Diablo 4?

[Chemii]

Why would Blizzard take their dungeon crawler IP which is the third best selling PC game of all time and turn it on it's head into an MMO, when they already have an MMORPG.

It would be commercial suicide.

"Lets alienate 13 million players"

[McLovenIt]

I don't know where people are getting this " Diablo 4 " from, because the plan from the start is to keep adding on to Diablo 3 ( Just like warcraft ) which i think is amazing.
I'll give you guys a tester. The new class in the next expansion is making use of 2 weapon types in they game that are consired " useless ".

Now my concern about that idea is, look what has happened to WoW. -- They had great success with Subscribers up until Cataclysm, and than after that was released, there was a steady decline of Subscriptions and they've never recovered that large number.

I feel like Diablo is almost similar to releases of Battlefield.....where you make a game that will last 2,3,4 years until you release the next one. Now with Diablo 3, I feel like they could/should be able to last for 4+ years like the previous ones did. Make 1, maybe 2 more expansions to try and polish up the mechanics that are fixable. But if you have to call it quits early and just release a better sequel to entice your fans. Than by all means, admit defeat and do your best to fix the problems you had with the last one.

But the whole "keep adding expansions" doesn't solve all the problems in my mind - with WoW, there's a large majority of fans who rather go back to 2006 - 2007 and play THAT WoW instead of the shit they've been spewing into the World that is Warcraft.

[Aeluron Lightsong]

Now my concern about that idea is, look what has happened to WoW. -- They had great success with Subscribers up until Cataclysm, and than after that was released, there was a steady decline of Subscriptions and they've never recovered that large number.

I feel like Diablo is almost similar to releases of Battlefield.....where you make a game that will last 2,3,4 years until you release the next one. Now with Diablo 3, I feel like they could/should be able to last for 4+ years like the previous ones did. Make 1, maybe 2 more expansions to try and polish up the mechanics that are fixable. But if you have to call it quits early and just release a better sequel to entice your fans. Than by all means, admit defeat and do your best to fix the problems you had with the last one.

But the whole "keep adding expansions" doesn't solve all the problems in my mind - with WoW, there's a large majority of fans who rather go back to 2006 - 2007 and play THAT WoW instead of the shit they've been spewing into the World that is Warcraft.

I don't really think it's a majority, more likely they are just done with the game. Second, what does D3 have in terms of problems?

[Coldkil]

But the whole "keep adding expansions" doesn't solve all the problems in my mind - with WoW, there's a large majority of fans who rather go back to 2006 - 2007 and play THAT WoW instead of the shit they've been spewing into the World that is Warcraft.

I don't think Diablo will get an influx of exapansions like WoW, simply because the Seasons mechanics let for prolonged renewal of the gameplay, if they add new mechanics each season. Atm, even if everything is the same, you see a very large influx of players just to get the cosmetic rewards.

[McLovenIt]

I don't think Diablo will get an influx of exapansions like WoW, simply because the Seasons mechanics let for prolonged renewal of the gameplay, if they add new mechanics each season. Atm, even if everything is the same, you see a very large influx of players just to get the cosmetic rewards.

Yea I don't see that happening either, it'd make sense to me for 1, MAYBE 2 more expansions, but give them to the community for free or super cheap just so that if it's not a major expansion, people won't be outraged. and Than you can still use most your resources toward creating that potential Diablo 4 in the process.

I don't really think it's a majority, more likely they are just done with the game. Second, what does D3 have in terms of problems?

I don't know specifics, I'm going off what some of my friends and random guys I've played with complain about. Guess there are issues they've had with the mechanics of the game.....I've only owned/played D3 for the last few months, so I don't really notice problems. and maybe not the majority, but i've seen on this forum and others that a lot of people keep mentioning they rather play Vanilla WoW over any of these expansions, and especially these most recent ones like MoP, WoD, and now Legion.

(It's just WoW 4 Dummies these days, ever since they revamped the Talent Tree and things like that. They tried to bring the casuals & the hardcores closer together, which in a game like this where time & dedication was highly rewarded, I didn't like seeing these "power boosts" and crap like that to let noobs and people who just can't play much to get on the same level as a guy who grinded his way to max level.......granted gear won't be anywhere near what that grinder's gear is, but than that's all the booster has to do is now spend time grinding for a quality gear set.

I didn't mind that there were people who were A LOT better than I was even though we were both at level 60 -- because they invested hundreds of hours into raids and dungeons and killed epic bosses, while I just got lost in random lands and didn't chain quest properly or have an awesome clan to do all those large party raids. To me, WoW rewarded the guys who invested the most time & effort more than the guys who played a few hours a day / a week. Made perfect sense to have it like that.

