Slashdot Mirror
No Diablo II This Year
ViceClown writes "Blizzard announced in a press release that Diablo II is now looking at a Q1 2000 release and will not be available for the holiday season. They did mention, however, that there may be a limited 1,000 person public beta test around the end of the year so if your lucky enough you can get your fix before everyone else! Read more at IGN PC. " But on the positive side, Rob and I will remain productive throughout the rest of the year.
I rather enjoyed Diablo, I wish they hadn't delayed things, however, it DOES create less times I have to boot into windows....
"Out, OUT! You demons of STUPIDITY!" - Dogbert
Will it be legal to export Diablo ][? I'm pretty sure it should be classified as a munition - the first one stopped all work in my entire building for at least a month :)
Can your IM do this?
I guess I'll just have to settle for my two front teeth for Christmas now...
:(
-Vel
::collapses on her work desk and starts sobbing loudly!::
It pains me to see Diablo II getting moved back to Q1 2000, it was shaping up to be such a nice Christmas gift, too!
Mina Inerz [N. Reinking]
My wife must have paid someone off.
(I seem to remember that the original Diablo missed Christmas, too.)
Actually, I always like to hear this "Game X is late" stories. It means that there won't be an early, bug-infested release. Better to get it right then get it now.
The cake is a pie
I guess I'll have to consign myself to,um....to...hmmm, I guess I'll just kill myself now.
Does anyone know how to get to be one of the beta testers? I'd be willing to sacrifice my personal time and sanity to help test D2, for the sake of society.
Does it seem strange to anyone else to give a game called "Diablo" as a Christmas gift?
After you've explored the maze, and finally blasted the bad ass demon, what is left?
I'm sure that there are lots of us who are looking forward to this one (with slack jawed anticipation, and fingers twitching to push ever deeper into caverns and tombs using mouse, joystick, or keyboard).
Mike Eckardt
meckardt@yahoo.nospam.com
http://www.geocities.com/meckardt
Can anyone else think of a game that was worth playing that actually came out on the original release date? I don't think I have seen such a beast in my time.
I am 31337 or something.
... at least we know that they aren't willing to release a crappy product just to get it out on time.
Of course I'll be a bit upset when they finally do release DII and I still have to download megs and megs of bug fixes....
--
"A mind is a horrible thing to waste. But a mime...
It feels wonderful wasting those fsckers."
I currently have no clever signature witicism to add here.
I read most of the interviews because my girlfriend is addicted to Diablo 1 and really wants D2. I'm looking at the situation like this: We bought Alpha Centauri when it first came out. Now there are 4 - 5 patches for it .. Bugs ran like mad around the game. I'd *much* rather have a game delayed 2-4 months so they can work bugs out and make it more worth my money, then getting a game 2 months early, with so many bugs and playing issues that make the game pointless. Blizzard has really never let us down with some nifty games, and I'm sure Diablo 2 will be as groovy as I hear. I don't mind waiting a few extra months for it.
Hey, I'm happy they aren't releasing a bug-ridden, hey-lets-write-a-fast-buck sequal...Besides, more developement time means multiplayer code will be that much better.
I patented screwing your mom. But it got revoked for "prior art."
This is irresponsible. Now those of us who really care and who have thus been following this game all along (and who consequently already knew about this) won't stand a chance of actually getting in on the closed beta, seeing as how the sign-up, once it comes out, will now be /.'ed by many people with only moderate interest who will through their sheer numbers manage to get most of the 1000 spots.
The pool of tester applicants will now increase by an order of magnitude or so, thereby reducing the chances of getting in for those of us who really care by a factor of ten. Thanks a lot.
Note on Beta Testing
Most of our beta testing is done by our in-house quality assurance staff. Occasionally we do hold a public beta test for our products, and we will post news on our web site when we are conducting such a test. Testers are chosen on a per-product basis, and only during specific sign-up periods. Please, do not contact us about being a beta tester.
Dang it. (-;
I am a big fan of Blizzard games; particularly Starcraft, and Diablo to a lesser extent. I find it frusterating, though, that as one of the most successful computer game company ever, they have spurned Linux so far.
