Diablo 3 Second Expansion Survey


Diablo 3 Second ExpansionBlizzard often send out email surveys to find out what gamers think of their games and the service they are currently providing. A survey being sent out just now is asking “How Interested would you be in playing a second Diablo 3 Expansion.” Various devs have stated on quite a few occasions there will be more than 1 expansion to Diablo 3, so it’s not new news to you guys.

It struck me as quite a strange question. Why would you ask the question if you didn’t want to see what the consensus is and if you want to see what the consensus is does that suggest it might have some bearing? What if the results came back as 19% not interested, 28% unsure; how would a developer (not just Blizzard) respond to that? Especially if it’s already under development.

The Blizzard Product Slate leaked back in 2010 had the first expansion due for release in the middle of 2013 and a second at the end of 2014. Considering they were off by about a year with Reaper of Souls we can push that second expansion back a year; so middle to end of 2015. That seems reasonable.

As this survey wouldn’t go out to all Diablo 3 players, we can hold our own poll here and now. If you were asked the same question with the exact same options what would you say?

How Interested would you be in playing a second expansion to Diablo III?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Thanks fmulder for digging this up and putting it in the community forum.

Tagged As: | Categories: Diablo 3 Expansions, Diabloii.Net Votes

Comments

You're not logged in but can still post comments. Register or login to remember your details.
  1. what i would love to see is more story to the game, the story so far is good but lets be honest, that has never been the strong point of any of the diablo games, it would be refreshing to see them focus a little bit more on that, since diablo 3 has…(mostly) all the multiplayer things any would need(maybe improve some but nothing more)

    • Diablo wasn’t meant to have a story. Quite the opposite, D1 was a game built to remove focus on story and put it square on the action. A lot of things were left ambiguous and the playable characters intentionally didn’t do much speaking. D2 had more story but still that was not the focus.

      D3 added a bunch of story elements and you saw the result. Adding more would just make it worse.

      • ah, but that atmosphere…I still remember how scared I was to fight that…Warlord of Blood I think it was? The whole village hyped him up so much! In the end he turned out to be a weakling, haha.

      • And when they did add a load of story we got to find out what happens when you have a finite number of monkeys bashing away at typewriters. Not *quite* in the same league as Shakespeare. Or Kevin J Anderson.
        Or even my 7 year old son.

      • Do you not remember the Sin War book you clicked in the first few levels of D1? The story was absolutely there. It was a solid story, but not of epic like Baldur’s Gate for example.

        The spinoff stories have been nice solid high magic fantasy, but not to deep either. Just a good solid read for myself. The Sin war Trilogy was really good, I’d compare it to the Brother’s War in MTG 4 part.

        Diablo really is about the world now and the lore of it.

    • Isn’t the writing on the wall? Their “done” with D3. I can guarantee you the next sales numbers you hear for Reaper will be unimpressive.

      They pretty much bothced D3 too badly up front for it to ever really recover. Even if the game continues to improve the people who are bitter about D3 aren’t coming back.

  2. There was a blue post sometime ago saying they still dont know what to do – release another expansion or start making D4. That’s the reason for the survey imho.
    So I voted -not interested- bcause the stat and item system in D3 is beyond repair, and there’s hope they won’t screw it up in D4.

    • I also rather see Diablo 4, than an expansion. But if D4 would take 5+ years to make and an expansion would take 1-2 years, then I rather see an expansion first I think

      • Agreed. Even if they just filled the design space (better use of sockets, pvp?, rest of skills and skill runes, reaching the lvl cap of 99, etc.) and finish the story – if there’s a “finish” to it.

        Then, d2 sequel, please (hit recovery, cast rate, ok movement speed, etc.) 🙂

        • I’d love to see hit recovery make a comeback. You could say cast rate is kinda/sorta covered by IAS. But the movement system from D2? Run/Walk buttons and Stamina potions? Virtually everything auto-hitting while running? No thanks. That was an annoyance, not a feature.

    • >bcause the stat and item system in D3 is beyond repair

      The economy, level generator and story even more so.

      I am kind of hoping that D3 might become really good when they finalize it and have full freedom on lategame balancing, but calling D3 done after RoS and start working on D4 is an interesting perspective.

  3. The way I see it is the most fun I’ve ever had in D3 has been 1) The beta. When it was up to Leoric only and the story was more tight because it was more tutorial-mode. And 2) When ros came out and I took a level 60 character through the act 5 story. Slowly listening to dialog as it came up and doing every side dungeon. It’s like playing a different game when you play for story the first time. At lest for me. One note I made in this super-fun-d3ros-story-mode-euphoria-run was that oddly I was having fun exploring. I know 100% there’s nothing to get from exploring besides loot, but I explored the streets and bog and other areas for the sake of exploring. It’s like something you’d do in an adventure game. It was sort of a letdown however; as something about the random tilesets and stuff mess up exploring for fun.

    So anyways. What was my point? The story of all things. The thing enjoyed 0.001% of the time in d3/ros alone is worth another exploration pack. I would love another exploration on the grounds that I can have another super-fun-d3-story-mode-for-the-first-time-euphoria-run.

  4. “It struck me as quite a strange question. Why would you ask the question if you didn’t want to see what the consensus is […]?”

    My thoughts:

    For one, it wouldn’t be the first time Blizzard played the “players wanted it” card, thus justifying some of their rather dubious (and sometimes unrelated) design decisions in the future. — D3Y turns out to be a subscription-based mobile racing game? Players wanted it! Here, have proof. — A bit of hyperbole might have slipped there.

    More importantly, the result of this survey might be one of several cornerstones of a market analysis which may factor into things like the budget for D2Y’s production. If, after D3’s rough start, a survey about the continuation of the series entry so soon after D3X turns out favourably, D3Y’s content will likely be very similar in extent/detail/style/etc. They might even cough up enough bucks for things like an outro cinematic again … In my imagination, they’re currently finishing brainstorming and sketching possible content for D3Y and are now determining priorities on which ideas to pursue. For actual production to begin, they need a budget.

    Also, I wouldn’t count on statements on how many expansions they were possibly aiming at from years ago. Obviously, they had some not fully accurate perceptions about how D3’s public reception would turn out in the D3 pre-release era, that might somehow affect the concretion of these “plans”. The next investors conference should provide some insight on the decisive factor of D3Y’s future though: sales figures. On one hand, they weren’t too vocal about their usual sales record-breaking beyond the first week after D3X’s release. On the other hand, we haven’t seen any signs of a WoWesque grand sellout either yet (there are wide portions of the game interface where accidently clicking doesn’t refer you to the B.net store).

    Personally, I would have been interested in the results of a survey with the same background but different response options. Maybe something along the lines of:
    [ ] hooray, D3Y!
    [ ] don’t bother, D4!
    [ ] uh, WoW focus seems fine …

    Again, just my thoughts.

    • >More importantly, the result of this survey might be one of several cornerstones of a market analysis which may factor into things like the budget for D2Y’s production.

      This, i guess.

      >They might even cough up enough bucks for things like an outro cinematic again …

      Or maybe they consider scrapping the intro cinematic! 😛

  5. Need expansion please !!! D4… very loooong time.

    • Doubt it. Average length of time to develop a game is 3 years. For Diablo it would probably take 4.
      The time it would take them to make an expansion is at least 2 years so just making Diablo 4 wouldn’t make us wait much longer.

      • I understand that may be the average development time, but we’re talking about Diablo. It took more than a decade to get from D2:LoD to D3. And one version or another of D3 was in some state of development for almost that entire span. I’d prefer to not go down that road again. I’d rather wait and see how much they can polish up this game, ala D2>LoD>1.13.

        • But that team had never made a Diablo game before and it had been 6 years since the last Diablo game came out when they started pre-production on D3. Now they’re experienced with the genre and they could probably use the same engine for Diablo 4.

          Also, as I said in a comment below, I’m not sure how much they could improve Diablo 3 in another expansion and they probably don’t need a full development team to make the updates brought in ladders. They could continue to iterate on Diablo 3 via ladder seasons and bring what they learn from that to their D4 development.

  6. Don’t read too much into this, it’s really just a standard marketing question. In fact, in order to make the inital 10-year development of Diablo 3 and its new engine pay off, I rather see 4 expansions up to level 100.

  7. Anyone have a link to the survey? I want to fill it out.

  8. Considering, how much fun the primary gameplay of hack’n’slay is at the moment, with the secondary gameplay systems still lacking much in logical complexity, I would like a second expansion addressing the latter. Perhaps by moving away from a set damagestat to a tiered selection for each individual skill/rune-combination. Thinking like primary attribute enhances damage by 75% down to 25% for teritary attributes, adding to a value of 125% damage to be gained through attributes. (Skillchoice defines primary, while runes can add secondary of teritaries, or even overthrow or just add to the primary)

    The same type of tiering thrown upon itemslots (, except rings, amu, weapon and offhand, where this simply would make no sense to begin with), (white/blue/yellow) items themselves only inhabiting only two attributes at once and affixes connected to attributes could then easily break up the current “all these affixes are needed for item not to be crap”-pattern still going around. (Not to mention adding to the number of roles setting apart legendaries and sets from the rest, like having three attribute connections or attribute connections usually not available on a slot…)

    What this leads up to further on could simply be different tiers of affix strengths, as we basically have right now, or could be used in connectivity to attribute priorities on skill, leading further to affixes being most effective on skillrunes having the same attribute as primary as they’re connected to.

