Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Role Playing (Games) PC Games (Games) Entertainment Games

Blizzard Announces Diablo 3 423

Posted by CowboyNeal
from the mouse-buttons-beware dept.
stpk4 writes "After a week-long tease by Blizzard, Diablo 3 has just been announced in Paris. The splash screen has been updated at their homepage and The Escapist has the first write-up." While there aren't many details available yet, it is known that Deckard Cain returns to help our heroes yet again.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Blizzard Announces Diablo 3

Comments Filter:
  • by zolf13 (941799) on Saturday June 28, 2008 @09:11AM (#23980119)
    ... much more here [blizzard.com]
    • by Dachannien (617929) on Saturday June 28, 2008 @11:25AM (#23981285)

      All I see is fifty bazillion unnecessary Flash widgets, with a smidgen of text way at the bottom. They even apparently require Flash just to show a fancy capital "T".

      Maybe that's the point. In Diablo III, you, the hapless adventurer, are given the Nerd's Gaming Rig of Total Righteousness (Unique Item), and must venture through the Gates of Hell to destroy Diablo's armies of pointless Flash widgets.

      In the expansion, you essentially do the same thing, except now they're all Silverlight widgets, and you face off against a chair-throwing Steve Ballmer at the end.

      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by IHateEverybody (75727)

        All I see is fifty bazillion unnecessary Flash widgets, with a smidgen of text way at the bottom. They even apparently require Flash just to show a fancy capital "T".


        At least you got to see the bazillion unnecessary Flash widgets. The page appears to be slashdotted.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Jesus_666 (702802)
      Yeah, but Blizzard first put up the splash screen and then apparently forgot to upload the rest of the site for an hour or so. You got the splash screen followed by a 404.
  • by MooseMuffin (799896) on Saturday June 28, 2008 @09:14AM (#23980137)
    Perhaps Blizzard and I can simplify our relationship and I can just hand them my soul. They seem to have a pretty good handle on it as it is.
    • by dotancohen (1015143) on Saturday June 28, 2008 @09:43AM (#23980331) Homepage

      Perhaps Blizzard and I can simplify our relationship and I can just hand them my soul. They seem to have a pretty good handle on it as it is.

      I'd go for that when there will be a Linux port of the game. Here's the address to write to and to let them know that there is demand:
      http://us.blizzard.com/support/webform-us.xml [blizzard.com]

      Just think, if half of all /.ers wrote to them expressing interest in a Linux port, how much pressure that would be to deliver. Even a port compiled against Wine 1.0 would be great. Write to them and let them know that.

      • by MooseMuffin (799896) on Saturday June 28, 2008 @10:01AM (#23980477)
        I run WoW under wine on ubuntu. Works perfectly, and even plays nice with the compiz fusion desktop effects. I can run WoW on one desktop, and then spin the cube to another to answer IMs or whatever.
        • by dotancohen (1015143) on Saturday June 28, 2008 @11:28AM (#23981327) Homepage

          I run WoW under wine on ubuntu. Works perfectly, and even plays nice with the compiz fusion desktop effects. I can run WoW on one desktop, and then spin the cube to another to answer IMs or whatever.

          But it might not work in the next release. If we don't write to the game developers and let them know that we want to use their products on linux - even if there currently is a workaround such as wine - then we will never have games written for the OS. And not having games is what keeps many people on Windows. A vicious cycle, and we need to break it.

          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by crashfrog (126007)

            then we will never have games written for the OS.

            Maybe one of the reasons you'll never have games written for the OS is that you can't count on anything to work from one release to the next (like your example of games under WINE.)

            • No, the reasons for a lack of commercial Linux games are quite different:

              1. Linux desktop users make up a tremendously small portion of the home PC market. The development effort to port everything to Linux and support it is likely not to cover the added costs.
              2. Many people run Linux at home to get good use of hardware that can't handle Microsoft XP or Vista. Most modern games wouldn't run on those machines even if they were ported to Linux.
              3. A portion of the Linux user-base are free software advoca
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by jlarocco (851450)

          Well shit, in that case I can just run Windows inside Qemu or VMWare and run all my apps that way. Why bother making any Linux software at all?

          Using wine is a hack. It only works sometimes, in some cases, and chances are good that upgrading it will break things. It's not an excuse for not releasing a Linux version. If I wanted Windows, I would just go buy it.

          • by Jellybob (597204) on Saturday June 28, 2008 @12:46PM (#23982317) Journal

            While not the perfect solution, Wine does get the job done, and can allow people to play games that they wouldn't otherwise be able to.

