Talk:Diablo III

Diablo III has been announced. Unlock?

Diablo III has been announced. Please unlock or something. [1] [2] 85.82.180.82 (talk) 10:27, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Done. --Chris S. (talk) 10:32, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

3

Minor note - I don't know how to redirect, but Diablo 3 should go here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.120.208.68 (talk) 10:44, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

This has been fixed. Plrk (talk) 15:42, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism

Sweet, the game hasn't even been announced for an hour and people are already trying to vandalize the page. Jklharris (talk) 10:48, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

I foresee that vandalism will be a problem, so I've gone ahead and partially protected the article for 2 days. --Chris S. (talk) 10:57, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Was just about to request protection =) NeoDeGenero (talk) 11:00, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi NeoDeGenero, you inadvertently claimed that I was responsible for the vandalism regarding the game being developed by "Shrivelled Knob Entertainment". This was done by someone else and not me. I guess the page has been updated so rapidly, it's hard to keep track! Bernie bernbaum (talk) 11:12, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeh I know, you changed it back just when i was about to change it back. Thus, i've reverted my change. So it is correct again after my last change. =p NeoDeGenero (talk) 11:13, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Wrath of Lich comparison

Looking at the WoW: WotLK (no announcement, *sniff*) article, I may have to protect this page indefinitely. Either I or another admin will have to take care of that after the current 2-day protection period is over. Fun fun! ;-) --Chris S. (talk) 11:17, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

I've added this to my watchlist, I recommend that other interested users do likewise. --Stormie (talk) 13:19, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm watching it as well. I hope that it'll calm down over the next few days, although we'll see how it goes Gazimoff ^Write_Read 15:03, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Added to watchlist, as well. - Penwhale | ^{Blast him / Follow his steps} 18:50, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Number of Character Classes

Alright, I noticed that one of my changes was reverted, so to avoid an edit war, I want to clarify. According to the developers at the WWI, which seemingly would be the people who'd have the most current information, they haven't decided on a final number of character classes there will be. Definitely from the way they talked it sounded like they would end up with something closer to 7, but because they didn't say anything solid I don't want to end up putting in speculation. Jklharris (talk) 14:01, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Editing to add, I saw the note about what the FAQ said, but for some reason almost all of the D3 website won't load for me (stupid flash >.<). Since I know thats whats going to be brought as the counter argument, could I request that someone copies the text here just so I can see it?Jklharris (talk) 14:07, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

To quote the press release here:

Diablo III will pick up the story twenty years after the events of Diablo II. Mephisto, Diablo, and Baal have been defeated, but the Worldstone, which once shielded the inhabitants of the world of Sanctuary from the forces of both the High Heavens and the Burning Hells, has been destroyed, and evil once again stirs in Tristram. Playing as a hero from one of five distinct character classes, players will acquire powerful items, spells, and abilities as they explore new and familiar areas of Sanctuary and battle hordes of demons to safeguard the world from the horrors that have arisen. The first two characters classes -- the barbarian and the witch doctor -- were shown as part of the announcement at the event today in Paris.

Hope this helps, Gazimoff ^Write_Read 15:05, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Currently the FAQ and the official site lists the number as five, so lets stick with it for the time being. - Penwhale | ^{Blast him / Follow his steps} 18:47, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

During the gameplay demo movie on the web site, the narrator clearly states that the Barbarian is one of seven characters, and that should probably be noted in this article. The web site FAQ says five -- but considering the history of the franchise, one might speculate that the other two characters are indeed in development, but being planned for release in a future expansion pack. -- Mecandes (talk) 18:49, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry but i hear the word several, not seven. I won't change it myself as i'm not logged in but if someone else agrees with me they could change it. -Matt

I agree, it's one of several. The official press release also states five classes, as well as third-party sources. I'd suggest going with what the printed sources say for now.Gazimoff ^Write_Read 20:35, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Just to play devil's advocate, I could also link several printed sources (including IGN, who we've used extensively already) that quote the lead developer as saying that they haven't decided as a final number. However, I do agree that the FAQ is pretty clear, and while I could say something about typical Blizzard and having a little bit of conflicting information, I'll instead just say that my edit was wrong and that leaving it as two of five for now will probably be the right decision. Jklharris (talk) 07:09, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Note