    If the expansion is just adding some content (,even if this includes the Necromancer as a playable class), I still think I’ll take it. But I’m awaiting more of you, Blizz.

  9. um, hello?! no brainer?!

  10. I wonder if they will just make Diablo 4 instead. It would take them 2-3 years to make another expansion, and 3-4 years to make Diablo 4. I know it took them 6 to make Diablo 3, but you have to remember they hadn’t made a Diablo game in 7 years when they started.

    In Reaper of Souls they gutted the core of Diablo 3 and gave it a new one. I can see where instead of continuing to build on top of that mess they would just make a new game. While they are developing D4 they will continue to iterate on Diablo 3 via the ladder seasons and they will take what they learn there and put it in D4.

    I know people would be annoyed if they did that because Reaper of Souls ended on a cliff-hanger, but you have to remember Diablo 1 ended on a cliff-hanger too.

  11. No doubt they’d like to, considering how expensive that sort of content production is, but – alas – they can’t. Without at least some cinematic material, they’d find themselves left with only their in-game graphics for promotional use, which they know won’t exactly set the Thames on fire … =/

  12. Uncertainty about another expansion exposes how much of a fail Diablo 3 really is.

  13. I think the ending to RoS alluded to some sort of dynamic where the angels and demons feared the character’s existence as possibly being too powerful/corruptable. I’d like to see the tables turned where the hero’s became the evil that was trying to be vanquished.

  14. Don’t you think that the results of this pool might be a tad bit skewed seeing what kind of a page this is an what kind of people frequent it? 😉

    • Yes, I agree.

      The email survey is sent from Blizzard to people playing Diablo 3. I think they want to find out if those playing now want more rather than asking people who don’t play if they’d like to start.

  15. There must be an expansion! We freed Diablo when we killed Malthael. We have a mess to clean up!

  16. I am happy with the actual extension that bring a lot of interesting features (adventure mode, bounties, rift, new class). I am not sure I want another expansion because I do not know what they could actually put in it.

    The story is crap so there is no reason to wait for an expansion for that. The gameplay should not evolve a lot now that adventure mode is introduced. Perhaps dedicated PvP modes could be introduced but I do not really care for that.

    So, I guess Blizz would need to surprise me in a way or another to make me “desire” another expansion.

  17. Maybe they’re considering the DLC route a la Borderlands 2. (SO much DLC.)

  18. I’ve heard from a reliable source that Skovos is a dangerous place. 😉

  19. Thanks to adventure mode, the game could support a lot more expansions than earlier Diablo iterations, since the grind of campaign mode is no longer a concern. In fact, now it’s actually more appealing than ever to have more acts and content to explore.

  20. Which brings us to the next burning question… how much longer do we have to listen to the same 3 Tyrael-Lorath dialogues every single time we stop in town in adventure mode?

    • He ate all his meals for the day at once and now his tummy hurts… get it? Man that NEVER gets old.

      Also, I like Tyrael a lot less ever since I realized he was the one that kept stuffing my loot caches full of crap.

  21. no way not gonna but this crap 3rd time after they told me to fuk off with their broken vsync, 4 man performance drops to 10 fps on good machine and random stuttering everywhere.

  22. I, Clavdivs, The God, declare that I’m ‘not particularly interested’.

    Why so? D3V wasn’t finished, it lacked features (promised, removed from beta and unmentioned ones that simply had to be there, no matter what). Same is for betaD3X. Same will apply for D3X2.

    Diablo III as a work of art:
    So, we had a masterpiece of its and all times, flawless gem – Diablo II. Dev team decided that they will do something fundamentally different – almost a new game. It sold over 12 million copies. The rest is history (mass fan disappointment, weak band-aids, abandonment and RoS). The same saviour expansion is sold in less than quarter than initial game, which is quite weak for expansion – they tend to be inbetween 33-40+% (so 4-5 million).

    So, The God would call experiment over. Finished.

    Diablo IV:
    Why ‘fixing’ the game that is based on bad foundations, has bad core mechanics and is generally sick to death? Because of adventure mode (was also in D2) and rifts and bounties? Because of ladders (were in D2) and smiling, happy developer faces holding them. Yes, The God would also be smiling for a fat paycheck entirely undeserved. ‘Invention of ladders’, really.