Many of the up and coming big games are slated to come out for Linux. The all-at-once PC/Mac/Linux release is starting to appear with Quake III and Baldurs Gate II. Even if the primary publisher doesn't do a port, Loki Games is filling the gaps with third party ports.
And still no Blizzard games. I hope it is being planned, and the company is just being characteristically tight lipped about it. My hopes are pinned on D2 for Linux, I've already given up on Age of Kings....
from the crying-and-gnashing-and-teeth dept.
Does the dept. name come from a description of the after effects of the reactions of the people hearing it won't come out till q1y2k or a description of the game?
Hey guys I run http://loki.linuxgames.comand I think that this could give all of a chance to prove that there is a market for Linux. Now that DiabloII is delayed maybe there is a chance to get Loki in the picture to start porting the game. That way we will have a Linux Version on Shelf at the same time as the Windows version. I'm willing to put up a page to sign a petition to port Diablo II to Linux. If anyone can help me out here...please email me! I need someone to help out on the news section and the Petition! Natas natas@linuxgames.com
Natas of
-=Pedophagia=-
http://www.mp3.com/pedophagia
Also Admin of
http://loki.linuxgames.com
Somewhat related...Ultima 9 went gold on Monday and should be in shelves by the 24th! There goes all my productivity :)
--
Deepak Saxena
Deepak Saxena
"Computers are useless, they can only give you answers" - Picasso
My wife and I are die-hard Diablo fans -- we've been playing it constantly since it came out. In our desperation for something new, we tried a game called DarkStone. Although the UI doesn't hold together as well as Diablo, it is a really good game and I recommend it to anyone who liked Diablo.
Diablo II is going to sell a lot of copies, no matter what. Even though they're going to miss the holiday season, that's not going to stop me, my brother, the entire population of Slashdot, and everyone else from going out an buying it when it is released.
And why? Because Blizzard puts out good games. The original Diablo was late, other games were more than likely late as well, and Warcraft: Lord of the Clans was axed because it fell short of expectations. Here we have a company that is the opposite of most software companies: Instead of rushing a product out of the door, they test it and refine it until they have a product that's not "good enough" but actually good. And the fans love them for it - games like Diablo and Starcraft are still some of the highest ranked games (in terms of player esteem) ever made.
I think Blizzard gives an example of a software company that doesn't rush out a product, and yet still has a large amount of 'market share'.
IMHO, many companies could learn from this.
-Denor
Hey Diablo was fun, but yeah, once the beast was dead, it got to be a little dull. I think with the new four "zones" they have planned it could be more fun, but for me Everquest is where it's at. Everquest... what D2 wanted to be
WTF?!?
User Info for Jizmak (95124)
Karma -20 (mostly the sum of moderation done to users comments)
Jizmak has posted 7 comments (this only counts the last few weeks)
1 davecentral banner posted on 03:27 PM November 12th, 1999 EST (Score:0 Replies:1)
attached to No Diablo II This Year
2 my theery on dis stuph posted on 01:11 PM November 12th, 1999 EST (Score:-1 Replies:1)
attached to Linux in the Enterprise: Fact vs. FUD
3 my eleet idea posted on 02:30 PM November 5th, 1999 EST (Score:0)
attached to Linux on a Magazine Cover?
4 gr8 idea posted on 08:30 PM November 3rd, 1999 EST (Score:-1)
attached to Open-Source Component Repository?
5 i just want to say posted on 08:00 PM November 2nd, 1999 EST (Score:-1)
attached to SuSE Coming on DVD
6 Oil doesn't come from dinosaurs posted on 09:11 PM November 1st, 1999 EST (Score:0)
attached to Oil Isn't from Dinosaurs & Other Iconoclasms
7 Dan Kaminsky Sux posted on 08:23 PM October 30th, 1999 EST (Score:0)
attached to Minor Slashdot Updates
Hey what the hell does this have to do with Linux?!? You cant even run this frickin' game in Linux! Hemos are you a closet windows user? WTF? Windows sucks!! I wish we could moderate news postings! Hemos sucks!