            It only works sometimes, in some cases, and chances are good that upgrading it will break things.


            Not if the developers have been working with the aim of not breaking under Wine. I think the OP was saying to distribute a known good version of Wine with the game, and run it that way, which would mean that there aren't any issue.

            This has worked quite well to release Windows games for Mac OS, where they are built against a DirectX compatiability library, allowing companies to release games for both platforms at the same time.

            • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

              by dotancohen (1015143)

              Not if the developers have been working with the aim of not breaking under Wine.

              Exactly, but they aren't going to do that if we don't ask. Write to them and let them know that they need to target Wine / Linux as well as whatever versions of Windows they write for.

              Better yet, as another poster mentioned, wait a few weeks before writing to them. That way, we won't flood them all at once and then die down again.

      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by MMC Monster (602931)

        I guess that I'm in that "half of al /.ers" who never played any of the diablo games. *shrug*

        Games are nice, but I can't believe half of all /.ers can agree any anything (besides reading /., apparently).

  • Dialbo 3 (Score:5, Funny)

    by jollyreaper (513215) on Saturday June 28, 2008 @09:15AM (#23980141)

    The sounds you hear are college careers ending before they've even begun.

    • Re:Dialbo 3 (Score:5, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 28, 2008 @09:34AM (#23980265)

      Oh krud. Fool me once shame on you, Blizzard, feel me twice shame on me. There goes my second chance at finally graduating. At this rate, I'll never be able to afford my own basement.

    • Re:Dialbo 3 (Score:5, Funny)

      by flyingsquid (813711) on Saturday June 28, 2008 @03:28PM (#23983979)
      The sounds you hear are college careers ending before they've even begun.

      Yes, and it sounds like this:

      click.

      click.

      clickclick.

      click.

      clickclickclick.

      clickclickclickclickclickclickclickclickclickclickclickclickclickclickclick...

    • Re:Dialbo 3 (Score:4, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 28, 2008 @04:32PM (#23984537)

      Well Diablo I wrecked my middle school career, and Diablo II got my high school career. I already graduated from college, so I guess Diablo III gets to take my marriage or job...

  • Phew (Score:5, Funny)

    by Godji (957148) on Saturday June 28, 2008 @09:21AM (#23980175) Homepage
    I am so glad I never got around to playing the first two. That way, I'll have a good reason not to play this one - I've missed the storyline.

    Think of the countless hours I saved by saving countless hours twice before!
    • Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)

      by yanos (633109)
      The storyline? You mean kill the big evil bad ass? And when that's done, kill the big evil bad ass' brother in an expansion pack? I loooove the Diablo series but the 'story' is a joke.
  • by eclectro (227083)

    Isn't the monster at the end already beaten??

  • Rating Pending (Score:5, Insightful)

    by rpillala (583965) on Saturday June 28, 2008 @09:30AM (#23980239)

    Fair enough, but the www site asked me to enter my date of birth before showing me the cinematic teaser trailer. Then I watched the teaser trailer and didn't see anything even remotely offensive in it. Did anyone else see like a bare tit or extreme violence in there that I missed?

    Just the existence of demons and monsters is an issue?

  • by Admiral Ag (829695) on Saturday June 28, 2008 @09:31AM (#23980247)

    I thought I'd be first with: It's clear that witch doctors are massively overpowered. I demand a nerf.

  • by Scr3wFace (1200541) on Saturday June 28, 2008 @09:32AM (#23980251)
    Just when I kick my crack habbit... Go figure
  • I can't check out the trailers because their stupid age selection dialog is all mouse controlled dropdowns (no keyboard controls) AND they only have 8 selections. Therefore, I can only be born January 1-8, thru August 1-8, 2001-2008. At least that's the way it is in Safari. WTF?

  • by Yacoby (1295064) on Saturday June 28, 2008 @09:38AM (#23980291)
    OK, so, I have been to the site, but what does the gem do? I heard if you click it 100 times, you get sent a beta...
  • by n0dna (939092) on Saturday June 28, 2008 @09:42AM (#23980321)

    The only thing that frightens me is that they describe the game as "highly cooperative."

    That's what killed Diablo II for most of the legit players. If you were lucky, maybe as many as 2 people you knew in real life were also players, so you were left to play with strangers and 9 year-olds on Battle.Net. The 1.10 patch made the game no longer possible to finish by yourself.

    It's tough to assemble a party of reasonable size from cheaters and griefers and beggars, let alone the guy with the hacked gear who drops in, kills Diablo, Pindleskin, Mephisto, then Baal, and then drops right back out while you're still in the middle of Act 1.

