General Discussion

---

Originally posted by altairzq

---

Originally posted by Apocamentus

---

Originally posted by Zorvan

---

Originally posted by Apocamentus

---

Originally posted by Zorvan

---

Originally posted by Waterlily

---

Originally posted by Martie

---

Originally posted by Waterlily

---

Originally posted by Martie

---

Originally posted by Waterlily

WWI?

---

 
At their invitational. Im watching the streaming Live conference, the hall is packed with hundreds or thousands of peopel that just watched it.  ITS INSANE.

---

Cool, I see. I just wanna know if it's still isometric or full 3D. I'll worry about the rest later heh.

---

 
Full 3d.

---

Cool :).

---

 
I'm looking at it and it's still isometric. And it is no more an mmorpg than the original 2 were. It's just Diablo 2 with a couple extra classes and better graphics. Other than that, same ol' same ol'.
But I like the Diablo games for what they are, so I'm fine with it. Just don't expect to ever see D3 listed here.

---

 
It looks full 3d to me just a fixed isometric camera.

---

To me, and most people I'm thinking, full 3D means 1st/3rd person view, not top-down view only. If you notice, Waterlily asked if it was "isometric or full 3d".
 

---

 
Well 3D is 3D, and seeing as the character models are 3d (and probably the landscapes though this is harder to tell) it is 3D.

---

 
Dude, it's isometric.

---

The initial question that was asked is flawed. Isometric can use a 3d or 2d game engines. Isometric only refers to the camera angle. 1st person and 3rd person only refers to the camera angle as well. 1st and 3rd person games can also be made using 2d or 3d game engines just like isometric games. So the original questioned asked by the op should of been...."Is Diablo 3 a 1st or 3rd person game using a 3d engine?"

I've been waiting for this for a long time. Was a huge Diablo and Diablo II fan. The game play videos look absolutely sick with destructable environments and such. Hopefully the game will live up to my expectations.

A little , but I just find a few post in this thread funny.  Not going to point out any names.  There seem to be quite a few people that seem to believe that Blizzard is making a mistake.  Let me just ask you a few questions.  How many triple A title's have you produced in the last 10 years?  Diablo 3 might not be ground shattering in terms of evolution of the series, but Blizzard has always produced fun to play games.  So what exactly makes you think you know more then them whats the right direction for their IP?

I'm hapy to see Blizzard keeping the same feel and style for their games.  Square-Enix use to be one of my favorite companies in-part to the Final Fantasy series.  If it wasn't for that train wreck they called Final Fantasy XII.  Square-Enix hasn't learned a lesson that Blizzard seems to understand well.  You don't write off all the old fans that have supported your games over the years, in the hopes of reaching a newer crowd.

To the guy that said "Single Player RPG are dead, and all people want are MMORPG's."  You couldn't be further from the truth.  10 or 20 years down the road when developers can actually tell a gripping story within the game, maybe just maybe MMORPG's will stack up to a good Single Player RPG.

Originally posted by puma713

Originally posted by Martie

Originally posted by puma713

Originally posted by Martie

Originally posted by Raizeen

Originally posted by Tridian

Originally posted by Zorvan

Originally posted by Lobotomist

SHAVE MY LEGS AND CALL ME SHIRLEY !!!!!

 

I thought the day will never arrive !!!!

I refuse to shave your legs but I'll be happy to call you Shirley.
 

And it is a great day in gaming.

 

cant wait for d3 to come out.

 

its blizz it took them like 2+ years to make a nexpansion making a fully new mmorpg lawl 8-10 years no doubt

 

The fact that the orginal wow world had more content in those 2 years than most mmos have after 6  or 8.  The oroginal game still has more content than probably any mmo world without the expansion.  Blizzard dont need 50 expansions to try to improve their game from the start because its crap unlike alot of games.

 

Martie, I've enjoyed your posts so far (its fun to read someone who is really passionate about a certain game) but I'm going to have to call bullshit here.  Just because a game comes out with a lot of expansions doesn't mean that the world has no content.  EQ 1 had a wealth of content and they had what. . .5-6 expansions?  Maybe more?  DAoC had tons of content - three realms of individually written content, to be exact.  EQ 2.  There are plenty of games with lots of content.  And the original WoW was patched forward - it wasn't shipped with all the aforementioned content you're referring to.  In fact, the content in WoW that you're referencing is nothing more than a few new dungeons, a few new suits of armor and a new rep grind.  To me, that's not content.  You know what I think content is?  Options.  Has Blizzard given us a single new class to play over the 4+ years WoW has been out?  No, they haven't.  And now, their answer to the class situation is a new class that everyone can play, starting at 55.  *snore* 

I think you date yourself a little bit when you compare other content to WoW.  Sure, it has a lot of content now, but its a gear war and the content was added in tiny little expansions called patches.  You think WoW hasn't been "expanded" because they haven't come out with "expansion boxes"?  Wrong.

 

So you automatically thnk expansions means making the game better, maybe sometimes some games were so crap that they need so many even crapper expansion IE EQ2.  The fact the blizzard actually gives content patches that are damn huge when they release big ones means they dont need ot keep pumping oput worthless and pointless expansion, getting further and further away from the main game. 

