# DIABLO 3 to use Havok Physics, DX10.1



## nt300 (Feb 8, 2010)

*DIABLO 3 to use Havok Physics, DX10.1 or DX11...*

Just an update for this long awaiting Diablo 3.

*DIABLO 3 to use Havok (ATI) Physics*

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diablo_III
*Blizzard snubs Nvidia with Diablo 3* This is a good thing indead. Havok will work on both ATI & Nvidia where as Nvidia's Stingy PhysX only works on Nvidia because they will it. So good news for everybody and soon after Nvidia will have to say bye to there version of PhysX 
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1003969/blizzard-snubs-nvidia-diablo

Diablo 3 to use Havok physics engine!
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/252296-33-diablo-havok-physics-engine

















> Diablo III website splash page
> Developer(s) Blizzard Entertainment
> Designer(s) Jay Wilson (lead)
> Leonard Boyarsky (world design)
> ...


----------



## Disparia (Feb 8, 2010)

Excellent!

Now if they could only do something about that release date...


----------



## Mussels (Feb 8, 2010)

:O! no LAN!

FUCKERS!


By the way, there is no mention of hardware ATI acceleration. just that they're using Havok (which runs on CPU)


----------



## eidairaman1 (Feb 8, 2010)

Havok is owned by Intel, but im glad to see AMD trying to push GITG again.


----------



## Mussels (Feb 8, 2010)

altered the thread title to more accurately state the truth.

Havok works on CPU, potentially on Nvidia + ATI via openCL - but doesnt work on either yet.

One of those links mentions DX9 and DX10.1 support, meaning a minor win for ATI users


----------



## Fourstaff (Feb 8, 2010)

Release date 2011 or later? Man, Blizzard needs to get off WoW and start focusing on other projects.


----------



## Melvis (Feb 8, 2010)

Mussels said:


> :O! no LAN!
> 
> FUCKERS!



I hope you are joking?

If not? where does it say that?


----------



## Mussels (Feb 8, 2010)

Melvis said:


> I hope you are joking?
> 
> If not? where does it say that?








muliplayer is only via battlenet


----------



## Melvis (Feb 8, 2010)

Mussels said:


> http://img.techpowerup.org/100208/.jpg
> 
> muliplayer is only via battlenet



 Now that's just total BS, LAN play is what makes these games. Im ready to buy this as soon as it comes out just for that reason to, to play LAN here at home. ALL my freinds are waiting to do the same. Now im P*ssed


----------



## Tatty_One (Feb 8, 2010)

Lol, so why not develop the game for DX11 and then no need to worry about Havok?


----------



## Mussels (Feb 8, 2010)

Tatty_One said:


> Lol, so why not develop the game for DX11 and then no need to worry about Havok?



because it would limit how many people could play the game. this was covered already.


----------



## Phxprovost (Feb 8, 2010)

havoc does not need gpu acceleration, especially in a game like diablo 3.
i kinda figured this was a given considering SC:2 is using it as well.

also im pretty sure that open CL has nothing to do with DX11, as in im pretty sure CL by its design works on any hardware...kinda the point it was created, yes DX11 can work with it but CL doesn't need it for anything


----------



## Mussels (Feb 8, 2010)

Phxprovost said:


> havoc does not need gpu acceleration, especially in a game like diablo 3.
> i kinda figured this was a given considering SC:2 is using it as well.
> 
> also im pretty sure that open CL has nothing to do with DX11, as in im pretty sure CL by its design works on any hardware...kinda the point it was created, yes DX11 can work with it but CL doesn't need it for anything



direct compute and openCL are tied into hardware of the cards, it takes a DX10 (or higher) card to run them.


----------



## werez (Feb 8, 2010)

OH common Blizzard ! i need to hear the release date ! Just lie , i don`t care ...


----------



## Mussels (Feb 8, 2010)

werez said:


> OH common Blizzard ! i need to hear the release date ! Just lie , i don`t care ...



octember 34th, 2010.


----------



## Phxprovost (Feb 8, 2010)

werez said:


> OH common Blizzard ! i need to hear the release date ! Just lie , i don`t care ...



 i hope they break it into 3 parts and push it way back like they did with my star craft 2


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Feb 8, 2010)

Melvis said:


> Now that's just total BS, LAN play is what makes these games. Im ready to buy this as soon as it comes out just for that reason to, to play LAN here at home. ALL my freinds are waiting to do the same. Now im P*ssed



Depending on how much Battle.net gets changed and considering the popularity of the franchise pvpgn might add support for diablo 3 pretty fast. Lets hope so anyway.


----------



## Mussels (Feb 8, 2010)

i can tell you know, i know a lot of people who wont buy this if it has no lan. its thousands of lost sales.


----------



## 1Kurgan1 (Feb 8, 2010)

I'm a bit confused on the big issue with no LAN, almost everyone I know now days has highspeed internet.


----------



## Mussels (Feb 8, 2010)

1Kurgan1 said:


> I'm a bit confused on the big issue with no LAN, almost everyone I know now days has highspeed internet.



you have 8 people in one house. you need 8x the speed of the internet.

