Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Blizzard Making Changes to Systems in Diablo 3

Last response: in News comments
Share
January 20, 2012 5:21:20 AM

There goes the hope of FEB release !!!!!

Just release and patch later like other companies does. dammit ....
Score
-24
January 20, 2012 5:32:26 AM

As much as I enjoy playing betas and even alphas, it's also quite wonderful to play a game that works. I've waited this long, what's a little more?
Score
22
Related resources
January 20, 2012 5:36:14 AM

I still want an invite to the beta, Blizzard... :D  or anyone else!
Score
4
January 20, 2012 7:37:25 AM

ttcboyThere goes the hope of FEB release !!!!!Just release and patch later like other companies does. dammit ....

No, just no.
Score
18
Anonymous
January 20, 2012 8:12:22 AM

Actually, people will remember both. In the time it's taking Blizzard to give us Diablo III, BioWare gave us the ENTIRE MASS EFFECT FRANCHISE.
Score
14
January 20, 2012 8:14:58 AM

Please give me a key! I've been waiting for longo longo time now!
Score
-3
January 20, 2012 10:01:27 AM

I don't care for this game at all since it seems to be built for PS2 hardware specifications and I'm tired of PS3 hardware specifications already.
Score
5
January 20, 2012 10:34:34 AM

Its pretty standard for Biizz to do this. I was in the WCIII beta and some of the balances were so far off that they were just nuts (skele rush anyone). So this does not surprise me. And frankly I think its good that Blizz still puts games first and release dates second.
Score
3
January 20, 2012 10:43:09 AM

"No one will remember if the game is late, only if it's great"
Yea, because absolutely NO ONE REMEMBERS that DNF was late. Nope. Nobody here I'm sure. That didn't affect the gameplay experience at all.
btw, /sarcasm.
Score
4
January 20, 2012 10:52:58 AM

I'm starting to think George Lucas is in charge of this game because Blizz has been doing nothing but make more and more changes and just delaying the release further and further.
Score
-3
January 20, 2012 11:01:00 AM

Quote:
"No one will remember if the game is late, only if it's great."
Ummm, yes we will. This is what Blizzard is know for".
Score
2
January 20, 2012 11:03:44 AM

sporkimusI'm starting to think George Lucas is in charge of this game because Blizz has been doing nothing but make more and more changes and just delaying the release further and further.


This should be a praise not a complaint. When I purchase a game and play it I want it to be a positive experience that is aimed towards the best the developers can provide. I applaud Blizzard for taking their time to do just that.
Score
2
January 20, 2012 11:15:25 AM

What is one more year(hopefully) in comparison to almost a decade of waiting? Just stop waiting and when D3 gets here it would be awesome. There are many other games to play.
Score
0
January 20, 2012 11:21:09 AM

Diablo 1 1996, Diablo 2 2000, Diablo 3 2012.....See what I did there? Suuure, let's polish, leeeeet's polish. Because an Action RPG game is so complex to make, sooooooo complex. Even more complex when you're using 8 years old graphic technology might I add.
Score
9
January 20, 2012 11:27:16 AM

We will remember if it is late and it sucks though
Score
8
January 20, 2012 12:47:01 PM

stingstang"No one will remember if the game is late, only if it's great"Yea, because absolutely NO ONE REMEMBERS that DNF was late. Nope. Nobody here I'm sure. That didn't affect the gameplay experience at all.btw, /sarcasm.

Well, to be fair, DNF was not only late, but also not that great. So that might not be the best example.
Score
2
January 20, 2012 12:51:02 PM

"No one will remember if a game is late, only if it's great."
The original starcraft was WAAAAAAAAAY late... I remember!
Score
2
January 20, 2012 1:02:46 PM

I'm bummed that they're getting rid of the Nephalem Cube. I really liked being able to get some use out of the random common drops and not having to go into town as often. Not a big deal when I'm on my own, but missing out on mob kills and XP with your friends is going to suck every time your bags are full, which will happen more often now.