Wow dosnt need 40 classes unlike some mmos, which prentnd to be different classes but are actually mirrorered claases in different names.  Yes you maybe right wow could do with 1-2 or maybe 3 new classes, but making them means the game gets better?  Bullshit on that.  Daoc classes like Vanguard and eq2 are just pintless.  You dont need so many to make a good game.    You streamline, and adapt and work out whats bets for the game you have designed.

You thnk wow has no ioptions, go play the BC and then tell me if there are more options than old wow.  Even if you may not like it, there are way more options in TBC.

 

Did you say the Blizz's patches don't take the game further and further away from the main game?  I'm going to just stop responding here.  What happened when TBC came out?  Oh that's right, everything from the original game became obsolete, including all the content your going on about. 

And no, I don't 'automatically' think that expansions make a game better (SWG) but if you could subside your Blizz-love induced rage for a moment, we could talk like adults.  Having more classes isn't a point on weakness, its a point on replayability.  The replayability of WoW is shit.  I'm sorry to have to break it to you.  There is a reason that they're making it easy to level from 20-60.  There is a reason their making quests give more experience.  People just want to get to endgame.  You know what that's a product of?  Expansions that overrule all of your 'original game'. 

And I agree with you about streamlining and adapting, but they're not doing that.  They're just adding more dungeons and more armor.  When you take a step back, that's all it is.  And rep grind.  But what do you grind rep?  Gear.  Gear =/= content.

And I'm not sure how to answer you on your TBC comment.  Adding a new race gave me more options?  Not really.  Now I can look different.  Be still, my heart.

It didnt take anything away from the original game, beacause everything is tied in with the original gameing world and story.  Hell even start is being used again in the new expansion.  Eveythign with the neew expansion ties in with everything from the orginal wow story.  you think wos 1 expansion overrule its original game world lol?? Then soprry to break this to you, EQ2 do, eq1 do, Daoc certainly do so does UO.  These expansions for those games are so far from the original game its untrue.  Wows whole these is stil warcraft and its world.

Sorry to also break this to you, you think Warhammers classes are different because they have so many?  Its well known alot of them are mirrored copies under different names for each race. 

---

Originally posted by Roin

To the guy that said "Single Player RPG are dead, and all people want are MMORPG's."  You couldn't be further from the truth.  10 or 20 years down the road when developers can actually tell a gripping story within the game, maybe just maybe MMORPG's will stack up to a good Single Player RPG.

---

They'll always be a place for SP RPG games. For immersion types, MMOs are no substitute (they distract, as the last thing such a player wants is to chitchat with some troll, literally).

DX3 will be SP mostly (with MP thrown in), but it's a hybrid FPS/RPG, and this fanbase wants the storyline that would make RPGers drool, with the options of a RPG (names; skills; money and a-l-o-t of exploration). Not just s shooter with no other way to get around a baddie. Funny, that such a hybrid would be more of a RPG than many of these MMOs, even (especially the emphasis on raiding for l00t) -- not thinking around the baddie to get it another way.

Originally posted by UNATCOII

 

---

Originally posted by Roin

 

To the guy that said "Single Player RPG are dead, and all people want are MMORPG's."  You couldn't be further from the truth.  10 or 20 years down the road when developers can actually tell a gripping story within the game, maybe just maybe MMORPG's will stack up to a good Single Player RPG.

---

 

They'll always be a place for SP RPG games. For immersion types, MMOs are no substitute (they distract, as the last thing such a player wants is to chitchat with some troll, literally).

DX3 will be SP mostly (with MP thrown in), but it's a hybrid FPS/RPG, and this fanbase wants the storyline that would make RPGers drool, with the options of a RPG (names; skills; money and a-l-o-t of exploration). Not just s shooter with no other way to get around a baddie. Funny, that such a hybrid would be more of a RPG than many of these MMOs, even (especially the emphasis on raiding for l00t) -- not thinking around the baddie to get it another way.

WTH is DX3?

Geez not all of us know all the games released or to be released...

Unless you mean Diablo 3 but you've inserted an X to make it look cooler...

---

Originally posted by markoraos
WTH is DX3?
Geez not all of us know all the games released or to be released...
Unless you mean Diablo 3 but you've inserted an X to make it look cooler...

---

Deus Ex 3 = DX3

http://www.deusex3.com/

That trailer there may not mean much to those who aren't fans, but it was a nod to us fans -- by using the DX1 opening theme and JC Denton's like voice over.

It's a cyberpunk FPS/RPG hybrid, and one of the best games of all time (not just my opinion). Hopefully DX3 will top even the original and get this franchise back on track.

If EIDOS can turn it into a MMO, I'd be in heaven. It's the only game I really loved in 20 years -- has everything a gamer wants: GOOD music; big world to explore; good storyline; actual books [and I mean chapters of REAL books, not just placeholders] to read that blended into the story; fight/talk/sneak your way around things, and you didn't even need to kill anyone to finish the game; augmentations; weapons for the shooters; hacking/cracking/lockpicking; and multiple ends, for REAL replay value.

I...wanted...to...get...away...from...this...wait...until...2009/10......I...need...a...long...MMO!!!!!!