Only for PC, and Mac eh? I guess I won't be getting it.
You seem surprised.
Title: Re: Diablo III
Post by: Enner on June 29, 2008, 02:22:11 AM
Well, this is expected. While this is great to hear that a new one is on the way to break our mouse buttons and fingers, I'd have to be honest and say that I was hoping for something more new.
Still, the graphics look nice and I won't mind some new dungeon crawling.
Title: Re: Diablo III
Post by: NWR_insanolord on June 29, 2008, 02:45:25 AM
I never played the first two but I'll have to buy it and try it out because it's Blizzard, the only developer that not only always makes a Mac version, but always packs it in the same box as the PC version from day one.
Title: Re: Diablo III
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on June 29, 2008, 04:37:16 AM
Hmmm, great news for fans of the series I guess. I personally was never a big fan of the series (though I like the genre).
Title: Re: Diablo III
Post by: ReverendNoahWhateley on June 29, 2008, 06:43:59 AM
Super dooper. Diablo is by far my favorite Blizzard franchise.
Title: Re: Diablo III
Post by: Arbok on June 29, 2008, 01:50:25 PM
So 20 years after Diablo 2 and Cain is still alive? My god...
Anyway, can't wait for this game.
Title: Re: Diablo III
Post by: Caliban on June 29, 2008, 06:28:08 PM
Only for PC, and Mac eh? I guess I won't be getting it.
You seem surprised.
Haha, well I was thinking that Blizzard made Baldur's Gate 2 which was ported onto consoles, but upon checking on wikipedia I relearned it to be from Bioware, but still I think it's a shame they don't bring such a game onto consoles.
Title: Re: Diablo III
Post by: Maverick on June 29, 2008, 07:04:48 PM
Does Blizzard make new franchises anymore?
Title: Re: Diablo III
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on June 30, 2008, 01:32:54 AM
World of [old franchise here]
Title: Re: Diablo III
Post by: NWR_insanolord on June 30, 2008, 02:41:11 AM
World of The Lost Vikings coming July 2012.
Title: Re: Diablo III
Post by: KDR_11k on June 30, 2008, 05:55:27 AM
Only for PC, and Mac eh? I guess I won't be getting it.
You seem surprised.
Haha, well I was thinking that Blizzard made Baldur's Gate 2 which was ported onto consoles, but upon checking on wikipedia I relearned it to be from Bioware, but still I think it's a shame they don't bring such a game onto consoles.
There was a version of Diablo on the Playstation. It sucked. No surprised there. You kind of have to point and click in action RPGs. Not everything needs a console port, and it's certainly good to see that some developers still believe that's true.
Title: Re: Diablo III
Post by: Maverick on June 30, 2008, 05:04:42 PM
OMG! I henceforth pledge half of my monthly earnings in order to experience the privilege of playing this masterpiece of community role-playing!
Title: Re: Diablo III
Post by: Deguello on June 30, 2008, 06:07:16 PM
LOL You gotta love the reporting of this game's announcement.
IGN basically said Blizzard was going after a "casual audience" because Blizzard does not want to shut out every user ever by requiring high tech specs. Will this bullshit ever cease? So Blizzard's targeting "non-gamer, idiot retard casuals" now? Can we all agree that this "casual" **** was basically created out of whole cloth by slanted press sites such as IGN?
Title: Re: Diablo III
Post by: Kairon on June 30, 2008, 06:19:55 PM
LOL You gotta love the reporting of this game's announcement.
IGN basically said Blizzard was going after a "casual audience" because Blizzard does not want to shut out every user ever by requiring high tech specs. Will this bull**** ever cease? So Blizzard's targeting "non-gamer, idiot retard casuals" now? Can we all agree that this "casual" **** was basically created out of whole cloth by slanted press sites such as IGN?
I completely agree. This sort of slanted reporting is ridiculous and... it's just... yeah. Out of hand now.
Title: Re: Diablo III
Post by: Morari on June 30, 2008, 06:23:53 PM
The game still looks great. Then again, so did Titan Quest and it did require a ridiculously high-end system. I think a lot of that had to do with poorly optimized code however. I loved watching the tall grass and fields of grain part around your character and sway in the wind behind! :)
Title: Re: Diablo III
Post by: Shecky on June 30, 2008, 09:24:36 PM
LOL You gotta love the reporting of this game's announcement.
IGN basically said Blizzard was going after a "casual audience" because Blizzard does not want to shut out every user ever by requiring high tech specs. Will this bull**** ever cease? So Blizzard's targeting "non-gamer, idiot retard casuals" now? Can we all agree that this "casual" **** was basically created out of whole cloth by slanted press sites such as IGN?
what
Title: Re: Diablo III
Post by: Dasmos on July 05, 2008, 05:40:38 AM
Title: Re: Diablo III
Post by: Morari on October 15, 2008, 06:34:55 PM
Blizzcon sucked if for no other reason than the announcement that Diablo III will have no LAN option. I mean, really Blizzard, what the ****? Forcing everyone to play on Battle.net is little more than a DRM scheme. Blizzard is going to be as bad as Valave, shoving Steam done everyone's throats. I certainly will not purchase three different copies of a game just to play on my personal, private, home network with the family. What ever happened to "home licenses" and spawn installs?