That's the one I've been waiting for. (For years now)
http://www.sierrastudios.com/games/gk3/
oh well. back to myth2 for linux and xbill, just can't play that enough. makes me feel better after having to work on windows NT (neanderthal technology) all day.
* * * --they cant all be your best, that would be confusing
I have been waiting for this game for the last 2 years (has it been THAT long??), so it really does pain me that they are pushing the release again. It would have been worse to have gotten this game, installed all FOUR CD's and found out that there's unplayable portions of the game because of numerous bugs. I think Blizzard's got tremendously large cajones for holding off until it's right. Plus, with this not coming out till early 2K, I'll be able to spend all my waking hours on Opposing Forces!!
(Close-up of Neo - Look of agog on his face - Said in a half-whisper)"Whoa!"
Figures.
Blizzard makes great games. I dare anyone to claim that battle.net hasn't revolutionized online gaming.
But Blizzard can't follow a timetable. Every game they have ever made had a delayed release. Starcraft was released at least a few months late. It remeber how updates for Diablo I used to take six months each.
And they also produce a game only about every two years. 'Warcraft II: the revenge of battle.net' wasn't that impressive, and 'Starcraft: The Protoss Kick More Ass' (aka Brood War), although spectacular, is the only one. It's like Daikatana, only funnier, because Blizzard consistently wins awards for all it's games.
Methinks they need fewer suits saying how great their games are and trying to think up new merchandise, and more coders. Considering how many screenshots and action figures they are trying to sell on http://www.blizzard.com/, it seems surprising we have to wait years for a sequel to a game that sells so many copies, churning out a sequel should be a priority.
I believe the description of Slashdot is "News for Nerds. Stuff that matters." Video games are a central part to upholding computer culture, I wager that a majority of people really get into computers because of the games... Contributing to a philosophically superior programming project, just doesn't seem to attract many 12 year olds...
I hope that means you will finally find the time for releasing a more up-to-date version of slash. No more excuses now, you hear!
You know what it is....the developers of Diablo have been lunching with John Romero and the Diakatana crew...
oh, well... Q3 will have to tide me over.
ah, and those screenshots of the week. what teasers, those blizzard guys!
xuvetyn
alive to the universe, dead to the world
That's the company that pissed on the people who wrote in asking for a Linux port of something or other (Starcraft?) back in the early days of Slashdot.
... namely feeding certain chunks back to their servers under certain circumstances.
It's also the company that has "creative" uses of your registry information
Conclusion? They can bite me. Loki gets my $$.
Honestly, I really don't think that 'game X is late' translates into 'game X is going to have less bugs than normal games'. It's more just that the software company said "damn, we suck, it's taken us 4 months to code the mousedown handler.. uh, maybe we'd better push the release date so that we can code the mouseup handler, too. We'll add an AI in the patch." It'll probably be released with as many bugs as any other game, it's just that it'll be released late. :-(
Im sorry, when games are designed for multiplayer use and when multiplayer hacks, cheats, or holes are found it makes playing those multiplayer games pretty much useless. This is in reference to StarCraft, the map hacks and other crap most people had to deal with.
Interesting that it's gettin pushed off until the EQ Add-on is available. From my Personal observations, I have noticed a severe price drop for most game except Everquest. Could they be waiting for an EQ burn out? probably. I meant Mech III dropped to 15 dollars(american) in about a week. and it's a nice game.
Ona EQ side note. I talked to the head EQ guy and he said there where no plans for a Linux port. The reason he gave is because it is so tightly intergrated to windows/directX. I think it's because they would not be able to have total control over a Linux desktop.
If this game doesnt run on FreeBSD or Linux.
For more info, check out Blizzard's press release at http://www.blizzard.com/PRESS/991111.sht ml. It looks like they are having a 1000 person closed beta followed by an open beta for testing Battle.Net.
Email Blizzard, start a petition, whatever to get diablo 2 and warcraft 3 for linux. Myself and many others don't use windows at all, and really really want these games!
As for possibly slashdotting the servers, well it happened with the Starcraft beta sign up, and as a result Blizzard extended the sign up time considerably. I can only hope that they've upped their server capacity considerably.
