This topic is locked from further discussion.
Ya I know...2011 is faaaaaaaaaar away lol.
looks like it plays the same as the previous. graphics seem like an upgraded dungeon siege.
not really seeing why it took this long to make.Ontain
I'd like to know what version of Dungeon Siege you have been playing...because mine sure as hell didn't look like that! Granted the videos I edited in are of poor quality (the original gametrailers.com ones were not), but the game looks better than Titan Quest and Sacred 2 for sure...forget Dungeon Siege lol.
Ya I know...2011 is faaaaaaaaaar away lol.
[QUOTE="Ontain"]looks like it plays the same as the previous. graphics seem like an upgraded dungeon siege.
not really seeing why it took this long to make.dnuggs40
I'd like to know what version of Dungeon Siege you have been playing...because mine sure as hell didn't look like that! Granted the videos I edited in are of poor quality (the original gametrailers.com ones were not), but the game looks better than Titan Quest and Sacred 2 for sure...forget Dungeon Siege lol.
that's why i said upgraded. the 3d environments in these type of games is nothing new anymore and Diablo 3 looks good more on artistic than technical merit. still with the game looking like it sticks to the old formula this much i don't see why it took this long for a sequel.I think the Diablo series has always been about artistic merit rather than technical merit...at least as far as the graphics goes. And there are other things that take time other than graphics like content, balancing, and polish...something that Blizzard excels at.
Also, they haven't been working on D3 for that long anyways...I think I read something like it's only been in production for 2-3 years. They didn't start major production right ofter LOD or anything...they have had other major projects between them.
Anyways, the thing about your upgraded comment is it's an over-exaggeration...had you said an upgraded (visually) Titan Quest or something it would have been closer to reality. It's like saying Doom 3 looks like an upgraded Doom I...I mean ya...it's true but in serious conversation would you really describe it that way? Does that give the other person a real understanding of the visual improvement?
Monk? :
http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/60134
This kills me. They need a bow/crossbow character (named zon, scout, hunter, ranger... ) so the Monk announcement pretty erases any option to paladin/crusader/unolly warrior as one of the 5 first calses. And dins are my fav . ARRRRGH!
Monk? :
http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/60134
This kills me. They need a bow/crossbow character (named zon, scout, hunter, ranger... ) so the Monk announcement pretty erases any option to paladin/crusader/unolly warrior as one of the 5 first calses. And dins are my fav . ARRRRGH!
Ondoval
Yup, I agree. Personally I have never enjoyed Monk characters in any RPG games...and I was hoping for a board & sword type character. But the first 3 classes announced I will definitely play...especially the Witch Doctor.
*edit*
Video of actual monk gameplay:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_IIe4Wufyw
I take back what Isaid...that looks awesome.
Yes, this is the way in that D II works; you max 3-5 skills to level 20 and spent the rest in prerequisites and "one point wonders". It works fine because even if you focus in a few attacks you still have some points in askills that are used in situational moments. It allows you to build very different builds of any class.
If the system would be focus in too many skills you will not take advantage about sinergies, you will be underpower and it will only exist a couple of builds per class -all classes will use the same skills, so no interest to build more characters.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment