Why should it have brought back and mixed classes. The Sorcerer was great, as well as the Amazon. Barb was a nice tank. They destroyed it! WHY!
Diablo III why should it?
- Thread starter HenrySugar
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Because they wanted to try something different as oppose to being plain to use the same classes over again? Beside some if not most of us probably had not played Diablo 1 and 2 (well I haven't) to make the comparison.
Beside have you play the beta to make such remark or just crying foul over the gameplay videos of the classes in action?
Beside have you play the beta to make such remark or just crying foul over the gameplay videos of the classes in action?
I'm not sure what your criticism is though, are you complaining that they did bring back some classes? Or that they didn't bring back enough? Or both?
I mean, the Witch Doctor and Demon Hunter are new classes, the Monk was in Diablo: Hellfire, the Barbarian was in Diablo 2, and the Wizard could be argued to be like the Sorceror and Sorceress from 1 and 2 (though).
So, all of the above?
Personally, I like what they have done with it. I have been enjoying the beta a lot and like what they have done with the classes.
I mean, the Witch Doctor and Demon Hunter are new classes, the Monk was in Diablo: Hellfire, the Barbarian was in Diablo 2, and the Wizard could be argued to be like the Sorceror and Sorceress from 1 and 2 (though).
So, all of the above?
Personally, I like what they have done with it. I have been enjoying the beta a lot and like what they have done with the classes.
Witch doctor is just a ridiculous concept for a character and Demon hunter also, its like world of Warcraft is leaching into diablo.ezaviel said:
Seriously, what?kingthrall said:
Act III in Diablo 2. Kurast was full of jungle / voodoo themed areas, monsters and NPCs. How are Witch Doctors ridiculous when they are already part of the Lore?
And, as mentioned, this is a world where demons exist, and seem to be pretty well known. Why is it ridiculous that traumatised attack survivors would group up and hunt down demons in revenge?
Both seem totally fine in the context of the world.
I'm disappointed that they only have 5 classes.
I'd have loved to have seen the return of all D2+exp classes plus a couple new ones.
I realize that the odds of a new game coming out with 10 classes from day one were remote but it still disappoints. It's like buying a new Street Fighter game only to find your favorite characters aren't in it.
Despite my disappointment, the game is awesome. Can't wait to play May 15th
I'd have loved to have seen the return of all D2+exp classes plus a couple new ones.
I realize that the odds of a new game coming out with 10 classes from day one were remote but it still disappoints. It's like buying a new Street Fighter game only to find your favorite characters aren't in it.
Despite my disappointment, the game is awesome. Can't wait to play May 15th
wut? I have no idea what your complaining about here. One part is why have they brought classes back and then the other is how could they not bring them back. It makes no sense to me at all.HenrySugar said:
idk, I think 5 classes is about right. 6 probably would be better for balancing though. Still expect to see some more added with the inevitable expansion pack.babinro said:I'm disappointed that they only have 5 classes.
I'd have loved to have seen the return of all D2+exp classes plus a couple new ones.
I realize that the odds of a new game coming out with 10 classes from day one were remote but it still disappoints. It's like buying a new Street Fighter game only to find your favorite characters aren't in it.
Despite my disappointment, the game is awesome. Can't wait to play May 15th
Anyway, I'm loving how Diablo 3 is shaping up and can't wait till I get my hands on it. Gotta reserve a few weeks after the release just for Diablo 3 but knowing my luck there will probably something I've gotta do during that time. (like exams messing with Skyrim last year).
I was actually kinda disappointed when i saw the barbarian was making a return. I wanted to see a new version of 'barbarian' come out (like how demon hunter is new version of amazon/assassin, or witch doctor is a new version of the necromancer).
But I'm not that worried about it in the end.
But I'm not that worried about it in the end.
I'd rather they try out new things. I'd still count the Monk as a new class because Hellfire was not made by Blizzard and that Monk was as OP and broken as a class can get.
Blizzard's intention was to make 5 brand new classes. The only reason the Barbarian stuck around was because they designed a heavy melee class that was essentially a Barbarian with a different name. Eventually they decided that it was pointless to try and hide it under the guise of a different class and call it what it is: a barbarian.
And I think the D3 barbarian makes a fantastic tank. People who whine about him/her not being a tank are just theory-crafting.
Blizzard's intention was to make 5 brand new classes. The only reason the Barbarian stuck around was because they designed a heavy melee class that was essentially a Barbarian with a different name. Eventually they decided that it was pointless to try and hide it under the guise of a different class and call it what it is: a barbarian.
And I think the D3 barbarian makes a fantastic tank. People who whine about him/her not being a tank are just theory-crafting.
