Diablo III Is Changing. Here's How.

Blizzard has released a timeline of sorts for upcoming Diablo III updates, detailing the kinds of things that are due to be fixed and the kind of things that due to be tweaked.

The first update, 1.02, will mainly be patching up the various network issues that have affected the game since launch. It should be out within the week.

Looking further, though, some of the things on the menu include tweaks to the difficulty on Inferno and making some stats on Legendary items more transparent so people stop bitching that they're not as powerful as they thought they'd be (Blizzard says they're not necessarily meant to be the best).

For a more detailed rundown of what's in store, check out the full post below.

Game Design Update [Blizzard]


    Sounds like some good ideas there. Shame there's no new areas, the game is a bit short. Needs some random instances or something for multiplayer, like dungeons you can run.

      The whole premise of the Diablo series is each dungeon is random, there is also random quests and mobs in dungeons. Diablo 3 already has more content than D2/D1.

        Not exactly. D1 had how many labrynth levels?

          but how many outdoor areas?

          D3 does have more varied content.

          Only sixteen and very little else. Act 1 of Diablo 3 alone probably has more than double that content.

          Indeed. Diablo 3 also has a random mission selection generator. There were X amount of missions but you could only do Y amount, making each game original. Sometimes you'd fight the butcher, sometimes you wouldnt, sometimes you'd fight this guy, sometimes you wouldnt etc.

          Not that many , I'm sorry. I think you're referring to the grand flipper sscene where oblong juices became self-aware and tore up the world of Diablo with his Fists of Woollongong.

    What this highlights for me is the same thing that made Diablo 2 amazing: Planning, updates, and a drive to keep getting things right. From the article we can see a clear path for their future patch efforts, and I hope in 10 years time we'll still be seeing major patches (ala D2)

      Exactly! People forget D2 was not perfect on release. Granted, it wasn't as bad as D3 was on release, but I'm actually quite impressed with the response by Blizzard - they have avoided any knee-jerk fixes.

        No, D2 wasn't as "bad" (and I'm using the term VERY loosely) as D3 on release, but I also think that the landscape is completely different. In 2000, hardware / software was comparitively simpler, so it was easier to get things right on release. Battle.Net was only 4 years old, and some of the deeper features (was there a public ladder on release? I can't remember) that we take for granted now didn't exist.

        Also the size and scope of things has changed dramatically. In its first week, D3 has sold more copies than (as near as I can tell) D2 sold over it's ongoing lifespan. (From what I can see D2 sold 4 million in the first 18 months) - These things all add up.

        Give it time, people. Things will only get better; and they're already pretty damn good.

          Wikipedia suggests D2 sold 1 million copies in its first two weeks. A record at the time, pretty low-to-average for a big release these days.

          "It was awarded a spot in the Guinness Book of World Records 2000 edition for being the fastest selling computer game ever sold, with more than 1 million units sold in the first two weeks of availability."

      Yes but are we going to see patchs that equal 1.10 in Diablo2 ?

      Diablo 2 is still a far better game from an RPG side, and also longevity side. Diablo 3 still pales in comparison and unless they punch out the same quality patches - its not going to happen.

    Well let just hope they fix the game to a point where thousands have to use the general chat just to play the game

    Are they removing online play? No? Then they're not fixing anything.

      Get over it. It's online , you know its online. Buy it or not .

        Yup.. didn't buy it. "Always Online" means their servers needs to be "Always Online" and "Always Reachable" and "Always Available" and "Always Not Overloaded" etc etc etc

        Me being online all the time is not the point.. the point is THEM being always online.

          Your also missing one drastic change, to reduce cheating all characters are stored on the servers.. D2 didnt allow you to take your solo toon online, or your multiplayer single unless playing an online game.

          D3 lets you do either or at your discretion. It was a little give and a little take. Its a fair measure. I dont see why people whinge? The AH as it is, your friends list etc all require online.

            How is that a fair measure...it's not necessary, they could still have offline and not let you play with that character online just like in D2...which is what you would expect.

            I regret buying the game, D2 was one of my favorite games ever, especially once patch 1.07 came out...damn that was awesome, this game is absolutely shit in comparison.

            I'd give it a 7/10 as any random game, as a D2 sequel it scores around a 3/10...and I'm not even sure why I'm giving it that much...I guess because it was still enjoyable for a reasonable amount of time.

            Wrong, just plain wrong. D2 is the one that gave you the option, D3 gives none.

            It wouldn't be an issue for most, except the servers are unstable as hell. I can't even play on my own without experiencing severe lag and unstable gameplay. 20% of the time when I want to cast a life-saving spell, or spells in rapid succession, it doesn't come out.

        And by measure of money, Diablo was a roaring success. What isn't obvious is thehr numbers of sales that Blizzard lost due to this decision of theirs. I am one, but I know of four others who are boycotting Diablo.

        People have accepted online only. It doesn't mean that the rest of us can't voice our opinion in opposition of it. Diablo is the green light to developers that gamers will tolerate lag in single player if the experience is overall "acceptable" rather than stored locally and faultless

          Enjoy the soapbox. You'll be just like the Modern Warfare 2 boycotters...... research how that went ;)

        People like you make me angry. One, it should work the first time around, it didn't. Sure they're fixing it now but what happens if your internet goes down, what happens if there is server maintenance, what happens if you want to play somewhere with no internet connection? Places like that do exist. Ok, fine, don't buy it - that in itself is a horrible argument. You are now saying that a person should deny themselves from playing a blockbuster game because of one very big and horrible decision. It's not fair and no we should not get over it.

        Getting over it means it's ok, being ok means that other companies will join the bandwagon. This is a horrible trend, just because it doesn't affect you doesn't mean that it won't affect someone else.

          Not that I agree with it necessarily, but when the product is advertised as needing a permanent internet connection it's a case of buyer beware. Blizzard are not changing this factor. So its a case of accept it or go play Torchlight 2. Incidentally that's a great game as well...

          Well I couldn't care less for Diablo 3, or any of the Diablo games in general, I agree the Always Online attempt at avoiding HAAAAAX is pretty fucking stupid, especially as Pirates can easily go provide a free single player version without any of this online crap.

          Just wait though, I'm sure the pirates will figure out server software for it as well soon, then the pirated version of the game will be far superior to the legitimate version of the game. Hmm, there's a shock. Good job Blizzard.

    One way or the other whether they designed it that way or not....

    White items shouldn't be better than Blue items, which shouldn't be better than Yellow items, which shouldn't be better than Orange items and so on to infinity.. The lowest Blue item should not be worse than the highest White item of the same kind..

    So if "Legendary" is the highest tier (not including Uniques), then there shouldn't be any items that are better than it from the items in the next group down..

    They're just trying to justify their failure to understand the average gamer's expectations.

    Over it already. 60 and in Inferno and have people insanely geared up with tons of resistance etc still getting one shot by certain packs of rares. Just forces you to reload the map. Also the broken loot. Great fun finding yellows and in some cases blues that are better than legendaries of the same level. Of the 4 legendaries I have found they were all crap for the level.

    Does this mean they are planning on making melee as viable as the current cheese range

    I still have a sour taste in my mouth from when one of Blizzards PR people, when asked about the permanent connection requirement in the form of "What if I'm on a long plane trip and want to play some Diablo?", replied with (Paraphrasing) "That'd be good, but there are other games to play on a plane trip."

    Seriously, what the hell kind of marketing is that?

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now