I played through the beta. You can only get up to level 13, and it's only part of one act. But trust me when I say this game is going to be awesome, and it'll be worth the wait and polish they're putting on it. I never played either of the first two, but I already love this one and it's going to be a day one purchase for me.
Score
1
Anonymous
January 20, 2012 1:43:18 PM

"We hope she’ll be able to join your caravan in the future, but for now we’re going to focus on the extensive customization options the game already offers."

Translation: We'll remove it now so you can buy it later in a DLC
Score
2
January 20, 2012 1:58:51 PM

at this rate my 1yr old will be able to play with me by the time the game is released.
Score
6
January 20, 2012 2:07:50 PM

Put down $1,800 for a new rig in anticipation of an "early Q1" release. Could have gotten Ivy Bridge + nVideo GTX 6xx. I should have known better...
Score
-1
January 20, 2012 2:17:28 PM

I'll only remember it if I get a LAN option.
Score
4
January 20, 2012 2:23:34 PM

AKA waiting for GW2 release date
Score
1
January 20, 2012 3:02:24 PM

""Our job isn't just to put out a game, it's to release the next Diablo game,""

If thats the case the whole team should be sacked immediately for failure to perform the terms of their employment!
Score
4
January 20, 2012 3:42:06 PM

dark_lord69"No one will remember if a game is late, only if it's great."The original starcraft was WAAAAAAAAAY late... I remember!


Exactly. If any of you actually own the Warcraft II box, take a gander at the back of the manual.

Starcraft will be released summer of 1996.

Starcraft actual release date 31 March 1998. Starcraft was one of the greatest competitive RTS to ever hit the scene.

Find another game to occupy yourselves with or get over it.
Score
2
January 20, 2012 3:45:57 PM

Removal of the Identify scroll = Good // Potion Button = Good // Removing the Cauldron & Cube = Possibly Bad

I personally like the cube and I'm sure I would like the cauldron if it were available in the beta.
Score
1
January 20, 2012 3:48:49 PM

everygamerWe will remember if it is late and it sucks though

How can a game be late if there is no release date.....
Score
2
January 20, 2012 4:04:02 PM

bak0nI'll only remember it if I get a LAN option.


Blizzard made it very clear with Starcraft 2 that LAN isn't happening and they did very well with the game. Diablo 3 will be the same thing so I don't expect Blizzard to ever make another game with a LAN option. I've played the beta and it's looks great. LAN would be nice, but definitely not a requirement in my book.
Score
-4
January 20, 2012 4:18:44 PM

DTheSleeplessActually, people will remember both. In the time it's taking Blizzard to give us Diablo III, BioWare gave us the ENTIRE MASS EFFECT FRANCHISE.


Big difference. 1 is a single player RPG, the other is a multiplayer game that is created to satiate an addicting, almost infinitely replayable game. ME was a great story with good game elements, but didn't need to last longer than 1-2 playthroughs. D3 needs to last for YEARS, on 1 game.
Score
2
January 20, 2012 4:18:48 PM

By the time they release this game no one will care anymore. Blizzard, please remove your cranium from your rectum.
Score
0
January 20, 2012 4:22:23 PM

steadywatersPut down $1,800 for a new rig in anticipation of an "early Q1" release. Could have gotten Ivy Bridge + nVideo GTX 6xx. I should have known better...


Good thing you weren't holding your breath.
Score
6
January 20, 2012 4:28:39 PM

Disappointing news, more delays... sounds like Diablo 3 is in Global recessions.
Score
1
January 20, 2012 4:30:54 PM

BurodsxBlizzard made it very clear with Starcraft 2 that LAN isn't happening and they did very well with the game. Diablo 3 will be the same thing so I don't expect Blizzard to ever make another game with a LAN option. I've played the beta and it's looks great. LAN would be nice, but definitely not a requirement in my book.


Just because the game did well, that doesn't justify removing features. If battle net actually worked as it was supposed to it would be fine, but I've seen tournament players get disconnected during matches. If they are going to remove LAN support, this absolutely should NOT happen.

Obviously, the story is different with Diablo since it isn't likely to have a big competitive scene. But the point is that there is no justification for leaving out LAN support, and we have a right to call out Blizzard for this.
Score
5
January 20, 2012 4:43:04 PM

My wife and I both lov(ed) Diablo, Diablo 2, and LOD, but I will not buy Diablo 3 if it a) requires a battlenet connection to validate or play the game, or b) does not have LAN play. PERIOD! Which of course means I won't be buying D3 since it fails in both counts.