    Co-Op is great, but please don't force those of us who enjoy playing the game to rely on the children who can't afford the $15 a month for WoW.

    • by rpillala (583965) on Saturday June 28, 2008 @10:56AM (#23980957)

      I'm sure the game will have a single player mode. Wait, here from the FAQ:

      Will there be a single-player component in addition to multiplayer?

      Yes. In addition to battling the hordes of the Burning Hells cooperatively with friends over Battle.net, players will be able to adventure through the world of Diablo III solo. More details on both the single-player and multiplayer experience will be revealed at a later date.

      You might also look into TOG, a multi-game guild with a minimum age of 25. This is when men's brains are finally fully formed, so you get a decent group of folks there.

    • by thermian (1267986)

      The 1.10 patch made the game no longer possible to finish by yourself.

      Did it? I don't recall that, The one problem I had with the Diablo games was that your character could get so absurdly powerful that you could beat anything.

      I used to play as a sorcerer (memory fails, I don't remember the class name). By the time I stopped playing my character was so deadly that other players in the party had to run away before I used my offensive spells, because they'd get creamed too, no matter how well armoured they were.

      It got a bit tedious in the end, all I'd ever see was dead things,

  • by andytrevino (943397) on Saturday June 28, 2008 @09:53AM (#23980409) Homepage

    We've already killed Diablo in Diablo 1. Then, in Diablo II, we killed him AGAIN, and killed his brothers and scores of underling bosses.

    Are we now killing him a THIRD time, along with his brothers, cousins, college roommate, and that guy he talked to at the bus stop last week? How does Evil(tm) finance its operation and pay its underling bosses? More importantly, how many computer mice must the forces of Good(tm) sacrifice to stop this nonsense?!

    • by ConanG (699649) on Saturday June 28, 2008 @10:00AM (#23980463)
      He wasn't killed in D1. The soulstone trapped his essence. Then your idiot hero sticks it in his head and becomes Diablo (aka "The Wanderer") in D2.

      Don't know what happens in D3 obviously, but the soulstones are destroyed. My guess is something to do with Tyriel in Heaven. Maybe a war in Heaven leading to a new "Diablo"?
      • by Gavin Scott (15916) * on Saturday June 28, 2008 @01:29PM (#23982821)

        The whole thing was a plot by Tyriel to allow him to arrange the destruction of the world stone, the only thing standing in the way of his final conquest of heaven and earth.

        Tyriel is clearly going to be the end boss of D3.

        G.

      • by Kingrames (858416) on Saturday June 28, 2008 @05:42PM (#23985167)

        In case you didn't read the instruction manual that came with the first game, the only way to contain the flawed soulstone of mephisto was to implant it into the skull of the person most resistant to the lure of evil and to lock him away.

        The hero of the first game was clearly aware of this and made the ultimate sacrifice, mind, body, and soul, to contain Diablo long enough for someone else to find a way to destroy him and his brothers and the soulstones.

        Dammit, man, now you've got me geeking out.

    • Well, at the end of the Diablo II expansion, Tyrael destroys the Worldstone, and the gist of things is that Anything Could Happen after that. (Including Blizzard co-branding a new Diablo III mouse with extra-rugged buttons.)

  • by wildzeke (191754) on Saturday June 28, 2008 @10:17AM (#23980601)

    I hear that Limbo of the Lost 2 is going to predominately feature Diablo 3 content.

  • ...or does the game look very much Warcraft like? Not that I am complaining , I loved the first two and the third looks much much better. Just that I hope I don't have to upgrade my grphics card to play this. Diablo 1 & 2 were not graphics intensive even though it had pretty nice stuff.
    • by Machtyn (759119)
      A couple of things I noticed with the graphics and physics engine in the game. At the beginning, it showed the barbarian walking through the water causing ripples to expand outward. (Still gimmicky looking to me, but they are getting better at it. That's hard stuff to do for a PPU.) However, at the end, with the big boss battle, characters are running through the pool of water and no ripples. You can't even tell they are in or on top of the water.

      Now, certainly, they are probably using the best $60
  • by TheGreatOrangePeel (618581) on Saturday June 28, 2008 @10:27AM (#23980675) Homepage
    to quote the review for the alpha,

    Clickclickclickclickclickclickclickclickclick clickclickclickclickclickclickclickclickclick clickclickclickclickclickclickclickclickclick clickclickclickclickclickclickclickclickclick clickclickclickclickclickclickclickclickclick clickclickclickclickclickclickclickclickclick clickclick...

  • Is someone still uploading the content to the web server or something? Most pages are empty (the pages are there, but no content)...

