Diablo-freaken-3!

[Draken693]

www.blizzard.com/diablo3
http://pc.ign.com/objects/714/714955.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diablo_3

YES! FINALLY!

[TrumanGrace]

between SC2 and this it shows that Blizzard is finally willing to focus on big series that aren't named "Warcraft"

[Keile]

Originally Posted by TrumanGrace

between SC2 and this it shows that Blizzard is finally willing to focus on big series that aren't named "Warcraft"

Well Diablo3 probably would have come sooner had they not LOST the team who made Diablo2, who then went to make the horribly mediocre Hellgate:London...

[resiz3d]

Originally Posted by TrumanGrace

between SC2 and this it shows that Blizzard is finally willing to focus on big series that aren't named "Warcraft"

Yes, shame on them for focusing on the franchise which pours millions of dollars into their bank accounts every month! What's wrong with them?!

Actually I'd like to see something new from them. Down with sequels and spinoffs!

[TrumanGrace]

Originally Posted by resiz3d

Yes, shame on them for focusing on the franchise which pours millions of dollars into their bank accounts every month! What's wrong with them?!

Actually I'd like to see something new from them. Down with sequels and spinoffs!

Yes, like these other huge franchises were such big losses for them!

[resiz3d]

Compared to WoW.. they were.

Warcraft takes in 120 million freakin dollars a MONTH. A big chunk of that goes to pay server costs and bandwidth, but I wouldnt be the least bit surprised if they're taking 30-40million once costs are paid.

Diablo3 and SC2 will definitely be successful but they're pay-once, play forever games. And Blizz will still have to pay for battle.net and its costs with no extra revenue coming in. Meanwhile people will still be sendin Blizz cash every month to grind WoW some more.

[TrumanGrace]

Originally Posted by resiz3d

Compared to WoW.. they were.

Warcraft takes in 120 million freakin dollars a MONTH. A big chunk of that goes to pay server costs and bandwidth, but I wouldnt be the least bit surprised if they're taking 30-40million once costs are paid.

Diablo3 and SC2 will definitely be successful but they're pay-once, play forever games. And Blizz will still have to pay for battle.net and its costs with no extra revenue coming in. Meanwhile people will still be sendin Blizz cash every month to grind WoW some more.

Not quite. They haven't made as much money, but to be a loss, they would have to, well, make less than they cost by any standard. The fact that the Sims sold more doesn't make WoW any less of a success.

However, I fail to see how that means I can't comment that an entertainment company pretty much sat on the top selling RTS game ever for years, as well as another highly successful series, instead of putting forth effort in the intervening decade to develop them?

No one denied WoW's success, but you can't deny the success of the other franchises which they ignored either.

[Beno]

Whenever Blizzard announces a game I either wait 2 years for it or it becomes vapour ware. Looking at you StarCraft: Ghost

[Darkborn]

I was watching the live feed of Blizzards WWI. When it was revealed, the French audience mildly claped. I don't think they were impressed lol.

I wouldn't mind playing this. I enjoyed the first two. I'm still playing the second one. I just hope Witch Doctor doesn't replace the Necromancer. probably will though.

[Snowglare]

I'm really looking forward to this. I spent a ridiculous amount of time playing D2. Just hope I can find people to play with, as the lack of companions is what burned me out on D2.

If the Necro isn't out, he'll have to be completely revamped. I've no clue why Blizzard said he's not necessarily being replaced. The Witch Doctor stole practically all his skills. It'd be like announcing the Sorceress for D2 and saying "well, the sorceror might still be there. Who knows?" That's one of my favorite things about D3; you can have male and female versions of each class now. If the Druid somehow makes the cut, we'll have shapeshifting women.

I seriously doubt they'll offer free online play again. If they ask people to pay a monthly fee for battle.net access, many will. I might end up just playing the Single Player mode, as I'm not too keen on paying ~$10 a month to play a game.

[Cadell]

I think that the type of game that Diablo is will force them to offer free online play. It wouldn't be hard.

[Snowglare]

I'll be thrilled if they do. Maybe they'll do both: free barebones online play with a pay option for added content and whatnot.