While the LAN play is just a case for games like Diablo where we (my family) like to play with each other on the LAN, but the whole validation thing is a case for all gaming for me. It is absolutely stupid for people in the same house to have to use the internet to play a game together. As for validation, I do not mind copy protection (that does not cause a ton of problems), but I refuse to buy any game that depends on the original company or some server in the sky for me to install and play a game. I like to play some of my games on and off over a number of years. A good example is Theif. What if that game had required the company for validation to install and play the game? They went belly up! That and sometimes I like to play games when I have no internet connection available. What then? Because of these new trends, I have not purchased quite a few games I would have otherwise. And if I really want to play it, I go and pirate a hacked copy where the validation has been removed. These companies are turning a lot of people like me into pirates, the very thing they were trying to control from happening.
Score
4
January 20, 2012 4:50:30 PM

steadywatersPut down $1,800 for a new rig in anticipation of an "early Q1" release. Could have gotten Ivy Bridge + nVideo GTX 6xx. I should have known better...


Good lord, $1,800 for a rig to play Diablo? You do know it'll run on an 8800GTX, right?
Score
3
January 20, 2012 5:14:02 PM

siuol11Good lord, $1,800 for a rig to play Diablo? You do know it'll run on an 8800GTX, right?


You mean it'll run on a 6600GT...Possibly at near max.
Score
2
January 20, 2012 6:32:59 PM

I hope that the effort to streamline gameplay doesn't end up flatlining it.

ProgressQuest eliminated all of the repetitive parts of RPG play. Give it a try if you haven't heard of it before.
Score
1
January 20, 2012 6:33:01 PM

Anybody who says this game is great and lacks experience with other two. your opinion is invalid! I know this diablo 3 is gonna suck hard comparing to first 2. You can keep your Diablo 3!!! I know its just other money grubbin half assed game.
Score
0
January 20, 2012 8:25:40 PM

steadywatersPut down $1,800 for a new rig in anticipation of an "early Q1" release. Could have gotten Ivy Bridge + nVideo GTX 6xx. I should have known better...

and you could have probably played this game maxed with a computer that cost 1\3 of that price. Then bought whatever will come after Ivy. After you've played DIII to your hearts content.
Score
2
January 20, 2012 9:47:31 PM

thrasher32By the time they release this game no one will care anymore. Blizzard, please remove your cranium from your rectum.


Its only been 10 years. What another few months?!? Cant wait!!!!
Score
-1
Anonymous
January 21, 2012 4:37:49 AM

As someone who got in to beta, I got to admit that D3 doesn't feel as replayable as D2, even with random quests/ events. Or I might just be getting old. The atmosphere in the beta-areas is great, combining the feel of D1 & D2 quite well, although IMO the graphics style takes a little away from it. Overall the story feels like something you'd want to play through, once or twice.

"but for now we’re going to focus on the extensive customization options the game already offers."
If you consider an item a customization, then I guess. Granted, there're no runes in the beta yet.

With me being against always-online for SP (seriously, the game sucks hard with a latency of over 300, like pretty much all online games), and hating RMT ( although understandable ), I'm more excited for Torchlight 2 than D3.
Score
2
January 21, 2012 12:10:16 PM

sporkimusI'm starting to think George Lucas is in charge of this game because Blizz has been doing nothing but make more and more changes and just delaying the release further and further.


NOOOOOOOOOO!!!
Score
-1
January 21, 2012 6:46:25 PM

"No one will remember if the game is late, only if it's great. We trust in our ability to put out a great game, but we're not quite there yet. In addition to finishing and polishing the content of the game we're continuing to iterate on some of the core game systems."

