Twokinds ARCHIVE Forums

Oh man Nox was a God among overhead RPGs. I played that game so long ago I forgot entirely about it until just now. Too bad Westwood got bought out...

I think the Diablo universe and its darker lighting was what set it apart from Warcraft, now it looks like warcraft, with humans only. (I voted on that petition if you can guess)

Woot necropost!
Also, woot Wizard!
http://www.blizzard.com/diablo3/characters/wizard.xml
http://www.blizzard.com/diablo3/media/movies/wizard.xml
Too bad they don't show what the male version looks like.

mages ARE awesome *cough lookatmyusername cough* and I approve of their video, but is there a male version? in the past it was one class one gender. I'd play the class either way because of the pure win but still....

There's supposed to be both sexes available for every class in DIII.

I'm hoping they introduce a Ranger class w/ pets... :3

I am angry they are basically making WoW with a diablo style attached to it

as my friend is explaining

How exactly do you come to that conclusion. If anything, WoW was just Diablo with the Warcraft style attached to it. Diablo is an RPG. An online, multiplayer RPG. This means that the difference between Diablo III and any MMORPG is all of one letter. In fact, this means that Diablo II and WoW should have roughly 83% in common.

People complaining that Diablo III has elements of WoW, an extraordinarily successful RPG made by the same company, is almost as bad as the people who want to cripple SCII's UI because they're elitist pricks. You know what WoW has? Monsters. Does that mean Diablo III shouldn't have monsters? I didn't think so.

What exactly is wrong with taking successful elements from other RPGs?

Gamers are just getting to be too... spoiled, it seems. If something has an element that they've already played before, and even if it does it well, it's generally frowned upon as not being new enough or wild and crazy. And when something is different, wild, and crazy, it usually only draws in enough revenue to pay off the development costs and the game is never tried out again.

I figure, if the game works, be happy and play it. I still play Delta Force 2, which was made back in 1999 and has some of the worst FPS graphics I've seen. And yet, its still one hell of a good game with some of the best sound quality I've yet to see matched by any shooter today.

well from reading the facts about the game so far, what i liked about diablo was choosing my skills to make a stronger character and spend my stats for the equipment i want. What i have read on the forums for D3 has suggested that you now have stat and skillls auto spent and the did away with potions. They say potion make you invulernable, they being the blizzard guys, this comes even though it is very hard to play on hell with one potio exception, the full rejuv. Why not just remove the potion that makes everyone invulernable?

The reason I dislike that possiblity of diablo 3 is that i was one of those guys who made some HORRIBLE necro my first time playing, imagine a melee necro with no vit and no poision skills and i had to learn how to play with build and othere features.