LAN parties are a big thing in many parts of the world.


----------



## Melvis (Feb 8, 2010)

DanTheBanjoman said:


> Depending on how much Battle.net gets changed and considering the popularity of the franchise pvpgn might add support for diablo 3 pretty fast. Lets hope so anyway.



To true i have seen this happen before and i realy do hope that is does for Diablo 3, i love Diablo 2, i still play it today and have LAN games here at home with m8s and we have been waiting so long for Diablo 3 to play it like Diablo 2 here at home LAN play. Its also easier to converse with each other with item drops and missions etc, over the net its alot harder to do this.


----------



## Tatty_One (Feb 8, 2010)

Mussels said:


> because it would limit how many people could play the game. this was covered already.



Can that not be said of any game and DX11?  You could argue that only ATi card owners will see the full benefit of Havok surely?  I was of the understanding that CL is linked to hardware, not too sure on this....  if that is so then the argument that only DX11 card owners would benefit from a DX11 enabled game kind of flies out of the window, whilst of course DX11 may not give us everything that havok will in physx terms, it will give some of what Havok cant give..... and of course the game could still run in DX10.


----------



## Mussels (Feb 8, 2010)

Tatty_One said:


> Can that not be said of any game and DX11?  You could argue that only ATi card owners will see the full benefit of Havok surely?  I was of the understanding that CL is linked to hardware, not too sure on this....  if that is so then the argument that only DX11 card owners would benefit from a DX11 enabled game kind of flies out of the window, whilst of course DX11 may not give us everything that havok will in physx terms, it will give some of what Havok cant give..... and of course the game could still run in DX10.



bad tatty.

1.

The game supports DX9 and 10.1 - not sure about 11, but the point is just about anyone can run that. XP, vista, 7, the whole lot. even macs.

Havok: *no* GPU acceleration! they're using it in SOFTWARE mode.

openCL is linked to hardware. DX10 being what it links to - hence why blizzard are using SOFTWARE havok.


----------



## pantherx12 (Feb 8, 2010)

I don't care if it has lan multiplayer or not.

I might get 50ms of lag when playing against someone on battle.net with my connection so no really much of a problem.

Its diablo not an FPS after all.


----------



## Mussels (Feb 8, 2010)

pantherx12 said:


> I don't care if it has lan multiplayer or not.
> 
> I might get 50ms of lag when playing against someone on battle.net with my connection so no really much of a problem.
> 
> Its diablo not an FPS after all.



i pay for my bandwidth. not unlimited like in the USA/UK


----------



## pantherx12 (Feb 8, 2010)

Mussels said:


> i pay for my bandwidth. not unlimited like in the USA/UK



D:

now it makes sense !


Pester blizzard GO GO


----------



## Mussels (Feb 8, 2010)

and another thing... aus doesnt have any blizzard servers. none for WoW, so there wont be for SC2 or D3. We get to use generic 'asia pacific' servers instead


----------



## Bjorn_Of_Iceland (Feb 8, 2010)

pantherx12 said:


> I don't care if it has lan multiplayer or not.
> 
> I might get 50ms of lag when playing against someone on battle.net with my connection so no really much of a problem.
> 
> Its diablo not an FPS after all.


With a game like Diablo? I think youl require the same amount of latency youl need with an FPS game. Its not an mmo with a click target and wait for it to die, with no significant spike damage.. everything is fast paced in diablo imo where in character location and precise skill pressing are significant and may tell the difference between life and death.


----------



## Tatty_One (Feb 8, 2010)

Mussels said:


> bad tatty.
> 
> 1.
> 
> ...




OK thanks, my bad.... so Havok will run with NVidia cards then, if that is so, it has to be good but being bad again..... IMO there is still no excuse for not including DX11, especially if it's DX backwards compatible, especially for a game thats not going to be released for some time, of course I am only saying it isnt supported DX11 from others feedback, I assume they are right in their thoughts.


----------



## Mussels (Feb 8, 2010)

Tatty_One said:


> OK thanks, my bad.... so Havok will run with NVidia cards then, if that is so, it has to be good but being bad again..... IMO there is still no excuse for not including DX11, especially if it's DX backwards compatible, especially for a game thats not going to be released for some time, of course I am only saying it isnt supported DX11 from others feedback, I assume they are right in their thoughts.



havok *could* run on nvidia and ATI cards, but the point is - right now, it runs on neither. and its not likely to support hardware acceleration in a blizzard game - they'd optimize it for weak CPU's instead.


----------



## AsRock (Feb 8, 2010)

Cool like that 3rd pic . 

The games been in the making for so many years you cannot expect them to change a shit load of code to make it DX11.

As for no lan umm not really bothered games don't take that much bandwidth anyways.


----------



## shevanel (Feb 8, 2010)

Mussels said:


> because it would limit how many people could play the game. this was covered already.



no lan was a heavily discussed topic last year, not news.

plus mussels is 100% right and at the end of that source link the write commented 





> What this won't be, it seems, is a guaranteed graphics card seller, unlike many of the other triple-A titles released recently.