[Aeluron Lightsong]

I don't know specifics, I'm going off what some of my friends and random guys I've played with complain about. Guess there are issues they've had with the mechanics of the game.....I've only owned/played D3 for the last few months, so I don't really notice problems. and maybe not the majority, but i've seen on this forum and others that a lot of people keep mentioning they rather play Vanilla WoW over any of these expansions, and especially these most recent ones like MoP, WoD, and now Legion.

Vanilla WoW is not as great as it was but that's a whole other discussion. I agree D3 needs a big update eventually but I don't know what else can be done.

[Sett]

It's much less taxing on resources to make an expac compared to a new game from the ground up.

[Coldkil]

I don't really think it's a majority, more likely they are just done with the game. Second, what does D3 have in terms of problems?

Well, the game has a very solid structure that lets devs test and try new stuff and progressively add content/features to the game with less issues than other environments even without expansions. That is a good plus. The problems are unfortunately more tied to the game core mechanics.

- the "meta": current 1dps/3sup setup for high GRs and ladder competition is pretty much broken. So much defense/healing that eveyone ignores nearly all harmful mechanics; supports that bring more damage than a dps; room for only the #1 dps spec; reliance on infinite grouping/pulling that makes all combat static and has bad repercussions on servers (lag). This is being dealt with in patch 2.4.2 already.

- itemization: sets don't leave any degree of freedom/choice to players. There's only 1 good setup per set, with only a bunch of complementary legendaries which are very often shared between specs/classes (F/R, EW, Hellfire, SH+LO combo for WD) which means that most of the dropped stuff is "useless". LoN failed its purpose as it brought only a couple of valid builds (often variations of already existing ones like LoNFoK/Natalya) and it's harder to get it working for a too small gain. Items should be supports for builds; at the moments builds are defined by items.
Not mentioning the inexistent item hunt and the multipliers that are becoming silly.

- Paragon: infinite progression is EXTREMELY good to have. Point is that a) is boring and b) it's binarily useless or mandatory. Grinding the same rifts over and over is annoying per se - add to this that ideally you don't need items since you have a good setup already and are hoping for sidegrades and that you're getting +5 main stat and you get a non appealing environment. Most if not all casual players don't even bother with it because you simply don't need it to finish the Journey, it's just a passive bonus. On the other side, Ladder players are literally forced to farm like hell 24/7 because that additional stat lets them finally break the GR and lets them progress ahead, making the Paragon grind mandatory.
Again, i shouldn't be farming paragon so i can beat GRs, i should be farming GRs because i want to reach THAT point in the Paragon progress. Time = power equation is just hardcoded in Diablo and cannot/doesn't need to be removed; but making the travel more interesting would make many more players stick on the game over the long period.

These above are not inherently "problems"; the game currently works. Read them as "necessary improvements".

[MechaCThun]

There is a severe lack of concrete evidence/proof for a Diablo 4. I would hate all of us to put all our eggs into that basket.

Job openings within the Diablo team could mean anything. Since they are positions for art and game engineering, that could just mean they need people to fill those voids to maintain the current game.

Of all the articles I've read about "Blizzard scrapping another D3 expansion" and "D4 in the works?" they all have all been the same. They fall back on the job opportunities that are open within the Diablo team but offer nothing really new in the direction of a new expansion.

So let's look at this logically...

(1.) Blizzard has a huge focus of momentum on Overwatch currently as well as getting Legion -- arguably the largest expansion in terms of features of content to date -- ready for launch.
(2.) If Legion is successful from launch to at least midway through, the tells them this formula for launching expansions works better than their old formulas (immediately working on expansion that comes after the current expansion about to launch rather than 1 expac a year) and you damn well know they will stick to what works for them.
(3.) Overwatch is about to get their competitive nature added to the game and with that comes huge waves of balancing, structuring for ranked ladders and setting up competitions.

Diablo's team is relatively easy going at the moment. I was reading on one of my favorite tech/gaming websites that Diablo's team is actually smaller than Hearthstone's at the moment. Not sure if that would have any bearing on a D4 or not, but I could imagine.

TL;DR... while it is fun to speculate for a D4 stand alone and what could come with it, I really don't see a D4 coming any time soon. A new D3 expansion is always easire to manage given the current circumstances and I still haven't ruled that out. Blizzard is (for the most part) notorious for scrapping plans/ideas only to bring them back around later on but in a newer form or fashion.