    I want to know what are the Mac requirements.

  • Does anyone know the system requirements? More specifically: Will it run fine with my current generation Mac Mini? I know this is Blizzard, a really good game publisher, so the answer is likely to be "Yes.", however, I'd like some details. Anyone?

  • New diablo 2 patch (Score:5, Insightful)

    by gbjbaanb (229885) on Saturday June 28, 2008 @11:03AM (#23981041)

    Just browsing, and look what I found:

    - Patch 1.12

              Downloadable Installer Support

    - If all required Diablo 2 '.MPQ' files are installed on the
        hard drive, the game will no longer require the CD to play.

          For users that originally performed a 'Full Installation'
          and wish to run without the CD, all '.MPQ' files should
          be copied from the Diablo 2 CDs to the Diablo 2 directory.
          Most users will only need to copy D2Music.mpq from the
          Diablo 2 Play CD and/or D2xMusic.mpq from the Lord of
          Destruction CD. Mac users will need to copy these music
          files and rename them to 'Diablo II Music' and
          'Diablo II Expansion Music' respectively.

          Anyone who did not perform a 'Full Installation' will need
          to re-install from CD again to ultimately play without the CD.
          In this case, a 'Full Installation' is required, followed by file
          copy step noted above.

    nice of them to think about letting us play these old games like this.

  • Finally!

    I do not like my actual mouse - but sadly it still works somehow. Coming up with the reason to buy a new mouse is quite hard.

    But Diabolo is for rescue!!!

    The game is notoriously known for its capability of rendering mice dysfunctional by wearing down left button very very quickly. My friend playing thru Diabolo I & II (with expansions) went thru 5(!) left mouse buttons (he was replacing only button mechanics itself) and one right mouse button.

    Diabolo III - Banzaii!!

  • Am I the only one who thinks this is quite a few years too late?

    I mean, yeah, it might be OK, but... I donno. The hype for this built up and waned all on it's own years ago, before it even existed. Seems to me they should have started work ont his 1-2 years after Lord of Destruction came out.

    Also, isn't the entire Diablo 1 and 2 staff "seeking success elsewhere" now?

    • The D2 team went and made Hellgate. Didn't pan out as they expected. It might seem a bit late... but look at how long SC2 took. Sure, starcraft had Korea to keep it going, but D2 still has its legion of nostalgic fans.
      • by Jellybob (597204)

        Yeah, Hellgate: London wasn't a particularly great game, which really annoyed me since I bought it on release after hearing that it was done by the same team that worked on Diablo.

        Sadly the game mechanics were a bit dull, although not broken as such, and the storyline more or less non-existant. It has so much potential though, with an interesting mix of classes, and randomly generated maps to keep things interesting.

        I also like that they made multiplayer more or less a free MMO, but I've yet to be able to l

  • Quick! (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Buy Logitech stocks now! ;)

  • When I looked at those screenshots my first thought was: "Damn, this looks like Neverwinter Nights with a new engine."

    Of course if it played like NWN with a new engine I'd be all over it. I doubt it, though.
  • by billtom (126004) on Saturday June 28, 2008 @03:05PM (#23983795)

    I was expecting Diablo 3, but I actually thought that Blizzard would move it to a console title.

    Business-wise, getting some of that juicy console money seems like a no-brainer for Blizzard (or their corporate masters). The *-craft games are somewhat problematic to move to the consoles, but Diablo looks like an excellent candidate: fondly remembered IP, a fallow period so people can't complain too much about gameplay changes, and the action heavy diablo style suits the consoles well.

    But no. Windows and Mac, they say. Seems like a missed opportunity to me.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by CronoCloud (590650)

      Maybe Blizzard is bitter about Snowblind muscling in on their territory and basically "owning" the console Diablo clone market with games based on their engine. Didn't the gameplay video look very similar to all those snowblind engine games, ripple water and everything? Blizzard's playing catchup now.

  • by fgaliegue (1137441) on Saturday June 28, 2008 @04:07PM (#23984327)

    I just hope that Blizzard will NOT go down the route they have chosen to go with the latest d2x updates. That is, keep the best stuff (items) for online gaming.

    This, essentially, sucks. What I want to do is play d2x, or d3 when it comes out, on my machine at home, with my characters on my computer, and not have to go online to create a character just to get this and that item, that I cannot get back to my homebrewn character. That just SUCKS.

    As a result, I found myself using cheat packs that made such objects accessible to non bnet users. How pitiful is that?

    I just DO NOT want to play online. That's not too much asking, is it?

Prototype designs always work. -- Don Vonada

Working...