|
|
On October 18 2013 23:05 DinoToss wrote:Show nested quote +On October 18 2013 23:00 Crownlol wrote:On October 18 2013 22:42 SkullZ9 wrote:On October 18 2013 22:41 Crownlol wrote:Can't wait to get my hands on this. Blizzard's MO is to take a genre that already exists, and make the best game ever for it. RPG? Here's Diablo RTS? Here's Warcraft AND Starcraft. MMO? Here's WoW CCG? Hearthstone is already massively popular (2-3x daily viewers of SC2 btw  ) This will be a well-thought out, smooth, engaging game. You can feel the engine for it in the HotS campaign's solo missions - the stutter-stepping and casting animations for Kerrigan are smooth as glass. For an example, pick up one of those missions and just pretend you're laning - it works really well. In which world is Diablo considered a RPG ? Literally every single definition. Back in the days we called it hack and slash ;P RPG was rather reserved for Baldur's gate etc.
Hack n' Slash, Dungeoncrawler, etc, are subgenres or fan descriptions. It's still an RPG :D You could call it an Action RPG maybe
|
The best part this is in SC2 general!
excited tho
|
havent they changed the name like 10 times and was suppose to come out before dota 2 did? blizzard, silly goose
|
On October 18 2013 23:05 Dandel Ion wrote:Show nested quote +On October 18 2013 22:57 Numy wrote: Runes and Champs. Obviously once you played enough than that advantage is lessened but it takes a huge amount of time to actually get to that level without putting in money You can't even buy runes with real money.
True. I was just thinking more of champs. Goes through fotm stuff all the time so if you have fotm champs you might be doing better than if you not but there's not much evidence to support that I think.
|
On October 18 2013 23:12 Numy wrote:Show nested quote +On October 18 2013 23:05 Dandel Ion wrote:On October 18 2013 22:57 Numy wrote: Runes and Champs. Obviously once you played enough than that advantage is lessened but it takes a huge amount of time to actually get to that level without putting in money You can't even buy runes with real money. True. I was just thinking more of champs. Goes through fotm stuff all the time so if you have fotm champs you might be doing better than if you not but there's not much evidence to support that I think.
Not much evidence that swapping to whatever is FOTM will yield results. In every game, except at the top 0.1%, it's better to focus on a few roles/characters and master them. I'd rather have an Annie mid that plays Annie day in and day out, than someone who swaps from Diana to Orianna to Cass to whatever else is OP at the moment.
|
Even if this stays a joke, its more enjoyable than DOTA2 and lol combined.
|
Blizzard invented the MOBA with aeon of strife, now they're officially joining the MOBA with HotS.
|
Looking forward to actual details but naturally this would be a non starter if its dependent on HotS install.
|
ehm no, the first multiplayer online battle arena was STAR, right? And the first I played was quake. So sry but moba means nothing and does not define the genre at all.
|
Can't wait to see how Blizzard mess this up.
|
Can't wait to see how Blizzard succeeds and gets this as popular (Or even more popular) as Hearthstone.
|
I am curious what they will show about it @Blizzcon
|
On October 18 2013 21:46 serum321 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 18 2013 12:10 LarJarsE wrote: First Heathstone... then this.. I don't really see a blizzard after these games. I'm really disappointed and I think their stock value will soon plummet. HAHAHAHAHAHA....my sides please stop. As far as the name forget about the acronym the biggest problem I see with it as someone else pointed out can too easily be confused with Heroes of Newarth or whatever its called. On blizzard's facebook page it says they'd prefer it for ppl to just call it "heroes". I can easily see one buddy saying to another buddy "Hey, whatcha doing?" "NM, playing heroes." "Yeah, I tried that and didn't like it." "No, this is a new game." "Yeah, no thanks, already tried one." As far as saying Blizzard is too late to the party I suggest people wait and see gameplay at blizzcon. I get the feeling this game is going to be very different. And don't underestimate blizzard, remember they were "too late to the party" for WoW too. I have a hard time imagining how anyone can hear "I'm playing Heroes" and not think of Heroes of Might and Magic.
|
On October 18 2013 23:32 Thieving Magpie wrote: Blizzard invented the MOBA with aeon of strife, now they're officially joining the MOBA with HotS.
Blizzard didn't do shit, modders did lol. Blizzard though the idea was stupid and now they are biting their own tongue because they missed the new World of Warcraft.
|
i fail to see how a video that reveals nothing at all has generated 20 pages of mostly pure speculation
|
On October 18 2013 23:58 gedatsu wrote:Show nested quote +On October 18 2013 21:46 serum321 wrote:On October 18 2013 12:10 LarJarsE wrote: First Heathstone... then this.. I don't really see a blizzard after these games. I'm really disappointed and I think their stock value will soon plummet. HAHAHAHAHAHA....my sides please stop. As far as the name forget about the acronym the biggest problem I see with it as someone else pointed out can too easily be confused with Heroes of Newarth or whatever its called. On blizzard's facebook page it says they'd prefer it for ppl to just call it "heroes". I can easily see one buddy saying to another buddy "Hey, whatcha doing?" "NM, playing heroes." "Yeah, I tried that and didn't like it." "No, this is a new game." "Yeah, no thanks, already tried one." As far as saying Blizzard is too late to the party I suggest people wait and see gameplay at blizzcon. I get the feeling this game is going to be very different. And don't underestimate blizzard, remember they were "too late to the party" for WoW too. I have a hard time imagining how anyone can hear "I'm playing Heroes" and not think of Heroes of Might and Magic.
Make that Heroes of Might & Magic III. Fyi I am on my way home to get my old copy of that game to reinstall it since Blizzard reminded me of it :-).
|
On October 18 2013 23:37 tadL wrote: ehm no, the first multiplayer online battle arena was STAR, right? And the first I played was quake. So sry but moba means nothing and does not define the genre at all.
Quake was a top down view unit management game where you defended towers and killed creep marching across three lanes while you leveled up heroes at home in order to help your army push lanes until you killed the enemy Nexus?
Because I thought Quake was a first person shooter.
Because if you're simply talking about a multiplayer game with 5 people on each side then I guess Basketball is a MOBA and started before videogames were invented.
|
This makes me want to believe that carbots are doing all the animation for this game
|
Why is everyone acting like it's a new announcement, isn't the announcement itself, not the rename rather old by now?
|
On October 18 2013 23:59 Noocta wrote:Show nested quote +On October 18 2013 23:32 Thieving Magpie wrote: Blizzard invented the MOBA with aeon of strife, now they're officially joining the MOBA with HotS. Blizzard didn't do shit, modders did lol. Blizzard though the idea was stupid and now they are biting their own tongue because they missed the new World of Warcraft. While Blizzard didn't do anything, how did you arrive at the conclusion that Blizzard thought the idea was stupid? Or are you just trying to stomp Blizzard down a bit?
|
|
|
|