----------



## PP Mguire (Feb 8, 2010)

No LAN = fail for this game as well as SC2. Every LAN i go to is playing some sort of RTS over the LAN.

And people shouldnt forget. Nvidia has 10.1 now too.


----------



## shevanel (Feb 8, 2010)

i agree


----------



## Mussels (Feb 8, 2010)

PP Mguire said:


> No LAN = fail for this game as well as SC2. Every LAN i go to is playing some sort of RTS over the LAN.
> 
> And people shouldnt forget. Nvidia has 10.1 now too.



i go to 500 person lans every 2 months, and 30-50 people lans in the months between. RTS games are extremely common, as are FPS games - but there are ALWAYS groups playing the 'coop' games. Borderlands, freelancer, diablo II (yep, still see it sometimes). 

There is a very strong niche for 4-8 player games, especially coop ones with few games filling the gaps. Diablo II was one of the greatest for that in its era... and now diablo III is leaving that behind.


----------



## PP Mguire (Feb 8, 2010)

23rd of Jan i went to a LAN and i got a game of Starcraft going so i understand what your saying. We even still play BFME as well.


----------



## 1Kurgan1 (Feb 8, 2010)

I just wish we had LAN parties around here :/


----------



## PP Mguire (Feb 8, 2010)

Well if i visit my uncle in minnesota ill give you a ring cause i love to LAN.


----------



## 1Kurgan1 (Feb 8, 2010)

Sounds good, wheres your uncle at up here?


----------



## lemode (Feb 8, 2010)

no lan for this diablo?! no thanks!


----------



## copenhagen69 (Feb 8, 2010)

i will get it either way ... never even used the lan option in D2 lol

I just want the game to release already... i am tired of waiting


----------



## shevanel (Feb 8, 2010)

is diablo fun?


----------



## a_ump (Feb 8, 2010)

haha most people would ask if ur crazy and that of course it is. I personally enjoyed it for a bit but lost interest cause it seemed really repetitive but then i never went online with it(back in dial-up days) so that might be why i don't think of it with just high regard.


----------



## 1Kurgan1 (Feb 8, 2010)

shevanel said:


> is diablo fun?



I loved the 1st one, the 2nd was good, but just didn't have the feeling of the 1st game. Even now, 15 years after D1 came out, I would HIGHLY suggest going back and playing it, I still find the armor and weapons in that game good looking, very gothic and dark feeling, the 2nd went more bright lights and not that erie feeling.


----------



## PP Mguire (Feb 8, 2010)

1Kurgan1 said:


> Sounds good, wheres your uncle at up here?



i dont exactly know but my mom does.


----------



## Polarman (Feb 8, 2010)

Diablo 3's "real" release date will be on December 21st, 2012 (doomsday date).


----------



## Delta6326 (Feb 8, 2010)

Mussels said:


> and another thing... aus doesnt have any blizzard servers. none for WoW, so there wont be for SC2 or D3. We get to use generic *'asia pacific' servers *instead



that sucks you have to play with all the hacking Asian's  JK

but that sucks no lan! im also waiting for my StarcraftII


----------



## Super XP (Feb 8, 2010)

Mussels said:


> havok *could* run on nvidia and ATI cards, but the point is - right now, it runs on neither. and its not likely to support hardware acceleration in a blizzard game - they'd optimize it for weak CPU's instead.


You can thank Intel for that one, the last thing Intel wants is Havok to run better on ATI/NVIDIA GPU's than Intel CPU's 

Why is Blizzard taking long with Diablo 3? 
This is why IMO:
Windows 7
DirectX 11
Single Player & MMO 
Release Date: Q3 2010...
LINK:
http://www.diablo3release.com/diablog.html



> One unusual twist to this story is that if Diablo 3 takes as long to produce as the next Windows OS, it will be running on DirectX 11 instead of DirextX 10, making it one of the first high-end PC games to support the platform.


----------



## cyriene (Feb 8, 2010)

This game has been in development longer than DX11 has been around.  They would have to redo a lot of work to make it DX11 which would push the release date back even further...That is my best educated guess as to why it supports DX10.1 and not DX11


----------



## Mussels (Feb 8, 2010)

Super XP said:


> You can thank Intel for that one, the last thing Intel wants is Havok to run better on ATI/NVIDIA GPU's than Intel CPU's
> 
> Why is Blizzard taking long with Diablo 3?
> This is why IMO:
> ...



havoks been around for a very long time as a CPU only engine. Half life 2 uses it, company of heroes uses it, even some wii games use it.


----------



## Super XP (Feb 8, 2010)

DX11 was in developement for a long time before DX10 ever came out. The same process can be said about GPU's and CPU's. That's the only way to get games out B4 DX11 release date.


----------



## Mussels (Feb 9, 2010)

Super XP said:


> DX11 was in developement for a long time before DX10 ever came out. The same process can be said about GPU's and CPU's. That's the only way to get games out B4 DX11 release date.



