BlizzCon 2010: Blizzard Announces Final Diablo 3 Class

 Pages PREV 1 2
 

I want this game.

I want a kick-ass monk.

I want a bad-ass demon hunter.

I want!

Brotherofwill:
Demon hunter's a stupid name but apart from that it sounds good. For some reasons I hate using crossbows in games, I always choose bow and arrows, but maybe that's just me.

Logan Westbrook:
So she's kind of like Batman, then.

Priceless man.

she hunts demons. i think demon hunter is a pretty logical name.

OT: i actually like this last class. they remind me of diablo 2, but also manage to give those classes a fresh spin to them.

Wandrecanada:
Wow... so they're just riffing on old ideas again because they lack the talent to come up with something unique and original yet again?

Blizzard; Making the same shit over and over again since they sold out in 2004.

have you heard the saying "don't fix what isn't broken"?
and if they didn't include this character, a lot of people would complain they can't go physical ranged or something.

So...she acts like Batman and looks like The Huntress. Sounds good to me! SOLD!

I'm surprised there's only going to be 5 classes because only 2 of the ones announced do I actually kind of like.

Rogue class? I'm in.

Torchlight was a slightly less lame version of FATE. Unfortunately, the game was broken and the only class worth while was the Alchemist with that beam attack that seriously just slaughters all.

with magic of curse...

I find this statement awesome.

Serris:
she hunts demons. i think demon hunter is a pretty logical name.

I fry eggs in the morning. I guess that makes my class "Egg fryer" until noon every day.

I prefer flavor over logic and ingenuity over pragmatism. As stated before, a demon hunter in diablo 3 is cyclical redundancy in my book. Otherwise the other classes would be called Anger-management lunatic, death/nature user, magick user, and fancy kicker.

Come to think of it, I would very much like to see a class called The Anger-management lunatic. That just sounds wonderful.

rembrandtqeinstein:
Bah PVP....You would think Blizzard would have leaned by now...I'll use caps and bold in case they are listening.

"YOU CANNOT BALANCE BOTH PVE AND PVP SIMULTANEOUSLY"

Stop shoehorning PVP into every game to satisfy the 2% of the playerbase that enjoys it.

Sure you can. You just need to realize that they don't have to follow the same set of rules. This is how most games manage such a feat.

I mean, look at Starcraft. The single player game (that represents the PVE portion) may be functionally identical to the multiplayer segment but they use different rules, stats and units. Sure the game plays similarly in both, and the units still fill the same roles, but by throwing out the notion that you need to balance some aspect simultaneously for both PVE and PVP the game benefits.

 Pages PREV 1 2

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here