Finally, I'm surprised that no one mentioned the recent announcement that after the limited 1000 person beta test (encompassing the entire 1st act, or 1/4 of the game) there will be an open beta test to stress test the battle.net servers! Yes, that means everyone can get a small fix of Diablo II before it comes out.
G0del
P.S. www.diabloii.net is my main source of D2 news.
I know I am going to spark of a lot of talk about this but I just feel I need to say this: Everyone gives MS a hard time when they delay a software release. MS has stated more times than I can remember that they are going to ship their products when they have reached a level of stability rather then the date they said 2+ years ago. Yet as I read most of the reply's here about Diablo being delayed, everyone is okay with that and hardly bashes Westwood for stating that their software isn't good enough for release yet. Why the dual standard? Thats about it for my first Slashdot :-)
Damn. I was planning on getting this game over the winter break so I could play it while I wasn't in school. But now I'll have to play it during the next term, which means I'll flunk all my classes, which means my graduation will be delayed as I make up those classes. Frick.
(inhalation) AAAAARRRRGGGGHHHHH!!!!!
For one time in my life, I want to thump the techie types for not letting the marketing and management types have their way. Any marketeer with 0.5 brains would have said "A rocking good hit, a great brand name (tm), an installed base of hard core fans...sequel NOW!"
How hard could it have been to produce an evolutionary series of add-ons that used the original engine? With Hellfire, Blizzard demonstrated their ability to farm out the graphic and data entry work to some other group, rake in a percentage, and keep at the REAL work of producing Diablo II. Why didn't they keep it up?
Diablo was GREAT, but there was room for minor improvements in gameplay. Hellfire fixed some of those, but had limitations of its own. In the years since Diablo/Hellfire came out, I, and doubtless legions of others, would have paid good money for some good add-ons - additional levels, classes, quests, unique items, whatever - that used the original engine. All of this could have been produced by groups independent of those developing Diablo II.
But NO! The #^@(!%& PURISTS at Blizzard won't let us have any more fun with a new game until they're done with a new engine! I think that's great and all, but I also can't help thinking that MAYBE the new game would have come out sooner had there been more money to finance more bodies to work on the new game - money that could have come from a steady series of add-ons for the original game. 'Nuff said. Rant over.
If you havn't seen Darkstone, I would reccammend giving it a try. Some bacis idea and the controlls were made simular for easy adaptation.
There is some new unsupported feature now to change the skins on your characters... ought to be interesting.
Nice little music video in there too.
http://www.godgames.com/games/darkstone/
Name me one product from Microsoft that was delayed for stability reasons that was actually stable when it was released.
Where do I sign and/or who do I email?
I'm missing my Blizzard games since I dumped
Windows in disgust for Linux a year-and-a-half ago.
Lokisoft could even do the port, so Blizzard's coders could rest (or get started on Starcraft II or something...)
Of course, for a company who's official line is "We have announced no products for Linux" (but refuse to say whether they're seriously considering it or if they think Linux is just a fad, or what), I don't know how far this'll get.
It's worth a shot, though. Maybe they'll realize that they, perhaps more than any other game company, have a HUGE potential market in those of us who emigrated to Linux long ago but still badly miss Blizzard's games.
Hacker Public Radio is our Friend
Do a search for "Blizzard" in the Slashdot older articles and you get:
I buy games because I have fun playing them and then feel good about having fun afterward. I don't feel good after my dealing with Blizzard. I feel violated by them for stealing my personal info and not even apologizing for it. I feel cheated them by for not being able to enjoy the results from StarHack and Micro Star. But most of all, I feel sad that Slashdot decides that Blizzard is a company we can now trust again.
The privacy issue was important enough to display three articles on. But just four days after complaining about TRUSTe lack of protecting privacy, Slashdot decides to promote Blizzard once again--how quickly we forget. I guess the stamp of TRUSTe and the stamp of Slashdot approval just come much too easily for my tastes. But until Blizzard issues a statement of commitment to customer's right to privacy and third party levels, I don't see how Diablo II could be fun for me ever.
