Please respect other members. Please do not post links or information about hacking/warez/cheats.
Read the rules of these forums as we rarely warn before banning. Lost or need RSS check the forum map.
Ok so here is some food for thought. As everyone knows when blizzard north was shut down most of the original diablo team had already left. Some went to flagship wich sunk. Some started runic wich gave us the awesome torchlight. So now you have to ask yourself why blizzard announced D3 so earley? The game back then was extreamly incomplete, most things shown then isnt there anymore, and that is ongoing with the development. I think that blizzard might have done so to get as much input from fans as possible to prevent a fail, but keep saying - we feel and we want - to create an image of "control", wich they do have,but we have all seen how a project can be ruined. With most of the original team not there the production might have been derailing, so the next step is public input. Asking them guys to come back? Not good for the publicity thing, it would have made their lack of direction public and obvious. Not a single blizzard game has had as much publicity, not even starcraft 2. Just a thought.
Game wasn't announced early. When the first footage came out it looked pretty much the same that it does now. The game had been in making for years.
Games get announced earlyer than they used to to get a community for the game, publicity and to get feedback from the community. Nothing makes sure you buy a game than having someone follow the game for 3 years. People hyping the game for other people are really efficent way to make sure everyone hears about the game and how cool the game is.
I get what your saying, but they have been making too many changes since then, compared to sc2 it is incomplete, sc2 had minor changes that consisted of unit models and graphical updates and the odd units being cut or added. Putting the two next to eachother its clear diablo is getting more exposure when being more incomplete than when sc2 was unveiled. Most game dynamics are still undergoing revision. What you saw at blizzcon 09 will propably differ a great deal from the final product.
Game wasn't announced early. When the first footage came out it looked pretty much the same that it does now. The game had been in making for years.
By Blizzard's standards it was announced very early, as mentioned by Rob Pardo in some of the older interviews. The reason the game's graphics haven't changed much since it's because they were one of the first things to be made. What is missing from the game is what you don't get to see - quests, monsters, acts and a lot of content in general.
We can really only speculate why Blizzard chose to announce it this early, but it's likely it was so they could announce a new title at their 2008 World Wide Invitational convention in Paris (SC2 was announced at the 2007 WWI) and start receiving feedback and get the hype machine rolling.
Quote:
I think that blizzard might have done so to get as much input from fans as possible to prevent a fail, but keep saying - we feel and we want - to create an image of "control", wich they do have,but we have all seen how a project can be ruined. With most of the original team not there the production might have been derailing, so the next step is public input.
Firstly, I think you, and many other before you, underestimate the abilities of Blizzard's own team and put too much emphasis on the importance of the people who left. The notion that the latter were so integral to the success of the previous Diablo games suggests that those people would've released several amazing ARPGs since then, and as we know, it's just not true. D2 has remained the best ARPG for soon a decade, which goes to show that the there's more to the game than the contributions of the people who left. Regardless of what you may believe, Blizzard hasn't forgotten how D2 was made - it's their own game, remember.
Secondly, game development isn't a democracy. What you refer to as "public input" is just that: input. It doesn't dictate development or makes up for the lack of a "plan" or "direction" on Blizzard's behalf, as you put it, it's just a way for them to give bits of info to the fans and see what the reaction is. They have a plan and direction, they're just not showing it to you. In fairness, why on earth would they? You're not some world-renowned game designer by any chance, are you?
Generally speaking, the game is currently in a phase where a lot of content is being created. This is perhaps the least interesting phase for fans because much of the new content is going through constant iteration, making it unsuitable to show to the public since there's a risk it might be changed or even scrapped, for whatever reason. The result is that the team isn't sharing a whole lot of new, concrete info. Eventually, this phase will pass and we'll be getting more info, hopefully further debunking all these conspiracy theories.
Lastly, as long as they know what made the previous Diablo games so successful, and judging by many of the interviews, they do, then you shouldn't care much about who's on the team and who's left. Give them time and they'll release the game when it's ready.
