Diablo 3: Interview with Jay Wilson
Kotaku posted an interview with Diablo 3 lead designer Jay Wilson.
He says things. I want to play Diablo 3.
*Update*:
Interview with Paul Sams, COO of Blizzard Entertainment
Monday, June 30, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
39 comments:
oooo.
"Jay Wilson: I can’t really talk about Battle.net but I will say, Battle.net will not be a background. I’ll be huge, the next version will be absolutely Blizzard’s focus. Everyone is going to be thrilled when they see the kind of stuff we have planned!"
That's what I wanted to hear.
He talks about character classes a little bit and the notion of borrowing from other games. I'm ok with that.
I am disappointed that there are only 5 character classes in the game. Barbarian, Witchdoctor, and three more. I'm glad that they did not take the 7 classes from Diablo 2 and add on (Because FUCK the Assassin) but I also really liked druids and necromancers. Since the Witchdoctor is basically a druid/necromancer (from what we can tell from the demo) I'm a bit scared that druids and necromancers are gone.
Character classes are an odd discussion, I guess. There will be the strong melee class and the strong spell class. And then there will be everything else. What bugs me is that those pillars will always be there and the "everything else" is what will change. And with Diablo? I like the "everything else" classes while the pillars are mostly boring. Well, not boring but rather...less enjoyable. I liked playing an Aeromancer. I enjoyed playing my summoning necromancer and my bone spell necromancer.
I only used my sorceress to magic farm. I deleted my Barbarian because he was dumb (and he had The Grandfather). But I still play my Aeromancer druid.
I'm guessing there will be very neat similar things to what's gone..
as for the "Pillar" classes... they do a couple things - provide continuity, structure, and for alternative intrests..
They might also be QUITE fun, as Bliz. is pretty good at revising and changing contexts and designs.
The most frustrating part of WoW right now is that I know where the items I need are but I can't fucking get them because I either need to find 9 other people or 24 other people to run the instances in which they drop. AND those instances are limited in how many times one can run them per week.
Yesterday, though? I did about 14 Baal runs on my druid on realms. Just find a game, join it, kill baal, leave and find another game.
My hope is that Diablo 3 remains single player like Diablo 2, where anyone can kill any boss by their self and the task is eased with more players, rather than reliant upon more players.
I like playing with others. But I prefer others to be an option rather than a requirement. Especially when I reach the point that the only armor/weapon upgrades I can get come from instances which require 10 or 25 people.
"They might also be QUITE fun, as Bliz. is pretty good at revising and changing contexts and designs."
Oh, I don't think that Blizzard will just piss barbarians and magic users down their legs. I'm just mildly irked that looking at the game right now I probably won't be able to play another Aeromancer in Diablo 3.
But maybe they'll make something better.
The other part is why 5 and not 7? Lord of Destruction made me expect 7 classes so 5 makes it seem as if they are slacking.
Though, with the amount of customization they're pouring into the game maybe I won't notice the two "missing" classes.
I like that they are allowing for male/female characters and, from the sound of things, customization of characters. If they take a note from WoW character customization could be damn nifty. Instead of everyone wearing Armor set X looking the same way it would be nice to have some differences.
I wonder what the Diablo 3 version of crafted items will be. What will they promise and then not fulfill?
Also, isn't it about time for Blizzard to release a game with socketable items the gems in which can be removed? I contend that it is PAST TIME for such versatility for gems.
HEH.
Release your inner snarky/sincere fanboy, will you?
goddamn. seriously. Where the hell is everyone?
The more I read that short story description the more fucking awesome I think the game will be.
"Essentially everyone was kind of geared for Hell to actually invade. At the end of Lord of Destruction, the Worldstone was destroyed, it left a giant crater and everyone was expecting the hordes to come pouring out of it and nothing happened."
You know what's fucking awesome? THAT! 20 years of nothing but waning expectations after the Worldstone is destroyed only to have something happen? That's terrific.
It's the answer to Adam and my question: "The 3 prime evils are gone...the worldstone is destroyed...what can they do next? What can happen?"
Blizzard's answer? NOTHING!
Oh, but then something happens.
Awesome!
There are two more missing Lesser Evils..
and the return of at LEAST Diablo, in some form...
plus a question of the High Heavens.
And the phrase "There is no Penguin Level"
One class I can tell you with certainty will be gone is the amazon, as you can now choose sex outside of class, and male amazons just won't make sense.
And why exactly do you want to be able to remove gems. As long as they can be overwritten I consider that fair.
"Release your inner snarky/sincere fanboy, will you?"