So, regardless of if Diablo II comes out today, tomorrow, next month, or Q1 2000, I don't see how it could make a difference to me and I hope enough other Slashdot readers feel the same way. Only when the customer demands fair treatment by effecting the company's bottom line will the customer start getting fair treatment.
Has Blizzard been fair to us?
HAHAHA. Exchange 5.5 != stable unless you get it up to SP3, and even then its not exactly the most stable mail server I've ever seen. The others are at least of normal Microsoft stability, but I've definitely had more than a few users have problems with Outlook 98.
Asherons Call is where it's at!!
(Caution: this post will be moderated down to prevent a semi-quasi may-have-something-to-do-with-MS post)
Really? I liked Ultima V the best.
It had the same good top-down view as the rest, but it was larger, had more detailed NPCs, more items, etc.
It also fixed a lot of user interface 'features' imho.
Like, in 5, you could target distance weapons in more than eight cardinal directions. You could also repeat your last attack. It made the game play a lot better because you got through the fights without putting as much time into them, and got into the quests.
Four and five were my faves, but five was (imho again) miles better than four.
as of right now battle.net servers run solaris from what i've seen. check for yourself.. telnet to one of em. are they going to do an OS overhaul on the servers? i find that highly unlikely. that would require a major undertaking and patching all current games that use battle.net i would think. just curious...
Diablo II is currently the only reason I still have a licence for Windows 98, but I don't want to have to reboot to play it.
They've got a Battle.net forum for suggestions for Diablo II, (at http://www.battle.net/forums/diab lo2-suggestions/), so I'm off to suggest that they port to Linux.
They are one of the best, if not *the* best, game company out there. If we can just get them to understand the benifiets of a Linux port, then I can ditch Windows and save myself 500 megabytes.
-- The act of censorship is always worse than whatever is being censored. Always.
-- $SIGNATURE
Okay, first i'd like the say that all the "Port it to linux! Port it to linux!" cr** is getting really old. I admit, i use windows more often than linux (mainly because i'm too stingy to spend the exorbinant amount people want for external 56k modems my comp came with a winmodem). But i like linux. It's a great OS and i respect the ideas behind it.
However, i dont expect companies to start releasing programs for it en masse anytime soon. Why? because they would lose money. There simply aren't enough linux users yet to make it worthwhile to rewrite the software, do more marketing, and ship units to stores when your buyer base is so small compared to that of windows users. Hell, they arent even releasing a Mac version of it immediately and there are considerably more mac users out there than linuxians.
On top of that.. i dont know about you, but while i'm willing to wait longer for the game so that i'll have a better game, i'm not willing to wait forever and i'm not willing to wait so that they can port it to linux before shipping. Imagine how you would feel as a linux user if a Blizzard came out with StarCraft 2 for linux, announced a release of december 1, then pushed it back 6 months so they could make a windows port to release simultaneously?
Anyway.. so long as i'm ranting, i wish blizzard Would do what another poster suggested. After they release their game and sales die down enough that the prices start to drop, let other companies take a crack at releasing add-ons. I can understand not wanting to dilute your game with crappy add-ons by 3rd parties, but if they controlled it they could keep some quality management.. and just look at the waves of horrible 'add-on' packs from 3rd parties with loads of SC maps. They're not anything you cant download for free and many times are worse.
Well, that's enough ranting for now. I await the release with baited breath and clutching my pre-order ticket.
Dreamweaver
"If a man hasn't discovered something he will die for, he isn't fit to live" -- MLK, Jr.
After Ultima ]I[ it was all over.
;-p
.sig
No more taking over towns, killing all the guards and looting to your hearts content. No, now you have to be nice to people
Actually I'm just about done playing Ultima ]I[ again on the Mac version.
Hehe note the
---CONFLICT!!---
As an industry insider (core developer for all 3 Age of Empires games), I've known for a long time that Diablo II wasn't going to come out this year. There are two reasons for this, and both of them are for the better.
....
/. readers. As well it should be. Things like that are not accidental, and it's my strong belief that Blizzard will be much more careful this time.
:) (It's a sort of tit-for-tat in the Game Biz.. We send them a beta of our game, and all productivity at their officies grinds to a halt for a couple weeks, so.. they are compelled to return the 'favor' and spread the delays around.)