DX10 and DX11 are tied in so well, they were probably designed together. DX10 didnt have much new apart from D3D10, whereas DX11 has many new shinies like directcompute.


----------



## Super XP (Feb 9, 2010)

All I know is I can’t wait for Diablo 3 to get released. I loved both 1 & 2 and can’t wait to add the 3rd to my PC game collection.

Good point and further supports Diablo 3 based on DX11. DX10.1 was temporary and was the 1st step toward DX11. DX11 should be with us for a much longer time than DX10 & 
DX10.1

There’s already talk about a DX12 due out sometime in mid to late 2012. They need to perfect DX11 before they DX12 ever gets released.


----------



## Super XP (Feb 10, 2010)

Have you guys seen the new screen shots of Diablo 3? WOW, this game is going to look AWESOME!!!!!!

LINK:
http://us.blizzard.com/diablo3/?rhtml=y&rhtml=y


----------



## Mussels (Feb 10, 2010)

Super XP said:


> Have you guys seen the new screen shots of Diablo 3? WOW, this game is going to look AWESOME!!!!!!
> 
> LINK:
> http://us.blizzard.com/diablo3/?rhtml=y&rhtml=y



you realize that after viewing these screenshots, i'm going to have to kill you for making me want to play the game, right?


----------



## douglatins (Feb 10, 2010)

OMG those news are ancient, man since 4870 released that was known.
Also why go 10.1 and still look like a smoothed Diablo2?


----------



## copenhagen69 (Feb 10, 2010)

i wonder how the gear will be in this game


----------



## Super XP (Feb 10, 2010)

Mussels said:


> you realize that after viewing these screenshots, i'm going to have to kill you for making me want to play the game, right?


----------



## trt740 (Feb 10, 2010)

Tatty_One said:


> Lol, so why not develop the game for DX11 and then no need to worry about Havok?



most likely they have had it developed for 3 years and don't want to re do the engine, plus they most likely want to release it on the consoles and they are not dx 11


----------



## pantherx12 (Feb 10, 2010)

I don't really like the painted effect some of the textures have.


----------



## MK4512 (Feb 10, 2010)

Am I the only one dissapointed by the graphics? I thought a game that took this much development time would look the part.


----------



## pantherx12 (Feb 10, 2010)

Gameplay is more important then graphics in the Diablo Series , they also want the game playable on many systems so it sells more.


Although I have to say the style of graphics isn't my type ...


----------



## MK4512 (Feb 10, 2010)

pantherx12 said:


> Gameplay is more important then graphics in the Diablo Series , they also want the game playable on many systems so it sells more.
> 
> 
> Although I have to say the style of graphics isn't my type ...



Well, that's why graphics options were invented.


----------



## nt300 (Feb 11, 2010)

trt740 said:


> most likely they have had it developed for 3 years and don't want to re do the engine, plus they most likely want to release it on the consoles and they are not dx 11


DX11 should gain you better performance with better visuals. Even if Diablo 3 was being developed under DX10.1, it would take penuts to do a little switcharu onto DX11. Just like the mod said, they have alot in common with 4 major improvement differences under DX11. It can be done very easily is my point  
They can very easily port any DX11 game onto DX9/10 consoles with a flick of a switch.


pantherx12 said:


> Gameplay is more important then graphics in the Diablo Series , they also want the game playable on many systems so it sells more.
> 
> Although I have to say the style of graphics isn't my type ...


Hehe, this game is targeted for people like you. It's going to hook like glue especially when you play it in high def 1080p. I also heard there’s going to be an element of some FPS in this game which is the big surprise or not because I just spilled the beans  Sorry Blizzy


----------



## happita (Feb 11, 2010)

nt300 said:


> I also heard there’s going to be an element of some FPS in this game which is the big surprise or not because I just spilled the beans  Sorry Blizzy



Stop messin', I will seriously hook you!!


----------



## Disparia (Feb 11, 2010)

Graphics smaphics. I'll take another game that looks like D2...

http://www.theburnerishot.com/photo/Diablo2-HD.jpg


----------



## pantherx12 (Feb 11, 2010)

Jizzler said:


> Graphics smaphics. I'll take another game that looks like D2...
> 
> http://www.theburnerishot.com/photo/Diablo2-HD.jpg




You know I wouldn't might super high res Diablo 2, mmm high res sprite based game


----------



## Disparia (Feb 11, 2010)

http://www.moddb.com/games/diablo-2/downloads/d2multires-version-102

The previous screenie was just for show unfortunately as it's a bit slow (at least on my system). 1280x, 1440x, and 1680x are much faster and look worlds better than stretched 800x600.


----------



## pantherx12 (Feb 11, 2010)

Technically the the actual game ( rather then interface) is still stretched out unless they replaced all the sprites and such like.

I would love to see the sprites redone for high res.


----------



## AsRock (Feb 11, 2010)

MK4512 said:


> Am I the only one dissapointed by the graphics? I thought a game that took this much development time would look the part.




Your kidding right i played D2 for 5 years and still not found every item in the game and i played it daily.

