Rumor: Diablo 3 will arrive before StarCraft 2

No diablo is not coming out first.. Its a rumor and exactly that.

Check this out.

http://www.starcraftvanilla.com/news/1056-starcraft-2-release-date-confirmed.html

http://www.starcraftvanilla.com

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say you probably didn't need to post on a 2 week old article. I don't think many people will be back here.

The engine for Starcraft 2 is probably 80-90% done and Blizzard is working with testers to refine balance issues and test existing/design new units. When they have finished this, then they can start on the single player campaign and AI tweaks. Also, the article states that the dev. team is much smaller for Starcraft.

Combine this with the fact that, as you stated, we don't actually know how far into development they are for Diablo 3, this rumor is probably true.

They were one third through creating the single player campaign in July.

Not to bum you out or anything but this doesn't necessarily mean more time for polish. Blizzard has always been a company that releases games when they feel it is ready, and not one that is pressured by release dates. If it takes 1000 man-hours for Blizzard to feel it's ready, they will take 1000 man-hours. By taking resources away from SC2 and moving it to D3, Blizzard only slows down the amount of man-hours spent on the game over time, thus delaying the release.

+1 because I hope you're right.

The whole "its on the web, so it must be true news" slack attitude Joystiq has been taking recently is getting out of hand.

This site is really going down the tubes.

I hope they add more color to piss off you whiners. Seriously, it's fine the way it is and Blizzard knows that you're still going to buy the game despite the way it looks because, after all, it's a Diablo game so STFU already.

+1

I think its funny that people were so up in arms about the color scheme and theres been hardly a peep about the change in the health potion mechanic.

In the end its gonna look good no matter the choice of palette, but the health potion thing has the potential to change the gameplay in a big way - maybe for the worse.

...or just wait for a mod? We're not those console suckers that have to wait for months to get some new maps/patches.

"I think its funny that people were so up in arms about the color scheme and theres been hardly a peep about the change in the health potion mechanic."

I've seen a fair amount of discussion on those health orbs. But don't misrepresent it; from what we're told, health potions are in and work the same way as in the previous game. There's just another type of potion in the game now, too, that you just can't save for use later. I doubt it will change the game much, but probably not for the worse. We'll see in 2010.

And since it's been brought up, I'll try to put the complex color thing simply: if Dead Space 2 copied Diablo 3's visuals, there would be the same amount of disappointment. You can't take a horror franchise and lighten it up and stylize it without busting expectations, especially when the last game in the series came out eight years ago--it doesn't matter if the new look looks good or not, it's an inconsistent look and that's just plain disappointing all by itself.

We'll all get used to it eventually, like we'll get used to the new Prince of Persia or Stargate Worlds, but Diablo didn't have to change; Blizzard's the one company on Earth that doesn't have to worry about reinventing their older franchises to appeal to even broader audiences, and their excuse that horror doesn't work well with polygons, honestly, couldn't be much more preposterous. It's clear the talented, respectable guys at Blizzard were fans of the Diablo games and want to make Diablo 3 a true sequel and ultra-fun Diablo game, because it looks to be just that, but unfortunately their love of the style and aesthetic genre of the series didn't run as deep or they wouldn't have changed it.

If you haven't seen this already (http://www.deriss.net/diablo3/Diablo_3.html), check it out and try to get an idea--a general concept or notion--of what Diablo 3 could have looked like; I think it's pretty cool. (If it's all the same, please send messages of your seething hatred of people who like horror games to be dark to the guy who made the video, not to me. Thanks.)

Care to source your debunking?

http://www.diii.net/n/693200/d3-release-date-rumors

This rumor is total bullshit.

+1

Alex is correct, the spelling with an "i" is something fairly new.

The [sic] is usually used to indicate a direct quote and thus a remark about the importance of whatever was said. We on the other hand have become used to read this mostly in connections with spelling mistakes e.g. "Then he told me he was a nucular [sic] engineer". In this case I would assume it's used in the appropriate way to point the reader at the fact that someone from Blizzard actually confirmed that they've reduced the number of people working on their (most) anticipated project to a very small amount. So his source apparently actually spoke of a "minuscule" amount of people as compared to "still quite a few people" or some other phrasing one would expect from developers talking about their pet project.

I didn't know about the whole "remark about the importance" aspect. But in any case, the whole quote is precisely about the importance of the difference in staff numbers. So I believe adding [sic] after minuscule doesn't make much sense nor adds any new meaning.

I don't know about DIII, but the speculated (I don't think they're official yet) minimum requirements for StarCraft II are just about nothing. The 600$ desktop I bought for my parents 2 years ago could run it.

The problem with projected sysreqs today is that they never hold up to a satisfying experience. My PC could run Crysis ... but I'd rather go back playing Farcry because it looks about the same when I turn Crysis' settings down. I'll have to build a new computer anyhow at some point and I'll definitely wait for the final specs to go about doing that. The last thing I calculated was 800$ hardware and pretty much second in every class. First place stuff is way too expensive when you can get comparable results for a third less. Anyhow, even if I can afford the hardware I would have to install Windows and that is just way beyond my level of sacrifice I want to make for a game again.

If you don't mind my asking... what pieces of hardware are you getting?
I'm getting ready to buy parts to build a PC for the first time, and I'm not sure where people get numbers like 800$, as with only one graphics card my estimate was 1500$.

Either way, if you could run Crysis on any settings, I have a feeling SCII will be a piece of cake. Blizzard's strategy has always been to go easy on hardware so more people can play the game.

Well I did some online research a couple of weeks ago and came up with this (all Euros):

Intel C2Duo 3Ghz 125,-
Asus P5Q Deluxe Mobo 142,-
GEIL 4GB DDR2 Kit PC2 9600 92,-
(this one will change to sth faster):
Elitegroup Geforce 8800GT 512MB 113,-
(prly different one too):
Sharkoon Rebel Case 43,-
WD Caviar 500GB drive 54,-
Xilence 600W power supply 51,-
Logitech MX518 mouse 29,-

Together with some cables and some smaller stuff I get something just above 650€. I would switch to a better gfx card in the final one so with another 100-150€ I am well withing 800€ limit. Usually the hardware is even cheaper in the US even despite the currently bad exchange rates so I don't know how you would spend 1500$ on a new sys. If you look a little below the top of the hardware spectrum and sacrifice the seldomly used hardcore specs then you can get off way cheaper and still have ample performance. I usually get the "second best" in everything and just by staying behind the latest trends just one step you can save tons of money and you will never even need that extra bit of power for your gaming. Bleeding edge machines have the worst value ratio and the little tiny bit of performance you can gain is really only important for the enthusiasts, benchmarkers and overclockers. For the regular guy like me second best in the current hardware market is definitely good enough.