in the last couple of days someone has said a Blizzard games looks too cartoony lol. WoW looks cartoony if you only ever play the lower levels. Once you get into end game content, it is anything but. I don't think D3 looks cartoony at all, personally.

 

From what I remember, though, several employees responsible for Diablo 1 and 2 left Blizz. North before Diablo 3 even got under way. Even if Blizz. North had stayed, it lost several key components responsible for the first two installments. I don't think it would have had too drastic of an effect on the game we have now.

[strigori]

I know a couple of the brains from the first two Diablo titles are behind Torchlight. Much more cartoony than D3 if you ask me.

 

I don't mind the graphic look from D3, I played a bit of the open beta last weekend. I'll be getting it.

[Enhance]

I know a couple of the brains from the first two Diablo titles are behind Torchlight. Much more cartoony than D3 if you ask me.

 

I don't mind the graphic look from D3, I played a bit of the open beta last weekend. I'll be getting it.

I have Torchlight and I agree. That game is very cartoony in comparison to what D3 looks like.

[Enhance]

Well, Torchlight 2 is being developed and will probably be less cartoony.

I watched the gameplay trailer. Looks pretty cool in comparison to Torchlight, but I can't really tell if it's going to be all that different. I don't really have a problem with the look of Torchlight.

[husker_99]

I was looking strongly at diablo 3 until they talked about having a bnet account and micro transactions and always connected to the internet. No lan. f#*k that.

[strigori]

I was looking strongly at diablo 3 until they talked about having a bnet account and micro transactions and always connected to the internet. No lan. f#*k that.

Yeah, I'm not a big fan of having to be logged in all the time either for it. The 'micro transactions' I'm up in the air on. There is. theoretically, a way to make real world money with it.

[Enhance]

Well, many of the players buying D3 have battle.net accounts already because they play WoW, Starcraft or one of their other many titles. The battle.net accounts have been in play for years now, so, it's really nothing new.

 

As far as the real world money and micro transaction things, I'm not really that bothered by it. Players won't be forced to use real money. And although other players will obviously have a gear advantage because they're using real money, Blizzard didn't do this just because they felt like it. Players wanted the option to use real money in the game. WoW is rampant with people buying gold with real money, which is strictly against the WoW license agreement. Blizzard is listening to what a lot of their fan base has asked for, which is real life money converting into virtual money.

 

It sucks for people like me who won't waste my money on that sort of thing, but it also means two things: 1) I'll just have to try harder and longer to get gear and 2) I can be proud of myself knowing that I got gear the legitimate way. Moral victory!!

[Blackshirts007]

never heard of it

[strigori]

Well, many of the players buying D3 have battle.net accounts already because they play WoW, Starcraft or one of their other many titles. The battle.net accounts have been in play for years now, so, it's really nothing new.

 

As far as the real world money and micro transaction things, I'm not really that bothered by it. Players won't be forced to use real money. And although other players will obviously have a gear advantage because they're using real money, Blizzard didn't do this just because they felt like it. Players wanted the option to use real money in the game. WoW is rampant with people buying gold with real money, which is strictly against the WoW license agreement. Blizzard is listening to what a lot of their fan base has asked for, which is real life money converting into virtual money.

 

It sucks for people like me who won't waste my money on that sort of thing, but it also means two things: 1) I'll just have to try harder and longer to get gear and 2) I can be proud of myself knowing that I got gear the legitimate way. Moral victory!!

I think the biggest difference with the micro transactions is also that you only play with other people on D3 when you want to, and players like myself who wont be doing much if any multiplayer on it, it effects me not at all. There won't be the same 'social' dynamic of needing to keep up with the joneses.

[jsneb83]

[NebHusker72]

I will be wasting...er, playing D3 this summer and beyond...

[Enhance]

This is going to be a very long two weeks.

[VectorVictor]

Well, many of the players buying D3 have battle.net accounts already because they play WoW, Starcraft or one of their other many titles. The battle.net accounts have been in play for years now, so, it's really nothing new.

 

Yes and no. With StarCraft 2, Battle.net accounts and internet access were mandatory to play even the single-player game. No LAN play, no offline play, and no hosting your own server if you want--everything, good and bad, goes through Battle.net. Problem is, Battle.net is suspect and is prone to dropping even the best of connections, and I have a feeling that Diablo will tax Battle.net even further.

 

As far as the real world money and micro transaction things, I'm not really that bothered by it. Players won't be forced to use real money. And although other players will obviously have a gear advantage because they're using real money, Blizzard didn't do this just because they felt like it. Players wanted the option to use real money in the game. WoW is rampant with people buying gold with real money, which is strictly against the WoW license agreement. Blizzard is listening to what a lot of their fan base has asked for, which is real life money converting into virtual money.

 

Last I heard, auctions were going to be for real local (to the player) currency, and not funny money or credits. Even if they changed this, the auction houses are rife with profiteering and farmers in WoW--why would we think it would be any different in Diablo 3?

 

Also, here's a Kotaku article on the real-money auction houses and how Blizzard will be taking a significant portion of profits from auction houses. This move has that a*****e Bobby Knotnick's fingerprints all over this.

 

As for Torchlight 2, I'm looking forward to it more than Diablo 3. LAN play, offline play, four player co-op, and the first game was excellent. Plus, Torchlight 2 ($19.99) is 1/3 of the cost of Diablo 3 ($59.99)--hell, Steam is running a special where you can buy four licenses for Torchlight 2 for $60, and they throw in a license for the first game for free.

 

Frankly, I'll just stick with Torchlight 2 and save myself the money and grief that draconian DRM brings itself. More power to you if you can power through such nonsense.