[Morssoe]

wc3 ended -> world of warcraft

d3 ending(everybody leaving) -> new project world of diablo

[Deleted]

Think its way to soon for a Diablo 4.

Technology hasnt really evolved enough since d3 for a serious remake of the game. It would most likely just be a more pollished d3.

A Diablo mmo tho.... that would be interesting

[Jokubas]

If we're getting a new Diablo game soon, I'd bet on either another expansion for Diablo 3 or something new entirely.

Diablo 4 would be really hard to see. As already mentioned, it would appear as an admission that they failed with Diablo 3, which is not Blizzard's style. They're either confident with their games, or they get them to a point where they can be confident with them. I could imagine that they might start on a Diablo 4 now, but it's something they wouldn't feel comfortable announcing for at least a couple more years at minimum.

I also can't see a Diablo MMO. First of all, it's not that much different than what we have at the moment for the player in practice, but it's a ton more maintenance for Blizzard. Secondly, MMOs are a dying breed, being largely replaced with singleplayer-focused games with robust online components (much like Diablo already is). While Blizzard is the kind of company that can see beyond the trends to make their own trend, they already have an MMO, and a fantasy one at that. Keeping Diablo as a hack-and-slash, or doing something else with it, grabs its own demographic.

A lot of people were disappointed with choices Diablo 3 made, but a lot of people kept playing it. Then Reaper of Souls solved a lot of the issues people had with the original launch, and breathed new life into it. I think a lot of people who hated it at launch think it's been dead since then, but the latest issues are relatively recent, and come from a stagnancy that appeared after Reaper of Souls saved the game but didn't do much else. I don't think it would be that hard for a second expansion to do what Reaper of Souls did. I'd just hope that it would make itself a little more future-proof.

[Gadzooks]

Would love to see a Diablo MMO. I've been saying that back in the early WoW days.

Metzen, in an interview about Overwatch, when they touched on Titan, made a telling comment: "Do we want to be the MMO company?" It doesn't sound like they do.

I don't think they'll be doing an MMO anytime soon - they have one. Besides, if they were gearing up for another MMO, they'd be expanding Team 3 WAY beyond what they are now- a new MMO would require at least 50-75 new hires at all levels of the game. At least. Considering the WoW team is reputed to be 300+ right now, the current D3 team isn't going to get an MMO done.

I'd rather see a Witcher 3/Fallout 4/GTA style game set on Sanctuary. If they announce an MMO, I'll be very, very surprised.

- - - Updated - - -

If we're getting a new Diablo game soon, I'd bet on either another expansion for Diablo 3 or something new entirely.

Diablo 4 would be really hard to see. As already mentioned, it would appear as an admission that they failed with Diablo 3, which is not Blizzard's style. They're either confident with their games, or they get them to a point where they can be confident with them. I could imagine that they might start on a Diablo 4 now, but it's something they wouldn't feel comfortable announcing for at least a couple more years at minimum.

I also can't see a Diablo MMO. First of all, it's not that much different than what we have at the moment for the player in practice, but it's a ton more maintenance for Blizzard. Secondly, MMOs are a dying breed, being largely replaced with singleplayer-focused games with robust online components (much like Diablo already is). While Blizzard is the kind of company that can see beyond the trends to make their own trend, they already have an MMO, and a fantasy one at that. Keeping Diablo as a hack-and-slash, or doing something else with it, grabs its own demographic.

A lot of people were disappointed with choices Diablo 3 made, but a lot of people kept playing it. Then Reaper of Souls solved a lot of the issues people had with the original launch, and breathed new life into it. I think a lot of people who hated it at launch think it's been dead since then, but the latest issues are relatively recent, and come from a stagnancy that appeared after Reaper of Souls saved the game but didn't do much else. I don't think it would be that hard for a second expansion to do what Reaper of Souls did. I'd just hope that it would make itself a little more future-proof.

The game is the tenth best selling video game of all time. Announcing a new game would make sense, considering the success of D3, not an "admission of failure." When Pink Floyd put out "Wish You Were Here" after "Dark Side Of The Moon", it wasn't an admission they'd failed "Dark Side", it was just the next chapter in their musical history, and a new product in the Diablo franchise will just be the next chapter - not any admission of any kind - except maybe "Hey, we sold 20 million copies of this game - let's do another!" Or, D3 was not an admission they failed with D2 - it was the expected next chapter of the game.

I don't understand how you can call D3 a failure, when it's one of the most successful games Blizzard has ever released. A new game or expansion isn't a reflection of anything bad - the success of D3 and ROS means they can justify doing MORE for that franchise. It's a good thing.

