Why is it acceptable that diablo 4 released without monk, Paladin, Crusader, witch doctor, Amazon, demon hunter.
17 Likes
people still bought it so…
To be fair D4 created the art for 10 classes because they didn’t gender lock the classes.
If folks could get over genital pixels we could have nicer things.
3 Likes
it is after all one of the richest gaming companies in the entire world, what an effor theey had to put into creating a game 
1 Like
People are already complaining about balancing and you want more for them to do?
2 Likes
I’ve found that if too many classes are offered they lose their distinctiveness.
Again people just reset the Heart dungeon infinitly like they do NM dungeons cause activision don’t care everyone exploits… Just make keys not be used on use and do away with sigil dust all together if that is how u want people palying your game… Doing the same dungeon x1000 what a game
True western RPGs gender locked classes are peak and lore rich
1 Like
I’ll start off by saying I really don’t care about gender locking, I would play either.
However… creating the art to support two genders is much, much less effort than character and equipment art (with a completely different aesthetic), skill art/animations, and all of the gameplay considerations that come with a new class.
2 Likes
Having two classes or 10 wouldn’t have made a difference…
Its a live service game, balancing is always a factor.
List one example cause ffxiv and wow have plenty of classes with tons of flavor.
Demon hunter could have been changed to using more demonic power opposite of the Crusader/Paladin
1 Like
Blizz is struggling to make Barbarian and Sorcerer, two of the OG Diablo archetypes classes, work properly.
Imagine how bad all the other classes would be performing right now as well.
4 Likes
It absolutely would. You don’t think that’s extra work?
Why should Blizzard have a ton of classes available at launch?
5 is a decent amount. They will add more.
Also I can’t see them adding the Demon Hunter, because the Rogue does everything the Demon Hunter did.
3 Likes
Because it was the bare minimum. Blizzard should have gone above and beyond for D4, after the debacle that was D3 and Immortal. Instead, the just did as little as they could, and too much “designed by suits” instead of designed by passionate devs with a desire to make a great game.
1 Like
I think you are down playing the amount of effort that goes into adapting the same the gear and attack/spell animations around another model and having it look right.
Just go into the wardrobe shop with a male sorcerer and tell me I’m wrong?
1 Like
Diablo, since the days of Diablo 2, has always launched with 5 classes.
That’s what it does, and they change things up with every game.
So in Diablo 2 we had Barbarian, Sorceress, Amazon, Paladin and Necromancer. The Assassin and the Druid would be added with the Lord of Destruction expansion.
In Diablo 3 we had Barbarian, Wizard, Monk, Demon Hunter and Witch Doctor. The Crusader would be added with the Reaper of Souls expansion and the Necromancer would be added with a cheap DLC pack.
And now in Diablo 4 we have the Barbarian, Sorcerer, Rogue, Druid and Necromancer. More classes will come later.
1 Like
A new class requires all of that and a ton more…
The point was that they needed to do more. They were coasting on nostalgia and desire, instead of using that and turning it into something amazing.
Because they are planning to milk the diablo customers dropping these in addons at a later date.
30-40$ each im guessing.
Wont get a dime from me.
But they don’t.
5 classes at launch is fine. It was fine for Diablo 2, it was fine for Diablo 3, it is fine now for Diablo 4.
Not every game needs a hoard of classes to choose from. Also, adding all the classes from previous games would create a LOT of overlap, which is just redundant. For example, Blizzard could add the Assassin and Demon Hunter to the game, but both of those classes overlap with the Rogue. The Rogue can effectively play like the Demon Hunter, or like the Assassin, depending on your playstyle.
2 Likes