Diablo III

I remember really souring on Diablo II because of the save mechanic -- basically, everything constantly respawned, so even if you cleared out a large area, made your way to a save point and saved the game, that area you cleared out would be filled with monsters again when you started up the next time. I realize that mechanic was basically to support online play, but it was downright annoying in single player.

This is officially my most anticipated game for the next.. however long it takes them to get it ready. The gameplay video was just stunning, I love the new levels of interactivity with the environment. Beautiful.

Looks like its time to start saving up for a new computer.

Can this be pre-ordered yet?

I'm about to re-install Diablo II to get back into the Diablo mindset. Great times ahead.

Between this and Spore, it's gonna be good to get back to PC gaming.

There's a little larger version of the gameplay video here. http://www.gametrailers.com/player/35674.html



Did that barbarian just get it's head chewed off? Christ this is awesome.

Thanks for the news and this seems cool.

Looking good, and ditto on Spore and Diablo III taking me nack as well to Pv gaming....unless Starcraft II is released this year.

I love how much ooomph the Barbarian has. You can feel the bone shattering.

I watched about a minute and was unimpressed. Then came back later and finished it off. It still looks like not much more than a graphic/physics overhaul, but it still looks damn impressive. This kind of game, there's not many places to go past the "click until dead, collect loots" thing, but Diablo always did it great.

Oh god yes.

I was very addicted to number II, even though it's pretty repetative if you go back and look at it again. You also needed spider hands to be able to effictively use more than one skill while gulping down potions. I actually think this sort of game is better suited to consoles.

I watched a bit of the gameplay video... for those who thought Starcraft II was the same game with better graphics, here's another one!

I got a bit pissed off that they apparently replaced the necromancer with a functionally equivalent witch doctor. It's the kind of thing that makes people just scratch their heads and wonder why. But everything else is pretty damn awesome.

Yeah, I'm kind of bummed I won't be able to make a meleemancer in this one. But if they follow in D2's steps I'm sure I can find some other weird skill combination to fit me. That's what I loved the most about it. You could play a caster type character, put every skill point in strength and still be able to make him viable. I hope this philosophy carries over to D3.

I had thought that too, though as I understand it the Witch Doctor will also mix elements of Druid somehow. I guess we'll see how the character differs from it's predecessor(s?) in the coming months.

Overall, I think the real star of the gameplay footage is the Barbarian. I completely agree with Domingo; each swing has brutal impact, and we're not even the ones controlling the character. Seeing how the character has been updated and how it's retained staple, classic abilities really excited me.

Personally, I'm just happy that they're developing an RPG that emphasizes solo/small-scale group play.

Very glad they're going with the stable world, random dungeon of the previous game and not trying to WoW it up with a persistent universe. God damn, I'm looking forward to breaking the skulls of legions and legions of the damned.

The first Diablo had a really unique and oppressively dark tone, which was bolstered largely by its intimate, gory, and claustrophobic atmosphere, great score and sound design, and wonderfully creepy monster art. Diablo II, while being really fun in its own right, eschews the dark stuff in D1 for a more cartoonish D&D tone, and I felt that this was to its detriment. It was a fantasy-action RPG rather than a horror game. Sadly, D3 looks to be skewing more in the direction of a light-toned action game. It looks good, but I think they're forgetting what made the first one such a huge hit.

Looks like the villain from Nightmare before Christmas makes a cameo.

It's an understandable complaint, but it's the heart of the game, even in single player. I wouldn't expect that to change in Diablo III as it would essentially break the game for most of the players interested in it.

That seems to be the most common (and only) reservation fans are having at the first look. The game's a long way off and I'd expect the art style to at least be tweaked before release, or changed significantly.

Yet another reason why I'm glad that I upgraded my computer...

Maybe, but I'm not holding my breath. The enveloping (literal) darkness of the first game also served to make it a lot creepier. You couldn't see what horrors were hiding on the other side of the archway until you walked into the room. The D3 video looks like a well-lit cartoon with vibrant and oversaturated colors.

Good points, but this is just a demo and not an accurate rep seeing as this won't be released for a little while longer.

It looks pretty polished, but yeah, knowing Blizzard, we won't be seeing this before the end of the decade.

I haven't played either in years, but I remember Kurast's tombs and sewers matching the same creepy factor of D1's dungeons. I think once you got below ground and away from the admittedly brightly-lit topside landscapes, D2 felt a lot more like D1, but it did feel like you were going between two totally different games as you traveled between the dungeons and the outside world.

The gameplay footage looks great, but I'm still getting the "Gauntlet on steroids" vibe I got from the second game.

My thoughts exactly. I was all excited till I realized this game could cost me a grand.

Even in its darkest moments (e.g. Act 3's tombs), Diablo II skewed toward silly. Haku Slayer dolls and fire breathing dwarf shaman coupled with a less realistic art design made it a much goofier enterprise than its predecessor. I never understood why was hell so well-lit that time around. It felt like it was lit with fluorescent bulbs (to be fair, hell may very well be lit this way).

I'll give you silly monsters and too many wide open areas instead of the tight, claustrophibic dungeons of the original.. but I don't think it was an overwhelmingly darker (literally) game than the sequel





But granted, I haven't played the original Diablo since the days when it was the only Diablo

I have little doubt that this is going to be a very good, well polished game. Maybe they really have not been working on it hard until a year ago, but reports saying this has been in development for 4 years makes me wonder what makes it take this long to get the game done. From all indications so far this is almost exactly like Diablo II, just using up-to-date computer graphics.