[Sorshen]

I don't understand how you can call D3 a failure, when it's one of the most successful games Blizzard has ever released. A new game or expansion isn't a reflection of anything bad - the success of D3 and ROS means they can justify doing MORE for that franchise. It's a good thing.

Just a monetary success. Like Transformers.

[Coldkil]

Just a monetary success.

Which is a full success from a business standpoint.

You may not like how it turned out to be, but if you bought Vanilla and RoS, that is enough to define it a successful product. If they had the idea of a permanent-play game, it would have been structured differently with maybe more continuos support and likely a subscription fee.

To me, the game has some core flaws i think they're just designed wrong but all in all it's enjoyable for the brief sessions i play - i have no interest nor reason to play it 24/7 but i play as soon a season/patch is dropped.

And while we can discuss for ages about quality and featuers and design, money is the main drive that allows for the game development (or not) so it being a financial success is just good.

[Gadzooks]

Which is a full success from a business standpoint.

You may not like how it turned out to be, but if you bought Vanilla and RoS, that is enough to define it a successful product. If they had the idea of a permanent-play game, it would have been structured differently with maybe more continuos support and likely a subscription fee.

To me, the game has some core flaws i think they're just designed wrong but all in all it's enjoyable for the brief sessions i play - i have no interest nor reason to play it 24/7 but i play as soon a season/patch is dropped.

And while we can discuss for ages about quality and featuers and design, money is the main drive that allows for the game development (or not) so it being a financial success is just good.

Exactly this. I didn't buy Diablo 3, expecting the same amount of content and playablility as WoW - it's not an MMO, it's not Skyrim, I knew what I was getting into, because I played D2 for years. I'm perfectly happy with my D3 purchase, which is nice, because I wasn't, before Loot 2.0. I'll be playing season 7, finally leveling a Monk, because I really only play seasons now, for the rewards - the rest of the time I have plenty of other games to play.

I just laugh at the idea that 30 million sales = failure in some people's minds. I was wrong before, lifetime sales as of last year at this time was 30 million copies, not 20. That's almost a billion dollars in profit, assuming every sale was full list price. Yeah, I'd LOVE to sell a product that fails like that.

It's not a perfect game - but what game is perfect? I think the devs designed themselves into a corner with the sets in the game, but that can be corrected with a Loot 3.0. I don't regret buying it, and I very rarely see comments from others that they regret it. The game is going strong, 4 years later, the ladders are healthy, and if you dabble in public games (I don't) there's a healthy community there. I just don't see the "failure" here.

[Video Games]

Just like valve with 3, blizzard hates the number 4. Gl with that.

[Kazgrel]

At the batshit insane rate that power creep is going in D3, to have an xpac for it where you have a higher level cap, bringing more stats...yeah, we'd go from billions of damage a hit to trillions in no time. If it weren't for the number tructuation they started doing a patch or two ago, might as well call this game "OMFG BIG NUMBURZ ERRYWERE".

They already have a Diablo MMO in the pipeline, called Legion.

[Sarethion]

As unlikely as it may sound, I'd really love to see a Diablo RTS game revolving around the Eternal Conflict.

We'd have 3 races - angels (the High Heavens), demons (the Burning Hells) and humans (the Nephalem). It could either be set in the past and serve as a prequel to Diablo games, or follow up on D3's story. I think there's a lot story to explore in Diablo universe and a well made RTS could be a great way to see the world from a completely different perspective.

[Gadzooks]

As unlikely as it may sound, I'd really love to see a Diablo RTS game revolving around the Eternal Conflict.

We'd have 3 races - angels (the High Heavens), demons (the Burning Hells) and humans (the Nephalem). It could either be set in the past and serve as a prequel to Diablo games, or follow up on D3's story. I think there's a lot story to explore in Diablo universe and a well made RTS could be a great way to see the world from a completely different perspective.

See, the thing is...the hiring doesnt support an MMO, an RTS, or a whole new game. They'd need to be ramping up the team for something that big. They did massive hires for Titan. They did massive hires to build D3. I highly doubt it's an MMO, after Metzen's comment.

With an RTS is they could be combining the Starcraft team and the Diablo team - and it would fit their eSport ambitions and it would sell tons in Asia.

It's not impossible. It's more likely than an MMO or wholly new game, to be honest.

(But I don't play RTS games, so I hope it's not - I want more expansions for D3)

It's also within the realm of possibilities it's another card game, like Hearthstone, set in the Diablo universe. That would satisfy their eSport ambitions, their mobile goals, and would have an income stream from selling packs. Less likely...but not out of the question.