I'm with him - OP is complaining D3 is bringing back classes and then complains that the old classes were better.black_knight1337 said:
I petty much only know what classes are in the game and bits and pieces of their backgrounds. So can I ask somebody to explain to me how the new barbarian is worse than the old barbarian? Or how the wizard is different to the other generic magic users from previous games (i.e. sorcerers of any gender)?
And a offtpoic-ish question...rather meta, actually - why do people design such ridiculous titles for their threads. Sure, I'll open your thread if it interests me but why do you have to trick me to do it? "Diablo III why should it?" what? Why should it what? I have to open the thread and read the OP to understand what the thread is about. Just stick "classes" in the title along "diablo 3" and more words it would be way more descriptive than it is now. Hell, "diablo 3 classes!" is a better title than the current one.
As much fun as the new classes seem I would love to see some returning, I'm going to miss my absurdly improbable Necromancer tank.
Oh man, that necro was da boss! Well, not really but fun to play, at least. A friend of mine played twinked barbarian (not yet uberly twinked but was getting there) and challenged me to a duel. I pulled my tanky necro and made him cry like a little girl. Iron Maiden tends to do that to whoever tries to deal massive damage to him.Kron_the_mad said:
I do not know of any reason why the "new" barbarian is worse then the old barbarian. As far as I know, lorewise, he is one of the survivors of the destruction of their society at the end of Lord of Destruction, who is out to refashion a new purpose for the remnants barbarian society.DoPo said:
I beleive the Sorceror and Sorceress were members of the "Mage Clans" from the east(the male from D1 was a Visjerei I think?), while the Wizard seems to be painted as some kind of naturally talented spellcaster who doesnt follow a code or specific system of teaching. Although they havent said much about the Wizard's background so far.
I remember reading somewhere that the only reason they brought the Barbarian back was because they didn't think they did a very good job with him in Diablo II, and that all of the other Diablo II classes were left behind because Blizzard was satisfied with them and it was time to move on and do some new stuff.
I suppose that you could say that the Wizard is nothing more than a renamed sorcerer\sorceress and the Demon Hunter is nothing more than a renamed Rouge\Amazon\Assassin and that the Witch Doctor is just the Necromancer wearing a different skin, but does it really matter?
It's another chance for Blizzard to expand the lore without having to keep doing exactly the same thing over and over and over again because let's face if they did that people would ***** about how they're not moving things forward and it's just the same boring generic crap as the last game only with prettier graphics.
If you want a game with some real class variety give Titan Quest a shot, it had a ton of different classes and variations on each class. You pick up to two masteries at different levels and those determine your class, further specialization within each mastery allows you to really fine tune your character in a way that Diablo II never could even though it sounds like Diablo III is going to try it in it's own way.
I suppose that you could say that the Wizard is nothing more than a renamed sorcerer\sorceress and the Demon Hunter is nothing more than a renamed Rouge\Amazon\Assassin and that the Witch Doctor is just the Necromancer wearing a different skin, but does it really matter?
It's another chance for Blizzard to expand the lore without having to keep doing exactly the same thing over and over and over again because let's face if they did that people would ***** about how they're not moving things forward and it's just the same boring generic crap as the last game only with prettier graphics.
If you want a game with some real class variety give Titan Quest a shot, it had a ton of different classes and variations on each class. You pick up to two masteries at different levels and those determine your class, further specialization within each mastery allows you to really fine tune your character in a way that Diablo II never could even though it sounds like Diablo III is going to try it in it's own way.
Really people all those who cried about how I said witch doctor isnt a good class and calling me stupid you need to get a life and stop over-reacting just cause I say somthing different. Regardless of act 3 in diablo teeming with witch doctors in kurast.
Demon hunter is a silly name for a class because, every character is demon hunting so to speak. It would of been better to name it an inquisitor or a ranger.
They could of had so much better classes that was my argument such as
* Rogue
* Summoner , instead of witch doctor.
* Alchemist, similar to pippin from diablo 1, with throwing potions ect.
p.s Styc9 idea about titan quest is also great because titan quest seriously did an awesome job but got a bit disappointing with the great wall of china when it should of stuck to Greek mythology.
Demon hunter is a silly name for a class because, every character is demon hunting so to speak. It would of been better to name it an inquisitor or a ranger.
They could of had so much better classes that was my argument such as
* Rogue
* Summoner , instead of witch doctor.
* Alchemist, similar to pippin from diablo 1, with throwing potions ect.
p.s Styc9 idea about titan quest is also great because titan quest seriously did an awesome job but got a bit disappointing with the great wall of china when it should of stuck to Greek mythology.