I think it is great Blizzard keeps churning out top-quality sequels, but another side of me wants to see them make something new. With the amount of effort they put into something, I would like to see something new and original being made along with these sequels. Blizzard used to be a lead innovator, but the only thing original they have made in a long time is WoW, which is really a spin-off that takes a lot of features from Diablo as well. Hearing about has Starcraft:Ghost was cancelled, and how Warcraft 3 was originally not a RTS game, then got changed, makes me think that Blizzard has gotten complacent. Hopefully that is not the case and they have something up their sleeves.

Dude, fluorescent bulbs are the devil. Never light anything with that disgusting green light.

Oh and...

RAKANISHU!

Considering Diablo II sold twice as many copies as the first (5 million--including the expansion pack--versus 2.5 million) and is still played religiously today by many, many people, I'd say that they not only remember what made the first one such a huge hit but also knew how to make the second one a RIDICULOUSLY huge hit. Diablo II is still the fastest selling PC game of all time, and I think Diablo III might do just fine.

Plus, I had a chance to work with Stieg Hedlund (designer of Diablo II) recently, and he's a darned nice fellow. He's also this huge Viking-looking dude that they could have based the barbarian model on, so that's fun.

Personally, I think they've nailed the mechanics perfectly, and am glad to see that all they're doing is iterating on that for III. The basic graphical roguelike formula is so tasty: explore random dungeons, kill monsters, get loot, and level up. Then do it over and over again. The Diablo series hits that spot perfectly.

Diablo had a really constrictive light radius. I'm not sure why your pic has the light cranked up to 200, but I'm assuming it's just to show detail.

I don't doubt that Diablo III will make Blizzard lots and lots and lots of money. Diablo II was a classic example of the "more is more" approach to game sequels- it was certainly bigger, deeper, and longer- but what made the original such a seminal touchstone wasn't the character classes, dungeon size, or spell compendium. DII a fine example of a fantasy action-RPG, but as far as capturing the tone of the original, it misses the mark.

Well, they both also had absolutely fuck-awesome music, which I think set the tone even more than the graphics did.

Blizzard has three ridiculously lucrative and popular franchises (four if you want to separate Warcraft from WoW), and by the time they finish one game, fans are ready to storm the gate for the next iteration of at least one of the other franchises. Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3 will carry them through the rest of the decade, and while you'd like to see something brand new from them after that, how can they not have WoW 2 well into development by then? They're kind of caught in their own money-printing perpetual motion machine.

Those dolls haunted my dreams. I'm not afraid of many things, but living killer dolls are among those that do give me the heebie-jeebies.

I would argue that D2 made a huge improvement upping the creepy factor on staple monsters over D1-- skeletons, ghouls, zombies, etc. I would also argue that D2 got Diablo himself right in terms of execution and animation, but that's a given as time inevitably improves technical aspects of games. D2 also featured quite a few designs that reminded me of stuff from the imagination of Wayne Barlowe, which I can only consider a good thing.

I think what made D1 more consistently effective was the fact that it was for a lot of people the first game of it's kind that they'd seen. When I first installed it, I had never played anything like Diablo before in my life, and it was scary, plain and simple. Between the oppressive darkness and overall design and atmosphere, D1 was a fear-inducing experience. I doubt anyone would claim they weren't clenching their asshole in sheer terror while running away from the Butcher for the first time.

And D1's Hell was much superior to D2's. I can't argue with that. I'm betting that Diablo, seeing that the dark didn't deter heroes the first time around, switched to fluorescent lighting in an effort to blind interlopers.

I can only hope that D3 captures some of the horror of the original and mixes it well with the combat and pace of the second. I did get that feeling from watching the game play footage that took place in the catacombs of what I assume is Tristram, so hopefully that translates to the final build of the game.

More encouraging news. The guy doing the lore and world design for Diablo 3 was a game and art designer for Fallout and Arcanum. Very nice.

That's some solid pedigree right there.

The Haku dolls were hilarious.

I just can't wait to see a monster and go click click click click click click click click click click click click click click click click click click click click click click click click click click click click click click click click click click click click click click click just to kill it.

To be fair, there is also right clicking.

Ha. I forgot how much depth these games had. They were fun, especially the first, but there's so much clicking one has to do to kill a dungeon beast, let alone 10 000 of them.

Thank you.

click click click I'm casting Inferno at your face Martin Savage click click cliccccck

Edit: I meant right cliccccck

Let me tell you, my index finger was so strong back in my D2 days.

And I'm standing, doing nothing, as that retarded Thorn aura reflects all the clicks you did to me and kills you 16 times over. I go over your body and take all the shit you have. Click. Nice try Minsky, but you're a n00b.

Thorn aura only reflects melee damage WHOS THE NOOB NOW

Isn't it clear that I TOOK TAHT PISSY INFERNO AND REFLECTED ALLZ THOSE MELEE CLICKS YOU DID???

God, I hate playing with kids.

There's gonna be escalation, Minsky.

No matter how hard I try, I just can't stay mad at Martin Savage. C'mere, you!

This thread is reaching critical levels of entertaining.

When I can't decide whether a Savage/Minsky click click click'ing battle (I bet the one who goes down drops phat l3wtz) or a man getting his nose and testicles bitten off and his ass chewed up by disgruntled chimpanzees is the more entertaining thread, it says a lot for how great this day is going.

I'm going to stay a while, and listen.