Proof that Diablo 3 is Coming!?


Recommended Posts

Diablo 2 made me sleepy very boring

I agree. I think Diablo is lame. WoW is a much better game. Blizzard is benefitting greatly from this MMO so why refer back to the 2D RPGs again?

Diablo + WoW = a decent game. Probably something to consider as long as it is 3D and not that ****ty one angle, helicopter camera view.

I think the announcement of a new Diablo game will confirm that StarCraft 2's development is nearing completion. Perhaps Blizzard has already begun the development of Diablo 3, but I don't know. So far the hidden clues hint to the announcement of a Diablo related game.

I think the announcement of a new Diablo game will confirm that StarCraft 2's development is nearing completion. Perhaps Blizzard has already begun the development of Diablo 3, but I don't know. So far the hidden clues hint to the announcement of a Diablo related game.

Well when they announced Starcraft 2, they were considerably far as is when it was shown at Blizzcon. I wouldn't doubt that they've almost got it done. Most game sites are estimating the fall, but you know Blizz and they're release dates / Set backs. The Blizzard North team had just begun working on D3 before the mob of them quit/laid off, whatever happened over there, so I have a hard time believing they've got a lot, but I'm sure they've started. They've gotta show us something this weekend :)

I don't get it, why would they try to steal any of WoWs thunder?

I mean, since they saw how great MMOs can be I doubt they are going to make another non-MMO alongside SC2.

It has to be, unless they are going back to... Old school.

Cause Blizzard has class. They said themselves, they aren't one of those companies that just produce MMO's. All 3 of their titles are special in their own way, so it's not really going to steal any thunder from WoW. Even if it does, Blizzard doesn't lose anything, it's competing with itself. Money's flowing in no matter what. Diablo 2, back in the day was the equivalent of what WoW is today, back then. What I'm saying is, the amount of people in 2001 that played Diablo 2 was probably as remarkable as the 9.5+million on WoW today.

The fact that that Blizzard have been able to be as successful for as long as they have with 3 IPs; Diablo, Starcraft, and Warcraft...quite amazing if you ask me. And more amazing is that there have only been 1 Diablo sequel and 3 Warcraft sequels...usually most companies are on their 5th game in the series ;)

So nobody knows what the insignia on the bottom right means or the new one at the top?

The Protoss symbol looks "filled in" now and those eyes just make me think of Protoss.

Edit: Browsed around and found that the day 4 symbol could represent the Arcane Sanctum from WC III (Which is what I thought but wasn't sure.) And the new one today.. I dunno... it makes me think of that battery shield building from SC.

post-110879-1214574694.jpg

Edited by Guest

damn I was hoping for a Diablo III, but I saw the new image and protoss came straight to mind. Seems this image is definitely indicating a starcraft/wotlk rather than diablo. Still would love to be wrong but would hate to be disappointed yet again. Damn your mind games blizzard!

damn I was hoping for a Diablo III, but I saw the new image and protoss came straight to mind. Seems this image is definitely indicating a starcraft/wotlk rather than diablo. Still would love to be wrong but would hate to be disappointed yet again. Damn your mind games blizzard!

I agree, but I still have hope for Diablo III due to the presence of the runes, as I can't remember any of the other games having those kind of runes.

Scirwode

It's still going to be D3. I don't know how to explain, but luckily you will see tomorrow, well at least hear. One reason I think it's going to be Diablo 3 is because Diabloii.net, one of the most popular Diablo fansites, announced that they had an inside source and knew it would be Diablo 3. If they lie about it, they're publicity as a reliable source goes right down the drain. They wouldn't risk that if they didn't have the utmost positivity. For those of you who think it's a Protoss, good guess, but this is Blizzard here. When Haven't they tried to trick us at a game release, or anything other spectacular they've done? Blizzard are notorious for making you think hard, get a headache, and asking for more. Just look at diablofans.com for goodness sake, they've got 100's of pages for each daily image concluding what they consider are their ideas.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
    • A $300 price hike is insane! No one is going to want to pay that much!
    • Since the 1st one flopped, there is really no reason to make another one. It's just losing money left and right.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      581
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      73
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!