2011 Release Date for Diablo III is Blizzard's “Goal,” But Delay Possible to “Get It Right”
2011 Release Date for Diablo III is Blizzard's “Goal,” But Delay Possible to “Get It Right”
Posted 02/15/2011 at 9:38pm
| by Nathan Grayson
14
Comments
Print
Diablo III's been in development since 1864, but the end is nearly in sight. Or is it? Blizzard's been hinting at a 2011 release date for a while now, but if we've learned anything from the PC powerhouse's track record, it's that the company's evil lair probably has two buttons: a giant red neon-emblazoned one that says “DELAY” and one of those indented things you have to press with a pencil point that says “release, I guess... if you feel like it.”
While speaking with Kotaku on the Interactive Arts and Science Awards red carpet, Blizzard's Rob Pardo was asked whether or not its slice of hack 'n' slash heaven would finally fight its way out of development hell this year. He replied:
"We really, really hope so. That's our goal. Our goal is to get there. But you know, at the end of the day, we are going to get it right. That's more important.”
"We're going to promise, we're going to get it out there when it's awesome. And, we're crossing our fingers, maybe it will be this year."
And if not? Well, you'll always be there for us, right, Torchlight II? Right?
More like this
14
Comments
Comments are closed on this article
Consolitis
February 16, 2011 at 12:47pm
Not. Gonna. Happen.
MAYBE 2015,... maybe. Blizzard is too busy gorging on money to care about releasing ANYTHING on a timely manner.
someuid
February 16, 2011 at 11:14am
I enjoyed the heck out of D2. I really want to play D3, but I spent all my gaming money at Steam during their holiday sales.
Subtle Point: there is Perfect and there is Taking Too Long. D3 is starting to cross into Taking Too Long
Obsidian
February 16, 2011 at 9:46am
Blizzard is without a doubt, the most successful gaming company in the world. World of Warcraft addictions bring in more money every month than some countries. Others have tried to take market share and have not stopped the growing life-sucking force of WoW.
But Blizzard has been dialing it in for years. The innovation just doesn't seem to be there. The company has opted or old gaming concepts and more accessible interface (simple) and super-scalable games (not all that graphically impressive). Some of it has that wonderful patina of nostalgia that keeps it from being a total waste of money. That feeling wears off quickly.
Where is my Android interface to the game(s)? iPod/iPad interface? Even if it's basic and that's the way I 'fish' or whatever ... where are the web-generated clan pages that populate automatically? Where's the multi-platform tie ins to keep the game a part of our lives 24/7 if we want (but don't require it)?
It's not hard to conceptualize these kinds of innovations. It's about time some monster gaming company start developing these things.
I'm hoping for the best for games like Torchlight 2. I don't really expect they'll take the big guys down entirely, but with Steam they will carve out a piece of the pie.
Dexter243
February 16, 2011 at 7:54am
because when you tell some one that you play World of Worcraft thay turn and look at you and say WOW!!!!!! your one of thos
chipmunkofdoom2
February 16, 2011 at 6:24am
Delays to "get it right"? What they really mean is to make sure the market is saturated with enough hype that they could release dog shit pressed into a disk and get consumers begging to drop $60 a piece on their flaming turds.
Case in point: SCII. Almost 10 years after the original StarCraft and we finally get SCII. Why's that you ask? Because it took all that time to get it right? Because they've been working day and night trying to make sure it's a perfect game that doesn't disgrace the SC name? Bullshit. Blizzard has SOLD OUT. These corporate money whores released 8 (yes, that's EIGHT) games since then, most being Warcraft variations. That's a lot of time to spend in development, so why didn't they spend some on Star Craft sooner? Cuz they're whores, plain and simple. They knew that Warcraft was a hot item and they jumped on the bandwagon. They'll do whatever gets them the most money, and they've pretty milked the Warcraft cash-cow all the can (hell, they have a model where they get MONTHLY INCOME from their WOW titles), so now they need some revenue. StarCraft was an afterthought, haphazardly developed when the bigwigs realized they needed more money to get that yacht and the summer home in the Caribbean this year.
Don't get me wrong, I loved the first StarCraft.. still play it to this day. However, I've played SCII and was frankly not impressed. The DRM, the just so-so graphics (I have a top end system, so it's not that.. I was expecting a little more after 10 years of development and was sorely disappointed), and the $60 per each title in the series is bull. But go ahead, by all means, drink the Kool-Aid.. wait for years and years and years for your sequel and let your anticipation get so high that you love whatever game comes out simply so that you can feel like the series still exists. I'm not judging or insulting you if you do.. you do have to wonder though, even if only to yourself, why you're still buying their games.
bling581
February 16, 2011 at 11:37am
Blizzard takes their time because they produce high quality games. Blizzard and BioWare are both companies that take their time to get their titles right the first time and it shows. I will buy any of their titles without a second look and so far they've made some of the best games I've ever played.
Your example doesn't prove your argument, it actually works against it. If they were money grubbers then why not kick out new titles every year or two like Call of Duty? Almost the same game, just a new look. Your rant makes no sense.
praetor_alpha
February 16, 2011 at 10:30am
When you have a product (Warcraft) that is BOTH raking in the dough AND has high customer satisfaction, you'd have to be worse than a retarded moron to not make it continue. It's just good business. Mind you, WoW was only ever expected to have 100,000 players when they were originally developing it.
So-so graphics? Are graphics all you play games for? Graphics and story do not good game make!
DRM? What DRM? I can play offline without a disc.
And 60 bucks? That's worth less than $50 was 10 years ago.
praetor_alpha
February 16, 2011 at 5:47am
Diablo 3 can go die in a fire for all I'm concerned; I want the next SC2 installment.
mdahlke4@gmail.com
February 16, 2011 at 5:20am
Diablo III's been in development since 1864??
Somebody want to get the CORRECT DATE on that?
Exarkun1138
February 16, 2011 at 6:15am
That's called "sarcasm". Supposed to be funny. Obviously it wasn't for you.
mdahlke4@gmail.com
April 19, 2011 at 3:11am
Somebody want to eat shit? Oh, THAT is meant for YOU.
Its called accuracy in reporting douchbag.
Now something like "Diablo in production since the dawn of time" would have been funny.
Seeing as The Devil ( diablo ) has been been around for that long.
k11k
February 15, 2011 at 11:05pm
I'm already tired of it. Was so looking forward to playing it that, I hype myself out of it. Know it just seems like WOW, "yawn". Lets move on to next big thing.
Connect with MaximumPC
Featured Content
The gang discusses the GTX 690, Trinity, Ivy Bridge, Amazon, big-box stores, MMOs,...
This month's issue
Feature
Build a PC On Any Budget
Feature
Cloud Services Showdown
How-To
Encrypt Your External Drive
Build It
Upgrade an X58 Rig
Most Commented Articles
Latest Max PC Tweets
- maximumpc: Want to work at Maximum PC? Our Online Managing Editor, Alex, is moving away, so we need a new one. http://t.co/9Z7JCh0E1 day 12 hours ago
- maximumpc: Fraps 3.5.2 fixes lots of bugs, so if your motto, like @PCGamer's, is "always be frapsing," you should pick it up http://t.co/3DW3WUI01 day 15 hours ago
- maximumpc: Google Chrome Becomes World's Most-Used Web Browser, Kinda http://t.co/Xqgscmrp2 days 9 hours ago