Firstly, I think you, and many other before you, underestimate the abilities of Blizzard's own team and put too much emphasis on the importance of the people who left. The notion that the latter were so integral to the success of the previous Diablo games suggests that those people would've released several amazing ARPGs since then, and as we know, it's just not true. D2 has remained the best ARPG for soon a decade, which goes to show that the there's more to the game than the contributions of the people who left. Regardless of what you may believe, Blizzard hasn't forgotten how D2 was made - it's their own game, remember.
It's a company, companies might have identities and histories but they don't have memories. If a new crew is working on Diablo 3 to the ones who worked on Diablo 1 & 2 then they have no given right to suddenly be able to produce a game of Diablo 2's quality. It's a franky idiotic statement that can be likened to saying that a football team like Blackburn should be pushing for the premiership because they won the title in 95.
Quote:
Secondly, game development isn't a democracy. What you refer to as "public input" is just that: input. It doesn't dictate development or makes up for the lack of a "plan" or "direction" on Blizzard's behalf, as you put it, it's just a way for them to give bits of info to the fans and see what the reaction is. They have a plan and direction, they're just not showing it to you. In fairness, why on earth would they? You're not some world-renowned game designer by any chance, are you?
Why is it that people pull the 'oh you're not world renowned so gtfo' argument all the time? it's stupid. going back to football, Fergy and Wenger were never world class footballers, so by your logic they suck at managing teams. Also world renowned is a bit of a joke, I know of Blizzard, I guess a lot of people do, but I guarantee that most people who have heard of Blizzard couldn't name any developers.
Quote:
Lastly, as long as they know what made the previous Diablo games so successful, and judging by many of the interviews, they do, then you shouldn't care much about who's on the team and who's left. Give them time and they'll release the game when it's ready.
A runaway budget is curse and a blessing. Blizzard has hit titanic levels, and is a massively successful business with a good history and a single, all be it insanely huge, game.
Blizzard can afford to sit back and spend a fortune that other companies don't have on producing games.
However without tight leadership, this is a landslide disaster waiting to happen. When you have no real deadlines you can enter slip, where your productivity goes down. Diablo 3 looks good, the gameplay trailers look good, the classes... well I think the classes so far are 3 rehashed + something I'm not that interested in but never mind it's not the point, generally the game looks like it'll play well. However I've got to question the timescale here, for what we've seen, it's not really looking like the sum of 3 years work when you compare it to other game developers.
When you think that Blizzard hasn't released a game for 6 years (not including WoW addons) you can see that they have probably forgotten what it's like to have your back to the wall. (In Blizzards case its your back to a huge wad of cash).
Also knowing what makes a good game doesn't mean you'll make a good game.
All in all I'm not trying to bash Diablo 3 or Blizzard, I've been a fan a long time, but I'm not going with blind faith.
It's a company, companies might have identities and histories but they don't have memories. If a new crew is working on Diablo 3 to the ones who worked on Diablo 1 & 2 then they have no given right to suddenly be able to produce a game of Diablo 2's quality.
Not per se, no, but even if you for the sake of argument assume that a 100% new team is working on it, then there are a few factors that improve their chances to repeat the success, such as higher production values, improved technology and influence from new Blizzard products/features (WoW, SC2, battle.net 2.0). They also have a better idea of what makes ARPGs successful now than they had a decade ago, for natural reasons. To me, these factors are far more significant than having a few more "old" guys on the team; as evident from all the unsuccessful Diablo clones those have made so far.
Check out some of the panels from previous WWIs and Blizzcons. Even if you disagree with some of the D3 team's design choices, you must admit they seem to have nailed down the essence of the Diablo franchise - randomization, loot hunting and fast-paced action - and that they've made it a priority to focus on these cornerstones in order to make gameplay as fun as possible.
Quote:
Why is it that people pull the 'oh you're not world renowned so gtfo' argument all the time?