In the trailer you can see that both Deckard Cain and Tahla are alive. And i suppose that big red demon is Diablo once again? Or could it be someone else —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.233.245.115 (talk) 16:25, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

IGN

Would it be okay, if I linked the game to IGN. Only it says I must post it on this talk page before submitting any changes, and a lot of other games have IGN linked. --EclipseSSD (talk) 19:31, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

We already link heavily to IGN through the references, so this may be a bit over the top for now. Gazimoff ^Write_Read 20:38, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

• IGN is a reliable sources. --SkyWalker (talk) 07:31, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Protection was ridiculous

I redirected this name to the Diablo II article about a week ago, and then someone deletes it, how ridiculous, since it was just going to come out. Tyciol (talk) 21:12, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

So why are you whining?. It is over. --SkyWalker (talk) 07:30, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

I think everyone arguing against deletion in the recent AfD should feel pretty smug right about now. JMalky (talk) 17:59, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Fairly useless trivia...

I'm not going to add it since it isn't necessary at all, but the chat gem is on the Diablo III page at Blizzard. Use that information however you want (possibly add it to the "chat gem" section in Diablo II. BrainRotMenacer (talk) 08:47, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

3d engine

"Like other games in the series, Diablo III will use an isometric, overhead view to present the game to players."

You might want to check for yourselves, but I think the engine is true 3d presenting an 'isometric like' viewpoint - ie in isometric projection there is no parallax or true perspective, whereas diablo 3 has perspective corrected visuals....87.102.86.73 (talk) 13:02, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

(eg for an example of the difference compare visuals of

perspective corrected: Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance (http://images.google.co.uk/images?hl=en&q=Baldur's%20Gate%3A%20Dark%20Alliance&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wi)

with

isometric infinity engine eg baldur's gate 2.

Could someone signed in please correct this, thanks.87.102.86.73 (talk) 13:07, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

I've just double checked the source for the ref here:

2:53 -- Overhead isometric view is key for Diablo. "If you can click a mouse, you can play Diablo," says Wilson. He says the game must have a smooth difficulty curve, like in Diablo 2. Blizzard wants to attract casual users to the game.

— Charles Onyett, IGN

If we can find sources to confirm your statement, then we can easily correct the section with a supporting reference. Hope this helps, Gazimoff ^Write_Read 13:42, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Just to butt in - that's IGN's blogger describing it as isometric ( a loose term ) not somone from blizzard?87.102.86.73 (talk) 14:12, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

we can´t link this can we? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kyUPqqXYx8A is a DIABLO III CINEMATIC TRAILER. Prietoquilmes (talk) 13:57, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

No, I don't think we're allowed to link to youtube videos of copyright material. We'd need a journalist's article, developer interview or similar to do the job. Gazimoff ^Write_Read 14:01, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Quote:

What engine is Diablo III running on? What graphical enhancements are included? Diablo III runs on a custom 3D game engine for rendering full-3D characters and environments...

http://eu.blizzard.com/diablo3/faq/#2_1

I'd suggest something like

"whilst retaining the overhead viewpoint of the previous games, diablo 3 now renders the enviroment in (perspective correct) 3d"

.. Obviously I was thinking of the hair splitting definition of isometric - clearly the viewpoint is still 'isometric like' - but I think has subtle parallax that gives clues to the eye/brain to prevent the problems described in Isometric_projection#Limits_of_axonometric_projection. Check some of the screen shots - bridges and verticles seem to have a vanishing point; but it might just be me...87.102.86.73 (talk) 14:10, 29 June 2008 (UTC) (By the way the old 'ruler on the screen' trick confirms it's not a true isometric projection eg measure this:[[3]])87.102.86.73 (talk) 14:55, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Note: from Isometric_projection#"Isometric" projection in video games and pixel art quote: "games that use perspective projection with a bird's eye view, such as The Age of Decadence and Silent Storm —are also sometimes referred to as being isometric, or "pseudo-isometric"." - I'd guess that "bird's eye view" is a better term to use here.87.102.86.73 (talk) 15:07, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Birds eye is head down. Isometric is at a 3/4ths angle. Diablo is far from a birds-eye viewpoint. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.215.10.1 (talk) 16:32, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

I think you're right - still it's not isometric.. maybe 'isometric' (note the quotes..) eg Scare_quotes#Neutral_distancing87.102.86.73 (talk) 17:17, 29 June 2008 (UTC)