Purkake

That's usually what free to play means.

No, it was beautiful, had some interesting and more mature players that I imagine roam some of the more popular games. I played on an RP PVP server, which of course helped in regards to maturity. But while the community and the setting was extremely nice the gameplay was just sorta lacking, I completely lost interest in leveling because the grinding was so horrible. But I hate mmos exactly for that so call me jaded. Yup, AoC was a bright beacon of potential in the post-WoW world, but the developer/publisher dropped the ball on endgame content and post-release support basically killing AoC a few months in.

Please, tell us how you really feel.

This No. More. DX. ugh

I guess we'll have to wait and see in this case as well.

And how much of that was apparent 6+ months before release?

True but Starcraft 2 did actually bring many necessary improvements to a very old game, and it has yet to be seen what Diablo 3 will bring to what's essentially a very stale genre. Oh? I'm all ears.

D3 is as much a remake of D2 as SC2 is a remake of SC1. That's how Blizzard rolls, you don't have to like it.

They also brought over multiple skills from D1/2, the audacity!

You'll need to find an alternate reality if you want everything to be original. Plus, you'll be able to modify it with skill runes.

So what you're saying is that humanity is embracing cybernetic enhancement too rapidly and its shortsightedness will be its downfall?

If gameplay is the priority you get the best experience if you divorce the mechanics from the flavor. Going back to Drowsy Boo's post, you won't get original characters, you'll get original skills/powers/gameplay.

I agree that the atmosphere and character design is important, I was just saying that it is basically interchangeable. Blizzard probably went through dozens of designs for all the characters before they settled on what they have now. The barbarian might as well be a viking warrior or a mongol warlord, Blizzard would have changed the aesthetics for the character/skills and it would be still be of the same quality the barbarian is now. Whether you would have preferred a viking warrior instead of a barbarian is a personal preference.

You can't please everyone.

No! Preserve your innocence. We need people untouched by the horrors of Invisible War in this bright new era of Human Revolution and thinly veiled Greek mythology references.

My point was that the characters are window dressing, created to match the overall style of the setting and the skills/roles that Blizzard wants in D3. You don't play D3 to be a barbarian or a demon hunter, you play it to mash monsters with whirlwind and tank or to shoot at monsters with sweet crossbows and debuff(or whatever the DH does) in an exceedingly polished and satisfying way.

Yup, it's probably a step up from KOTOR II

Well, this is MMO's you're talking about... if it wasn't supported after there'd be no reason for the monthly fee Go tell that to Age of Conan and the other dozens of MMOs that have started out with a bang and died a few months later.

The key has always been post-release support. If they add content and fix whatever problem will pop up in a timely manner, it will be fine. Well, that and a decent end-game.

I don't think Blizzard was aiming to create unique characters. D2's cast didn't exactly scream originality either.

It's pretty much the same deal as with say.. JA2, you'll figure it out eventually and it's awesome, but you need to read the manual/tinker with it/read the internets.

Hopefully they'll fix the power creep and keep the lower lever powers useful to the end. My Shield Bash Paladin, Unarmed Barbarian, Magic Arrow Amazon...

By engine, I mean the gameplay part. Have you actually played Nexus? And this thread wasn't really supposed to be about Homeworld vs Nexus, they both have their charms. Just like Icewind Tale and Baldur's Gate.