Well me at least don't want UBER graphics although i do wish it had more of the D1 feel to it which is were the second failed.  In fact the only reason i don't play D2 today is the lack of support for higher res and trust me 800x600 don't look good at all on  a 1600x1200 LCD never mind a 40" 1920x1080.

I my self love that 3rd pic the OP posted but by the videos the game don't look that way but maybe they are listening and the pics how the game looks today .


----------



## 1Kurgan1 (Feb 11, 2010)

pantherx12 said:


> Gameplay is more important then graphics in the Diablo Series , they also want the game playable on many systems so it sells more.
> 
> Although I have to say the style of graphics isn't my type ...



Diablo 1 and Diablo 2 always looked great, yes they went with a view that was easy to make the games look better. But I can still play D1 and say I like the look of it, most games from 1995 you cannot say that about. I can understand Blizz cheaping out on WoW graphics, so many people are on each server, and on the screen at the sametime, very stressful. 

But these are small servers, I always loved how the previous games looked and honestly, these screens and videos are just dissapointing. I was really hoping they would flex the graphical muscles on this one, but I guess they won't :/ The new head of Blizz is going to ruin that company, people will still buy the games, but the Blizz games of the past have ranting reviews, people love D1, they love D2, they love SC, they loved WoW, but most people I know that still play the game bitch about it all the time. And I have a feeling thats whats going to happen here, the head of Blizz is big on micro transactions and milking gamers for all they are worth, I bet they will have micro transactions for D3, I look forward to this game, but I don't look forward to some of the news I am sure to hear about it.

Here's some quotes from that sweet Activition Blizzard president...

Kotick was challenged over his "comfort level" around high prices attached to "new games that have some expensive controllers" (presumably the Guitar Hero, Tony Hawk and DJ Hero franchises), and said, "If it was left to me, I would raise the prices even further."

"We have a real culture of thrift. The goal that I had in bringing a lot of the packaged goods folks into Activision about 10 years ago was to take all the fun out of making video games." Kotick later stated he tries to promote an atmosphere of "skepticism, pessimism, and fear" in his company and, "We are very good at keeping people focused on the deep depression."



Jizzler said:


> Graphics smaphics. I'll take another game that looks like D2...
> 
> http://www.theburnerishot.com/photo/Diablo2-HD.jpg



Yeah, D2 looked great, this honestly doesn't look much better if any better than D2


----------



## Mussels (Feb 11, 2010)

i wish they'd re-release a HD version of diablo II.

Just up the sprites to say, 1280x1024, and add widescreen support (even if it had to crop, or added its own black bars or something)


----------



## Melvis (Feb 11, 2010)

Mussels said:


> i wish they'd re-release a HD version of diablo II.
> 
> Just up the sprites to say, 1280x1024, and add widescreen support (even if it had to crop, or added its own black bars or something)



The 1.13 Patch when its released will have support for widescreen 

Its still been tested at the moment, but wont be far away.


----------



## pantherx12 (Feb 11, 2010)

patch 1.3 was best Diablo II patch, game was actually difficult as magic items were actually hard to find, made the dungeons seem that much more dangerous and engulfing.

Game really had an atmosphere back in the day, just a cake walk now and thus not scary/ atmospheric at all.


The current art style of D3 is ruining the atmosphere for me already actually : /

Water colours in-between textures is just odd.


----------



## Super XP (Feb 12, 2010)

I e-mailed Blizzard and asked them if the new Diablo 3 will be based on new State of the Art 1080p High Def format. 



> Dear Sir/Madam,
> Thank you for contacting Blizzard, we strive to make your gaming experience as pleasurable as possible. In regards to your question, we are aggressivaly working on completing Diablo 3 based on the Direct X11 software architecture. We originally had planned to use Direct X10 but somehow Convinced Microsoft to give us an early release of Direct X11 hence the release date.
> 
> Bellow you will find 2 pictures based on the new engine we are basing Diablo 3 on. Once again, please feel free to contact Blizzard anytime at your convenience.
> ...



They've replied back with this: Is this a JOKE






Just Kidding lol by Tom Sharp


----------



## copenhagen69 (Feb 12, 2010)

i never have liked those type of screen shots ... anyone can make those look super nice ...

why would they not give you actual in game screen shots to show off how it will really look


----------



## Super XP (Feb 12, 2010)

Sounds to me they don't want to give away too much information. All I can say is for them to be taking so long, DIABLO 3 "SHOULD" be one of the best all time games out for its class, if not then why on earth did they take so long


----------



## pantherx12 (Feb 12, 2010)

Those are screen caps from the video trailer : /


----------



## 1Kurgan1 (Feb 12, 2010)

The monk trailer was beyond unimpressive, granted it wasn't taken at the camera angle that the games in, but it looked like in game models. I say that because the D2 videos looked better than the Monk video, the monk video looks like playing WoW, which for an MMO is fine, but honestly though don't go that route, DX11 would be nice to see.


----------



## Easo (Feb 12, 2010)

Blizzard jokes FTW!