Title: Re: Diablo III
Post by: Morari on September 21, 2011, 10:40:45 AM
Blizzard is now sending out beta invites for Diablo III. Assuming anyone is still interested in this title after all of its "features" were revealed. Reminder:
-Always online and connected to Battle.net... even in singleplayer. -No LAN play -Auction House
There have been other questionable tweaks made to the basic gameplay, but none of them sounded deal-breaking. Very sad, considering D2:LoD is still among the very first things installed on any new system of mine. I guess I'll just have to rely on Torchlight II instead. :\
Title: Re: Diablo III
Post by: Ceric on September 21, 2011, 11:25:55 AM
Sounds the exact same as there stance on Starcraft 2.
Title: Re: Diablo III
Post by: Morari on September 21, 2011, 02:47:26 PM
Indeed, it is. I haven't bought or played StarCraft II either.
I suppose at least Diablo III isn't being split up into three different games to further rape customers. :P
Title: Re: Diablo III
Post by: Ceric on September 21, 2011, 04:57:25 PM
True, but Starcraft 2 really is worth its price for the single player alone if you like RTS. The pain is all the patching which I'm sure Diablo 3 will have too.
Title: Re: Diablo III
Post by: Morari on September 21, 2011, 05:28:01 PM
Oh, I'm sure that the content is worth it. It's the DRM and lack of standard multiplayer features that keep me from buying it. Granted, I always liked WarCraft better. :P
Title: Re: Diablo III
Post by: Ceric on September 21, 2011, 05:30:48 PM
Warcraft 2 single player but, Starcraft was the better multiplayer game.
Title: Re: Diablo III
Post by: Enner on September 21, 2011, 06:06:13 PM
The Man locking you down in His books and lowering your standards. Granted, I'm sure the game plays fine if you have a steady internet connection. It's still a bit of a shame that big developers and publishers of PC games are reducing the freedom previously had by PC games.
Title: Re: Diablo III
Post by: Morari on September 21, 2011, 08:06:23 PM
Ceric, I liked WarCraft III much better than anything StarCraft had to offer (multi-player and singleplayer). The focus on micro-management and heroes were far more interesting to than Zerg rushes. Of course, I almost doubt we'll ever see another WarCraft RTS anyway with the way Blizzar's MMO (ugh!) is going.
Enner, it's not just PC games. Consoles are moving in that direction as well. It's pretty evident by Sony, and especially Microsoft's moves this generation.
Title: Re: Diablo III
Post by: Enner on September 21, 2011, 09:44:26 PM
Heh, we're gonna be entering CD keys for Diablo 4 on the Xbox 3.
Title: Re: Diablo III
Post by: Ceric on September 21, 2011, 09:58:39 PM
Ceric, I liked WarCraft III much better than anything StarCraft had to offer (multi-player and singleplayer). The focus on micro-management and heroes were far more interesting to than Zerg rushes. Of course, I almost doubt we'll ever see another WarCraft RTS anyway with the way Blizzar's MMO (ugh!) is going.
Enner, it's not just PC games. Consoles are moving in that direction as well. It's pretty evident by Sony, and especially Microsoft's moves this generation.
I have to disagree. I found Warcraft 3 to be a bunch of escort missions and the multiplayer went one of two ways. Really really really slow or all the suddenly I was being royally maimed by someone who could do everything at speeds that I could never pull off.
Warcraft 2 the game was still expansive and RTS.
Title: Re: Diablo III
Post by: Morari on September 21, 2011, 11:02:23 PM
Enner, CD keys wouldn't be a problem. They're a simple and fairly effective means of controlling duplicate players in the online space. Anything more than a CD key or initial disc check is far too much security in my books. In fact, I make a habit of removing the CD checks for the sake of personal convenience and the safety and longevity of the discs themselves.
Ceric, to each his own, I suppose. I haven't played a Blizzard RTS that I've disliked. For me though, WarCraft 3 struck the right balance between planning and actual on-the-fly strategy. Of course, I spent many an hour within WarCraft II: Battle.net Edition all the same. That was years before the third installment was to be released, however. ;)
I'm sad to say that I've never been particularly good within the RTS genre. I'm much more adept with its turn-based cousin. To that fact, Blizzard games were about the only point I had to get into the genre... and Rome: Total War, if you want to count it under RTS given its quasi mix of the two styles.
Title: Re: Diablo III
Post by: Chozo Ghost on September 22, 2011, 12:36:24 AM
Stieg Hedlund isn't involved in this one, so I'm not sure if I should expect much out of it. But it is good to know they are keeping the system requirements to a minimum, so maybe even my PC will be able to handle it.
Title: Re: Diablo III
Post by: Morari on September 22, 2011, 01:57:28 AM
Blizzard has always been pretty good about making sure their games scale across a wide range of hardware. I am a little curious to see exactly how D3 looks in reality. Titan Quest set the bar pretty high for visuals in an ActionRPG.
Title: Re: Diablo III
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on October 21, 2011, 05:09:48 PM
Did you guys see you can get a free copy of Diablo III with a year of WoW?
Blizzard is trying pretty hard to ruin my life
Title: Re: Diablo III
Post by: Ceric on October 21, 2011, 05:32:43 PM
I saw that. The real question I have is with the Annual Pass is WoW discounted more then the current 6 Months max? I mean 12 months I'll probably be out of Diablo 3 so it probably be cheaper for me in the long run.