I really want Diablo to be my game franchise. You know how everyone in the group has sort of a franchise that is their thing? I want Diablo to be mine. I know there is stiff competition. But, man, Diablo.
My guess is that all 5 prime evils will be involved and fought in the game. It's Diablo. Of course Diablo will be back. Baal? Baal got his own expansion; of course he will be back. Mephisto? They need to have a boss we can farm for Digglers.
There will totally be a penquin level.
Dude, Manazons!
wait.. Five Prime Evils?
There were three, I thought..
plus Four lesser.. of which we saw two..
well.. two, and a corrupted angel who kinda served as a fifth lesser..
Amazons will probably be crafted to archers, or maybe a ranger sort of class. Perhaps Hunters from WoW will be borrowed in part.
In WoW I want to be able to remove gems because when I've spent 300 Gold or 15 badges on a gem I'd like to be able to move it around to new armor I get. In Diablo? I think it makes runes more versatile and useful. Use two runes to make a two-part runeword, then when you get the other 3 for the 5-part runeword you can just reuse the two from before.
Otherwise they just sit in the bank for ages while you farm crap.
Things as difficult to find as Zod runes need to have some versatility, I think. Or, hell, release a Magic Screwdriver that can be used to pry them out. So long as the screwdrivers are easier to find than the runes themselves that would solve the problem.
I've no idea out of whose ass they pulled two more prime evils.
I'm guessing it was Jay Wilson's ass.
Maybe Nippon Ichi will be one of the prime evils, fought in the penguin level.
I'd argue for limited removal possibilities..
and not item based.. but.. more than once per playthrough.
Reasoning being that itembased (your screwdrivers) will put the price of those items through the roof, and drop the price of the runes or socket item or whatever you have into the gutters.
As would unlimited transfer.
Something similar to the scaling respec costs of WoW... but a bit more prohibitive.
You want to keep the focus on the runes, right? In order to do that, you need to keep a cost related to their use.. else they're as useful as TP scrolls. Nearly required, but equally, worthless.
Storywork from the manuals, and online official stuff.
Possibly the novels, too.
Dude. NIS is totally evil.
Beyond Prime Evil.
Source of Evil, perhaps?
With Diablo we're talking about "rare" in the sense that "45 people in the world have them" way. So things like Zod runes would probably see their value increase given that not only could one use them, but one could give the item away when done.
Oh, that's another park. No binding items. BOO Binding items. I'm ok with items as currency so long as that ensures that I get to click like mad when baal dies.
.. this thread is building faster than a headbutting argument.
we need much more bullshittery in our threads, I think.
I'm almost pissed that they are releasing all of this now. Because I want it more than ever, but didn't realize how close it was. Now I realize how close we are to even more kick ass diablo lan parties, and frankly I can't take it.
I agree, but my point on the runes is that people would simply trade their ass off to get their copy of Zod, and what not, while the screwdrivers would become the new "currency" item..
hrmn.. but that's precisely what you're sayin' you're okay with, then..
I dunno.. I suspect the "market" would change much more than you expect.
There's no "market" to Diablo 2. It's just 13 year old being crazy and calling one another shitcocks. People say there is a currency and will say SoJ. But it's just institutionalized "shitcock" at this point.
It would probably affect the economy...but I'm ok with that. I think they ought to design a game and let the in-game economy do what it will rather than, as with WoW, design a game with a recognition of the in-game economy.
I've spent months of my life emerged in both worlds. I prefer Diablo II to WoW in terms of in-game economy as it relates to item versatility and availability.
Diablo 3 lan parties will be best. If they make Realms function? Diablo 3 realm parties will also be best.
Realms parties will be nightly! But lan parties will be even better.
Only because you can shout at me, and throw things at Mike.
Plus Bowser ruining somone.
Belial and Azmodan are apparently the two remaining Prime Evils.
Mike cannot play. Mike mikes seals.
He also hates fun.
I think it's a hatred born of envy on his part.
You did not know that diablo.wikia.com existed before I posted this link.
Lesser Evils, Jay.
Three Prime Evils.. which... shouldn't be, semantically.. but..
and 4 Lesser...
make 7 Great Evils.
LAG!
I don't SEE any druids....
I shall require a new computer to play Diablo 3.
Sadly, I do not know what any of the numbers mean anymore. :(
And I do not want to use Vista.
lolcats discuss Diablo III
didnt one of the posts on kotaku say that it would not require direct x 10? If that is the case, i don't think vista will be a requiremant. You could also just get a mac and play it without any problems
It won't required Direct X 10 but will have a video mode which utilizes it.
Presumably Direct X 10 is prettier than not Direct X 10.
Post a Comment