----------



## copenhagen69 (Feb 12, 2010)

hopefully they spend time on the weapons and set items ... D2 had soooo many i never found all the items or set pieces ... unless i traded for them.

hopefully its the same in this game with lots of them and not just a set or 2 per class :/


----------



## nt300 (Feb 15, 2010)

Those screenshots look like rough copies of the game in its pre-design. The real game should look sharper and cleaner.


----------



## copenhagen69 (Feb 15, 2010)

so does anyone know if there will be 5 characters or 4 until an xpack comes out?


----------



## Disparia (Feb 15, 2010)

^ My guess would be 5. Don't mess with the success of D2  (Necro's were eventually balanced better)



copenhagen69 said:


> hopefully they spend time on the weapons and set items ... D2 had soooo many i never found all the items or set pieces ... unless i traded for them.
> 
> hopefully its the same in this game with lots of them and not just a set or 2 per class :/



Would be nice to adjust the drops for single player mode. In my recent replaying of D2 for the _n_th time, five set items dropped. And unlike online, I can't leave them in a room and enter with another of my characters, or trade.


----------



## copenhagen69 (Feb 15, 2010)

is the witch doctor the 'necro' class of this game?

they still dont seem to have an amazon type class yet ... unless you consider the witch doctor it, but i don't


----------



## Super XP (Feb 15, 2010)

I like the Warrior Mage or am I thinking about another game


----------



## nt300 (Feb 15, 2010)

Just a note, Blizzard started Diablo 3 in 2005, so it's been 5 years now in the making. They were recording the music for Diablo 3 in 2005 which brings me to believe they already had this on paper and ready for designing. But how about DX11 or even DX10? They were none existing back them. Not sure abuot DX9 though. That is a long time to make a game

I think you mean the Wizard not sure about a warrior mage. 


> Character classes
> As of August 2009[update], four of the five classes have been unveiled: the Barbarian, the Witch Doctor, the Wizard and the Monk.[2][16][17][18] Players may choose the gender of each class, a change from the fixed class genders in the previous two games.[5] The Barbarian is the only class that Blizzard is planning to bring back from Diablo II for the initial release. Blizzard has stated that the Monk was not related in any way to Diablo: Hellfire Monk class.[19] The Archivist was presented on April 1, 2009 following Blizzard's April Fool's Day joke tradition


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diablo_3#Character_classes


----------



## copenhagen69 (Feb 15, 2010)

hmmmm 1 more class ... can not wait to figure out what it is ... hopefully it doesnt suck


----------



## Disparia (Feb 16, 2010)

Witch Doctor may be partial-summoner/spellcaster like the Druid, in which case the 5th class may be a full-summoner.

Will have to wait until more info is posted from Blizzard.


----------



## 1Kurgan1 (Feb 16, 2010)

nt300 said:


> Just a note, Blizzard started Diablo 3 in 2005, so it's been 5 years now in the making. They were recording the music for Diablo 3 in 2005 which brings me to believe they already had this on paper and ready for designing. But how about DX11 or even DX10? They were none existing back them. Not sure abuot DX9 though. That is a long time to make a game
> 
> I think you mean the Wizard not sure about a warrior mage.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diablo_3#Character_classes



I'm pretty sure Dx10 was in the making, Crysis was out in 07, I can't imagine they made a cutting edge game like that in a single year.


----------



## copenhagen69 (Feb 16, 2010)

Jizzler said:


> Witch Doctor may be partial-summoner/spellcaster like the Druid, in which case the 5th class may be a full-summoner.
> 
> Will have to wait until more info is posted from Blizzard.




eh i hope they dont have a half and half type person they are always gimped. 

They need an all out type summoner or caster.


----------



## Super XP (Feb 17, 2010)

Sounds good to me.


----------



## kid41212003 (Feb 17, 2010)

I believe the Asia Battlenet servers will locate in Japan, and China, not really a problem for AU. RTS games don't require low ping like FPS, you still can play it at 400-500ms.

2 countries that own the most gateways in the area.


----------



## copenhagen69 (Feb 17, 2010)

anyone know if the loot system will be changed? instead of the free for all click as fast as you can type system?


----------



## Mike0409 (Feb 17, 2010)

copenhagen69 said:


> anyone know if the loot system will be changed? instead of the free for all click as fast as you can type system?



I remember reading where loot options can be changed like in WoW.  Round Robin, Rolling, etc.  (can't remember where I read the article for that, might of been a FAQ after blizzcon, or it was a request from players)


----------



## nt300 (Feb 17, 2010)

1Kurgan1 said:


> I'm pretty sure Dx10 was in the making, Crysis was out in 07, I can't imagine they made a cutting edge game like that in a single year.


Microsoft must have a way to make it easy for game developers to easily port over DX9 games in the making such as Diablo 3 into DX11. There's no way Bliz would release a DX9 game what took that long to make without taking advantage of DX11's benefits. We just have to sit and wait for its release


----------



## kid41212003 (Feb 17, 2010)

They did say that they will include some of the DX10 effects on the interview.

Blizzard tends to make games to run on all kind of computers. I'm sure 99% of the game is based on DX9, with DX10/11 add-on just like CoH.


