Diablo III

yeah, bard, pally and sorc were the three most popular. I like playin Druid, but it wasnt very popular at all... If I had my guess, Id agree with Euphacent about the classes...

Barbarian, Paladin, Sorcerer, Rogue, Witchdoctor

The ranged class may not be called rogue, but you get the idea. According to Diablo 1 story, all rogues involved were female, as they were part of a 'sisterhood.' So maybe they will just be called something else.

I do think they will add more classes, 5 is just too small an amount, considering the hype for the game
 
Euphacent said:
The other classes have got to be Paladin, Amazon/Assassin, and Sorc..

Paladins are part of the Zakarum religion, I think, and they're the most popular class, so they will make it in. I believe Kurast is home of the main Zakarum temples, and Kurast is on the world map.

Amazon is a ranged physical damage class, but Assassins are sort of in the storyline in D2 (Natalya being in Act 3), so maybe they'll merge these classes somehow into something else... a rogue from D1 with trap abilities?

They have to have a sorc, just as they do the barbarians. They can't have the witchdoctor as the only magic damage class.

If I had to guess at which classes wouldn't be returning, I'd say druid.
Click to expand...

Necromancers are a huge class in the lore (according to the books and such) yet they don't seem to be in as playable :\ so it's possible those won't be playable... but I imagine Sorc will be as an Amazon-type character

And I thought necromancers were popular :P I always saw tons. They rape if you know how to build em :D Bone Spear or Spirit = so much pwnage it's not even funny

Edit: http://www.petitiononline.com/d3art/petition.html

lol people. I can agree the graphics right now aren't as dark/gloomy as previous Diablo games but they aren't done >.> I doubt they have the light radius feature implanted yet. but ya, I actually found this shit out first on the Diablo forums :P

http://www.battle.net/forums/board.aspx?ForumName=d3-general
 
Last edited:
What I think about that petition is people are just comparing the game too much to WoW and Starcraft. I think Blizzard wants the players of WoW that will be trying D3 to feel right at home in WoW or see some similarities. Whatever, I'll wait till this one is out, until then I'm happy they announced D3 already.
 
rumor has it, September 2009 is release date, forgot exactly which site i saw it on (Diablofans.com i think?)... pretty excited if its true!
 
rather it be September of 2008 :(
 
Dude there gonna add Orc marines.. im tellin ya it should be Diablohammer III
 
wtf? where's this bs? :P
 
Blackmagik said:
rumor has it, September 2009 is release date, forgot exactly which site i saw it on (Diablofans.com i think?)... pretty excited if its true!
Click to expand...

Doubt it. I can't remember the last time a rumored/"leaked" release date was right for a Blizzard game.
 
Strid said:
Doubt it. I can't remember the last time a rumored/"leaked" release date was right for a Blizzard game.
Click to expand...

More importantly, I can't remember the last time Blizzard met their own deadline.. lol. Every game was always pushed back a minimum of 6 months.
 
but to be fair, every game is pure win :3
 
By computer time, that would mean it comes out in 2010, but I can't see them taking 6-7 years to complete a game (barring their "it's been in progress four years).

If that is the case it might turn out to have the same huge flaw D2 had. That is, a new game with very dated graphics.
 
In terms of games fan, I agree with how the art direction should look in the altered compared to the actual art, however, from a designers PoV, they can't work bloody miracles, though that last screenshot I agree with, less of the WoW Gayness >_>
 
pfft, the art style is fine. Diablo 2 didn't even have the kinda gray boredom that the Diablo fantards are showing is "their choice" lol....
 
The fan-altered screen shots do look much better, but I agree with the developer. It looks better, but it can be more difficult to see what you're fighting clearly and it would definitely be more taxing on the system. The game looks great anyways, so it's not a big loss to not have such high level shading.
 
I like that it's bright to be very honest. Act III in diablo II pissed me the fuck off. I hated navigating in that son of a bitch. I like how you can preferably see things clearly. They also said places that need to be dark will be dark. There's no point in making everything dark.
 
cause if it's too bright they can see their emotardedness? :D
 
Gerry said:
In terms of games fan, I agree with how the art direction should look in the altered compared to the actual art, however, from a designers PoV, they can't work bloody miracles, though that last screenshot I agree with, less of the WoW Gayness >_>
Click to expand...

What the fuck is with retards saying it looks like WoW? Is it because it, like every other game made by Blizzard, isn't meant to require a $1500 PC to run? Personally, I find the fan alterations ugly. They look overly grainy and gritty, to the point where even the grass seems like it was sand blasted.

Oh no, a rainbow over a river inside a chasm during rain. Can't have naturally occuring things without people bitching all of a sudden?
 
Last edited:
Skaw said:
What the fuck is with retards saying it looks like WoW? Is it because it, like every other game made by Blizzard, isn't meant to require a $1500 PC to run?

Oh no, a rainbow over a river inside a chasm during rain. Can't have naturally occuring things without people bitching all of a sudden?
Click to expand...

I don't mind a rainbow in Diablo, but I do mind that some textures look as though they were directly lifted from WoW imo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top