Because, although clearly exaggerated for effect, it's a perfectly justified reason why a company isn't spilling their innermost secrets to you. Really, why would they spend resources on informing you about their plans and what would they gain from it? There is no logical reason to do it, so they don't. That isn't synonymous with an absence of plan/direction, however, contrary to what Fanusvr suggests, and that's what this thread is all about.
Quote:
Blizzard can afford to sit back and spend a fortune that other companies don't have on producing games. [...] However I've got to question the timescale here, for what we've seen, it's not really looking like the sum of 3 years work when you compare it to other game developers.
Precisely. They can afford a level of polish that most other companises do not, which is why their products are always good. If they're not good enough then they're not released, like SC:Ghost and Warcraft Adventures. Still, the amount of iteration and polish that goes into the work doesn't result in a measurably larger amount of content, it just results in more polished content. You must also consider that what you learn about the game is what they want to reveal and that is not necessarily a realistic point of view. Perhaps they choose to reveal the most polished content and perhaps they're polishing many features they've yet to reveal.
Quote:
When you think that Blizzard hasn't released a game for 6 years (not including WoW addons) you can see that they have probably forgotten what it's like to have your back to the wall.
I don't think that's true. There is no reason not to include the WoW expansions (other than because it doesn't suit your argument, I guess) because they're very much subject to the same kind of development cycle, testing procedures and deadlines as their other products. They've been very successful, too, which contradicts the idea that they're getting worse at it.
If what you mean is that they haven't released a completely fresh title in years and that they're not used to working with a completely new engine or whatever then I can partly agree with that, but at the same time you're hinting that they're not experienced enough to know what awaits, which I definitely disagree with. If anything they're better prepared for a "new" release now than they've ever been before, having a far larger budget and more experience than previously.
Quote:
All in all I'm not trying to bash Diablo 3 or Blizzard, I've been a fan a long time, but I'm not going with blind faith.
I realize some of my posts are definitely pro-Blizzard, but it's hard to adress anti-Blizzard posts without using that tone. To put things in perspective: Blizzard have yet to release a bad product and that fact is probably the reason why we're all here in the first place: we loved the previous Diablo games and want them to succeed with the third. So what does it take to convince people that their next product is unlikely to break that trend? Is it even possible to convince people of that before they've played the actual game?
I can only throw out my crude guesses: They owe us! We deserve to get some info on the future of the franchise after bearing so many unfixed problems with d2 over bnet. Maybe Blizzard wanted to reassure us there is hope with d3.
Another guess: maybe it has something to do with the whole d3 project being scrapped and started over again. So maybe they actually planned on announcing it much earlier.
Finally: the beezlebob problem. Leaked information was stacking up and they couldn't keep it a secret for much longer. It would be too embarassing for everyone to learn about d3 from leaked info. It looks much more professionsal for Blizzard to announce it.
Here is some food for thought. SC2 was announced in the spring of 2007 and has targeted release date of 2010. Diablo 3 was announced in summer of 2008 and has a targeted release date of 2011. It seems they have announced these games 3 years before their launch period. That is definitely releasing info on these games way too early to the public. The 3 years thing seems like a building trend here.
Anyway, one reason is that they might have seen that a lot of D2 players were dropping for good and so they announced D3 and played the entire 'amazing new patch out in 2 weeks' farce on us as a scheme to raise interest in a what-was-then dying franchise. (Diablo 2 is 9 years old, that is no joke, interest has really grown back only because of D3 and patch announcement). I still think Blizzard secretly gets a cut from all the item shop websites and wants D2 players to stay put, and what would be better than announcing D3 and overhyping what is definitely going to be a crappy patch.
come on..... while u have something in ur head, let that thought be just a thought
until its ready to be a thread.
if they didnt announce D3 early, the fans would have find out some different way.
and if fans find out about D3 before blizzard announce it,
it would shrink that fat cash-cow.
see it like this, blizz announces D3 at "THIS" blizzcon ?
and fans already knew about D3 already,
cuz they found out about D3 earlier;
the reaction @ the announcement ? zzZzZz "ok get to the point, D3 whatever" ?
Linear Mode