----------



## Mussels (Feb 18, 2010)

kid41212003 said:


> I believe the Asia Battlenet servers will locate in Japan, and China, not really a problem for AU. RTS games don't require low ping like FPS, you still can play it at 400-500ms.
> 
> 2 countries that own the most gateways in the area.



as a person who has to deal with this stuff, no, you cant. once you pass 200ms, things start rubber banding - you send orders to units, they start to move, teleport back, then start to move again, or they just take 2-3 seconds to obey orders (if at all) - all players have to sync up, so its not just you-> host, its you->player1->player 2->player 3->player 4 etc then back to you. it adds up to a shitty game, and then players just kick au members from lobbies due to the pings anyway.

D3 is not an RTS game anyway, it requires high speed clicky action. If blizzy doesnt start giving us real Au servers, i'm gunna rage.


----------



## kid41212003 (Feb 18, 2010)

I believe they host all the games, it's mean it's just you and the servers. We're not going through the servers just to connect to other players, they're actually host the games, like an MMORPG game.

I played SC1 and D1-2 on Dial-up before, and It's playable, and If i remember right, 90% of people in that time still use Dial-up.

Even with FPS game like BC2 that I'm playing I still can connect to an EU servers with ping between 150-180.

The only reason why they should include LAN is because some country like yours charge money for bandwidth...


----------



## Mussels (Feb 18, 2010)

kid41212003 said:


> I believe they host all the games, it's mean it's just you and the servers. We're not going through the servers just to connect to other players, they're actually host the games, like an MMORPG game.
> 
> I played SC1 and D1-2 on Dial-up before, and It's playable, and If i remember right, 90% of people in that time still use Dial-up.
> 
> ...



i'm not sure. IF they do it that way (peer to peer, not host/client) then it'll work better using just their servers for authentication - but the game needs to be low bandwidth optimised, or its going to f*#k up hard with aussie bandwidth limits. Thats why we want LAN, or failing that - local servers that our ISP's can play nice and give us free access to.


----------



## Melvis (Mar 8, 2010)

Now i just got told that Diablo 3 will be a pay to play online like Wow? and he said it was confirmed on there website.

Is this correct?


----------



## copenhagen69 (Mar 8, 2010)

Melvis said:


> Now i just got told that Diablo 3 will be a pay to play online like Wow? and he said it was confirmed on there website.
> 
> Is this correct?



damnit ... better not be cause i need a good game thats not P2P


----------



## Melvis (Mar 8, 2010)

copenhagen69 said:


> damnit ... better not be cause i need a good game thats not P2P



Same here, if this is true then i wont be playing Diablo 3 at all, ill be waiting for Diablo 4


----------



## copenhagen69 (Mar 8, 2010)

Melvis said:


> Same here, if this is true then i wont be playing Diablo 3 at all, ill be waiting for Diablo 4



lol ya D4 releasing in 2020


----------



## Melvis (Mar 8, 2010)

copenhagen69 said:


> lol ya D4 releasing in 2020



I know , and i have waited so long for Diablo 3 and now there just killing it.


----------



## AsRock (Mar 8, 2010)

Melvis said:


> I know , and i have waited so long for Diablo 3 and now there just killing it.



Far from it.  At leas this way it should not be like the typical game that come out these days.


----------



## Melvis (Mar 8, 2010)

AsRock said:


> Far from it.  At leas this way it should not be like the typical game that come out these days.



What do you mean?

I know if this is pay to play online, then ALL of my friends wont be playing it, game over.


----------



## Mussels (Mar 8, 2010)

Melvis said:


> What do you mean?
> 
> I know if this is pay to play online, then ALL of my friends wont be playing it, game over.



same. none will buy it if it has no lan play, let alone pay to play.


----------



## copenhagen69 (Mar 8, 2010)

Mussels said:


> same. none will buy it if it has no lan play, let alone pay to play.



yep no lan and P2P would be the death of it


----------



## DannibusX (Mar 8, 2010)

I don't see them making Diablo 3 pay to play but all of their games pay to play online multiplayer through a battle.net subscription.

Edit:

Also with the same SEC filing that Activision made where they talked about letting the heads of Infinity Ward go there was mention that Blizzard is working on sequels to Diablo.  I'm speculating, but it looks like the Activision sequel train has turned its head toward Blizzard.  I'm torn whether I should bother buying D3 or SC2.


----------



## copenhagen69 (Mar 8, 2010)

a sequel to D3 already? whaaaaaa


----------



## DannibusX (Mar 8, 2010)

It's from Joystiq, but it's an interesting read.

http://www.joystiq.com/2010/03/03/activision-sec-filing-mentions-diablo-sequels/


----------



## Super XP (Mar 8, 2010)

copenhagen69 said:


> yep no lan and P2P would be the death of it


In around 2008 the CEO along with the engineer designer for Diablo 3 stated very CLEARLY that Diablo 3 will not me MMO. Hope it won't be because they are gonig to lose MONEY:shadedshu


----------



## AsRock (Mar 8, 2010)

Melvis said:


> What do you mean?
> 
> I know if this is pay to play online, then ALL of my friends wont be playing it, game over.