If only Bethesda felt the same instead of shoehorning Skyrim into this 11.11.11 release date (whether the game was ready or not - which it obviously wasn't in the PC platform).
Score
1
January 21, 2012 7:07:05 PM

phoenix32xMy wife and I both lov(ed) Diablo, Diablo 2, and LOD, but I will not buy Diablo 3 if it a) requires a battlenet connection to validate or play the game, or b) does not have LAN play. PERIOD! Which of course means I won't be buying D3 since it fails in both counts.While the LAN play is just a case for games like Diablo where we (my family) like to play with each other on the LAN, but the whole validation thing is a case for all gaming for me. It is absolutely stupid for people in the same house to have to use the internet to play a game together. As for validation, I do not mind copy protection (that does not cause a ton of problems), but I refuse to buy any game that depends on the original company or some server in the sky for me to install and play a game. I like to play some of my games on and off over a number of years. A good example is Theif. What if that game had required the company for validation to install and play the game? They went belly up! That and sometimes I like to play games when I have no internet connection available. What then? Because of these new trends, I have not purchased quite a few games I would have otherwise. And if I really want to play it, I go and pirate a hacked copy where the validation has been removed. These companies are turning a lot of people like me into pirates, the very thing they were trying to control from happening.


No one is turning you into a pirate. You are making that decision on your own. I am playing the beta and there is nothing intrusive about the validation method they have chosen not to mention that the way you go about creating a game and finding a game your friend or family is in is freaken phenomenal. You just right click your friends name after you select your character and if he is in a call you just click join his game. No searching for game names, no nothing. Extremely easy.

If you want to plan a lan game, you require a network, if you want to play over the internet you require a network, so how is it any different besides the fact that the game connects to Battle.net. I could understand your point if you just wanted to play single player by yourself but what your are saying does not make any sense.
Score
-2
January 21, 2012 7:11:23 PM

Old, decrepit, ancient...that is what Diablo is. Is there anyone besides the hardcore fans who want to play a 3/4 view throwback from a dozen years ago? Might as well break out Baldurs Gate 2 and see if it plays on Win7 and save yourself $60.00. This game is dead-in-the-water! That is why it's taking so long.
Score
-2
January 21, 2012 7:15:49 PM

BloobAs someone who got in to beta, I got to admit that D3 doesn't feel as replayable as D2, even with random quests/ events. Or I might just be getting old. The atmosphere in the beta-areas is great, combining the feel of D1 & D2 quite well, although IMO the graphics style takes a little away from it. Overall the story feels like something you'd want to play through, once or twice. "but for now we’re going to focus on the extensive customization options the game already offers."If you consider an item a customization, then I guess. Granted, there're no runes in the beta yet.With me being against always-online for SP (seriously, the game sucks hard with a latency of over 300, like pretty much all online games), and hating RMT ( although understandable ), I'm more excited for Torchlight 2 than D3.



That is my problem with the game. seems like it is going to be a great game, but it does not seem like it is going to have the replay ability the D2 had. Then again, we are not seeing everything. The beta from what I have been told is extremely limited. There is not much in the way of customization at least not in the beta.
Score
1
January 21, 2012 11:47:14 PM

ap3x, yes the beta keeps you very focused on the content they want tested. The only customization you have are switching out your skills and passive bonuses, which is a great idea imo. In D2 people would be gimped until they reached the exact skill they wanted to use. I remember many games of me leveling using tons of mana potions and mass spaming lvl 1 ice bolt. D3 just gives you the skills at a certain level, but you're limited to how many you can equip.
Score
0
January 23, 2012 2:07:20 PM

Yeah right...
Just pull out the game and enable more cores.
Late is late.
Score
-1
January 24, 2012 4:55:31 PM

cobra5000Old, decrepit, ancient...that is what Diablo is. Is there anyone besides the hardcore fans who want to play a 3/4 view throwback from a dozen years ago?Yeah, a lot of people, actually. Dunno where people like you get the idea that every game that's not a freaking FPS is somehow technologically backwards. Hint: the camera angle has shit-all to do with technology or progress or anything. Another hint: the FP viewpoint is OLD. REALLY old.
Quote:
Might as well break out Baldurs Gate 2 and see if it plays on Win7 and save yourself $60.00.
Well you're right on that point: older games like Baldur's Gate 2 are still superior to a lot of the trash that comes out nowadays.
[/quote]
Score
0
!