First Reason: Blizzard's Management and operating principial is to not release a game until it is done to a high degree of polish. This includes testing for such hard to quantify things such as "is it fun?" This goal is held in high enough regard by the company that it will allow release dates to suffer for it. Not every game company does this - in fact I would say that game companies that do are in the minority. This is made practical by the
Second Reason: Blizzard can *afford* to let Diablo II slip. Their previous titles, and the fact that they publish themselves, has given Blizzard an incredible cash flow and reserves. Consider that Blizzard employs around 80 (give or take) people. It would probably be conservative to say Diablo 2 has cost more than $5 Million dollars (so far) to make. Time and time again in the game business, money considerations have forced a game to be shipped before it is finished and polished. Time and money to do it right is a luxury.
What's interesting about the business is that this becomes something of a self-perpetuating cycle: The top selling games are the ones that make the lion's share of the money.. allowing their creators the luxury of not having to make any cuts or concessions in their next game, while the ones that didn't sell well leave their creators in the position of having to do their next game quickly and cheaply.
Another Factor: Content Level Expexctations - these have risen steadily every year. As each year passes, you have to put some x% "more" into a game for it to be received at the same level by the game buying public. Must be a side effect of radiation from ever increasing CPU speeds.
As the costs of making a "Triple-A" (or "AAA") quality game (That phrase is used to death by people in the industry) have risen steadily in the last decade, we are seeing less change in terms the people and companies that make the chart toping games. I'm not really sure if this is good, bad, or just the way it is. So far it's not significant enough to stifle innovation or newcomers, but if development costs keep rising you have to wonder about the future...
Anyway...
With Diablo 2, Blizzard faces a couple of tough challenges:
#1: They have to make the game more resistant to hacking and cheating. This is not anywhere as easy as it sounds or most programmers think. If you are really interested in the subject, I am in the process of writing an lengthy article on the subject of cheating in on-line games for 'Game Developer' magazine, which should appear around the time Diablo 2 is released. (If you really are interested, feel free to email me). Diablo's problems with cheaters were so well known, that it tainted the reputation of the game and sets a high bar of expectations to be met for Diablo 2.
#2: The privacy challenge. It's fair enough to say that every network packet sent by Diablo 2 will be under the microscope of many
All that said, I'm looking forward to it. I know many of their guys and they are excellent at what they do. Hopefully, putting their developers on The Age of Kings beta will get us on the D2 beta.
I don't think Blizzard will do a Linux port of any of their games. I actually emaild them on this and they pretty much said it would never ever ever happen.
This whole concept of selling more product, to hire more programmers, to speed development doesnt compute here.
;-)
Why?
1) programming, and most projects in general, don't scale linearly. more like geometrically. Blizzard has chosen not to grow like that.
2) most of the actual work on Blizzard games is the artwork. they have impressed me by paying boucoup attention to detail. you just can't rush art and keep the quality high and the artist satisfied. adding more cooks does not make the pot boil faster.
...though I do agree with you that add-ons for Diablo would have been neat.
btw, anyone wonder if Blizzard releases these titles late *on purpose*?
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
Dude, you are my new hero !!!! Anyone that hates Dave Kaminsky is a friend of mine.
I remember the Microstar expansion sucked, big time, and it was the fans that pushed Blizzard to sue them. The mission editor license specifically stated that you could make your own campaigns, but you could not sell them, without the express permission of Blizzard. I.E. enjoy your campaigns all you want, but you are not allowed to make money off of them. Seemed fair to a lot of us campaign makers.
3 months ago Blizzard said Diablo 2 was going to come out Q4 99. I told everyone that mentioned that to me to expect it by July 00. I stand by that and I will be vindicated. Esperandi
I made a comment about this in another thread - Scott Draeker has told me Blizzard thinks the Linux games market is too insignificant to even open up a porting contract with Loki. But the good folks at Loki have tried, and I'm sure they're continuing to try.
Sam: "That was needlessly cryptic."
Max: "I'd be peeing my pants if I wore any!"
The penguins are after YOU!
...not to be all particular or anything...