I'm with ya i don't want  it to be pay to play but they get a lot more fixed and add a lot more if it is.  It's one game i might be interested in paying to play but it be only though the story so might not have to pay monthly for that.


Do i think they would do such a thing ?, nope. I would of thought they would keep it on Battle.net but advertise in the channels like they have been for some years now.


----------



## Marineborn (Mar 8, 2010)

blizzard can blow itself this game should have been released 5 yrs ago and looked better then it will in 2 yrs, theres no exscuse for this garbage, other then using the name to make profit, and then charging pay to play for massive 8 man server, blizzard is just greedy and they wont get my buisness i rather play titan quest, it looks better then d2 and is free to play on there server, and enjoyable. so heres for you blizzard *flips the bird*


----------



## copenhagen69 (Mar 8, 2010)

Marineborn said:


> blizzard can blow itself this game should have been released 5 yrs ago and looked better then it will in 2 yrs, theres no exscuse for this garbage, other then using the name to make profit, and then charging pay to play for massive 8 man server, blizzard is just greedy and they wont get my buisness i rather play titan quest, it looks better then d2 and is free to play on there server, and enjoyable. so heres for you blizzard *flips the bird*





yes this game better be amazing after its been delayed for so long.


----------



## MK4512 (Mar 8, 2010)

Wait, what do you do with LAN play for a game like Diablo? It's PvE! (And a tad PvP)

I can understand people being pissed about SCII not having LAN, but Diablo?

EDIT: I see, people have to pay extra...


----------



## copenhagen69 (Mar 9, 2010)

anyone know if it will have the same 90 day rule of deleting characters? I lost so many characters due to this i just dont know if i can handle it again


----------



## nt300 (Mar 9, 2010)

Marineborn said:


> blizzard can blow itself this game should have been released 5 yrs ago and looked better then it will in 2 yrs, theres no exscuse for this garbage, other then using the name to make profit, and then charging pay to play for massive 8 man server, blizzard is just greedy and they wont get my buisness i rather play titan quest, it looks better then d2 and is free to play on there server, and enjoyable. so heres for you blizzard *flips the bird*



If they made it like how Valve has done Left 4 Dead 1 and 2, OK then but none of this pay as you play nonesense. 
A game should be pay once and play for life period.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Mar 9, 2010)

Well all you have to do is look at Star Trek Online to see how well Pay to Play is doing.


----------



## copenhagen69 (Mar 9, 2010)

EastCoasthandle said:


> Well all you have to do is look at Star Trek Online to see how well Pay to Play is doing.



have not looked ... is it killing the game?


----------



## nt300 (Mar 10, 2010)

EastCoasthandle said:


> Well all you have to do is look at Star Trek Online to see how well Pay to Play is doing.


It really does not matter how well its doing right now because I'm not going to play it because it has this pay to play nonesense. And many more ppl will not play it either. They will lose loyal Star Trek fans IMO. 

*Read this quote:*


> Star Trek Online sucks, or I should say CRYPTIC sucks. As we all know STO is a P2P mmo, players have to pay a monthly fee or lifetime subscription to play this game.
> 
> At first I didn't feel comfortable coz we have to pay a life-time subscription to play Borg race. And now we have to pay more to play two added races---Federation Klingon and Federation Ferengi.Isn't it a p2p mmo? why do they still sell races in shops.
> 
> I think they should open all the races to all the players, maybe some limitation such as only after level 30 you can create a special race or anything else. If they keep selling such race or even items, ppl will leave and this game will fail.


----------



## InnocentCriminal (Mar 10, 2010)

I'm looking forward to Diablo 3 - didn't _really_ play the first and second but I doubt that matters tbh.


----------



## copenhagen69 (Mar 10, 2010)

anyone know if they will still have the stupid 90 day rule on characters though?


----------



## Flyordie (Mar 10, 2010)

Mussels said:


> altered the thread title to more accurately state the truth.
> 
> Havok works on CPU, potentially on Nvidia + ATI via openCL - but doesnt work on either yet.
> 
> One of those links mentions DX9 and DX10.1 support, meaning a minor win for ATI users



Havok does work on GPU. The Red Dress Demo used GPU Acceleration under OpenCL and STREAM. They had 2 versions of it.


----------



## Mussels (Mar 11, 2010)

Flyordie said:


> Havok does work on GPU. The Red Dress Demo used GPU Acceleration under OpenCL and STREAM. They had 2 versions of it.



but there are no titles that use it, and the public has no access to it. i dont consider it working until i have it in my hands.


----------



## Super XP (Mar 11, 2010)

I have a feeling AMD is going to push for Havok or what ever Physx they support this year 2010. it sucks that NVIDIA bribes companies to use there version, but anyway.

As for Diablo 3, it better not be P2P or they've lost my business. What they should do is follow Valves lead in how Left 4 Dead 1 & 2 is setup by trying to sell as many games as possible and giving us the ability to play online for FREE!!!


----------

