What would be the specs for Diablo 3?

[gogoblender 3,070]

Anyone know?

 

I've looked around the net, and found some conjecture. It couldn't be more than what we have to run Sacred 2 with righ?

 

...I hope?

 

 

gogo

[Timotheus 416]

Depends I think, also on how long it will take Blizzard to finish it.

But Blizzard's games are very well coded and run on a lot of hardware. So I think that the requirements won't be that high.

[Rllulium 0]

Five classes with 3 skill trees is where it seems to land.

 

Many thing point towards that Diablo 3 is not going to have a very advanced character building system.

[gogoblender 3,070]

Five classes with 3 skill trees is where it seems to land.

 

Many thing point towards that Diablo 3 is not going to have a very advanced character building system.

 

 

ugh

 

that's what scares me about this game.

 

After playing Sacred 2, I'm not sure there's anything else out there that can keep me hooked, build wise. However... surely Blizzard knows about the build system here in Sacred 2?

 

Or...they don't think that complexity and depth of builds is necessary for making a billion dollars?

 

D3 sure has a lot of nice trailers though ^^

 

 

gogo

 

 

P.s. Timo, that's what I was thinking about as well... Blizzard has a ton of money. They can be even more imaginative than Ascaron is/was ( ... ) and they'll have the money to make that imagination come to life... no bug spray needed

[Timotheus 416]

Five classes with 3 skill trees is where it seems to land.

 

Many thing point towards that Diablo 3 is not going to have a very advanced character building system.

 

 

ugh

 

that's what scares me about this game.

 

After playing Sacred 2, I'm not sure there's anything else out there that can keep me hooked, build wise. However... surely Blizzard knows about the build system here in Sacred 2?

 

Or...they don't think that complexity and depth of builds is necessary for making a billion dollars?

 

Well, think about it this way. They can make a really complex game. But what good would that do?

D2 is still a popular game, and I think that one of the reasons for that is it's simple and clear nature.

5 attributes, 3 skill tiers per character, and clear requirements. Also, the game is pretty easy to play, and learn, while also challenging to play on nightmare and hell modes.

 

A good/popular game should be good for both Hardcore and Casual gaming sides. I'm pretty much a casual gamer, play maybe 5-10 hours max a week.

I don't want a game to be too complex, making me taking notes to play it well. Sacred 2 made me go there for a sec, and that was one thing that put me off.

Just speculating here, but I think this also is one of the reasons people are switching to consoles, where games use less buttons, are more intuitive and less complex.

 

P.s. Timo, that's what I was thinking about as well... Blizzard has a ton of money. They can be even more imaginative than Ascaron is/was ( ... ) and they'll have the money to make that imagination come to life... no bug spray needed

 

Diablo 3 will need it's patches as well though. However, one of the reasons a game from Blizzard will be better is because the company is large enough to keep on supporting it's games well into the future.

Edited August 17, 2009 by Timotheus

[the1youh8 0]

I'd rather have a less complex character build, than having one thats trys and fails (Sacred 2).