    Which brings us to Diablo IV. Why not have the game built on healthy foundations (good core mechanics, random map generator, not ENTIRELY based on RNG, enabled trade) and with rare good stuff that D3 added?

    The God presumes price of 60g again, which is 20g less than D3X and D3X2 combined and only 20g more than presumed D3X2. Take into account that, although on paper this looks like a huge money generator for Blizzard it is actually a loss – 12*60 + 2.7*40 + 1.3*40 (last ~4*40 in a period of over 4 years). Compare that ~1.3*40 with 8*60 (D3 damage won’t be easily washed away) + potentially 3.5*40 (or more, for the initial interest base was 12, and the game could interest whole lot of previously disappointed fans) + whatever future DLCs/expansions could bring.

    The point is that D3X2 is not expected to be sold in million-numbers, which is likely the reason why Blizzard is considering a change of plans, as both RoS and D2X2 won’t be the gold mines they expected them to be.

    At the same time, Diablo IV could be financially successful, could be made in less time than normal new game (current engine is not yet ancient, and with the right changes and improvement could be a foundation of new game), they have oh-so-many indications what fans DON’T want to see in the game ever, etc. And there is no reason why bounties, rifts and such additions can’t be in it. From the very start.

    Why The God called D3 work of art? Because art is something which is mostly made to satisfy artists taste and not the general public. Same as D3. Undoubtedly, dev team is very happy with the game. The rest of as – less so. Or not at all. So, stop being inventive and make the game that fans want. It is your income, after all. And art can be crappy, depending on author (Calligula comes to mind, easily)

  23. QUOTE

    The rest is history (mass fan disappointment, weak band-aids, abandonment and RoS). The same saviour expansion is sold in less than quarter than initial game, which is quite weak for expansion - they tend to be inbetween 33-40+% (so 4-5 million).

    Don’t be silly, a solid xpac may sell 33-40% but that would be over its lifetime, not in its first week! With good reviews and a more positive word of mouth, I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s already well into the 30% range by now. If Blizz can keep up long-term interest with future content patches, you can fully expect RoS to end up selling 4+ million. It’d be foolish to call those kind of sales anything less than a success.

  24. The God reminds less inclined that 12 million copies were made in rush-sale, and very little was sold later. RoS wears a heavy burden of the original game, and gamers flocking back because oh-so-little improvement is unlikely. They were even unable to make ladders, not to mention PvP. The comma in price represented an almost unsolvable problem. Too late, too little, too pricey – that what RoS is. One month old, and the new wave of disappointment emerges – anyone who expect constant increase and constant return of old player lives in denial. 2.7 million is big fanbase, but it won’t grow much, if any.

    Divine wisdom seems to be renounced – having occasional and low-grade fun with RoS and D3X2 for the next four years, is preferred instead getting solid and polished, feature rich D4? If so, elaborate! Better game than RoS is impossible to make? Sequel won’t be better, and Blizzard should spend time fixing the unfixable, instead building new quality game?

  25. You can be as disappointed as you like but the truth remains: the xpac has sold well, fans and critics met it with overwhelming positivity, more people are playing then ever, the flood of negativity has significantly died down, and what complainers remain are far less extreme than they use to be. If they can maintain this kind of positive momentum then yes, the literally millions of fans who are enjoying RoS will gladly take MOAR.

    • The thing is that Blizzard shifted their target audience. That’s the ultimate betrayal. People can talk about the sales all they want, but the Diablo atmosphere was lost for many of us. The flood of negativity has died down? Yes, it’s natural. People move on. I bitch a comment now and then, but that’s it.

      Another xpac or Diablo 4, well, we’ll get more of the same. You’ll get something different if you let another team do it. But with this team at Blizzard, you’ll get more of the same. So if we want something truly different than what they gave with D3, I am afraid we will never get it.

  26. World of Diablo

  27. I, Clavdivs, The God declare that there were literally 2.7 million people who bought RoS and how many of them are actually playing (or enjoying, for that matter) is unknown – claim that they all are is the same as claiming that 9.3 million players still enjoy D3V.

    Time will tell, but in two millennia, The God had seen too much to have unreasonable hope. As he had seen denial, and futility of discussing it, so he, in his wisdom, will refrain of defending already well argumented case further.

  28. Expansion will have less error 37s lel.

  29. The flood of negativity has died down? Yes, it’s natural. People move on.

    Many people had not moved on and these forums were still full of angry hateful posters. There was hardly any topic you could mention that wouldn’t eventually turn to how awful Blizz and D3 were. And then came 2.0 and the hate was gone in a flask. Post-2.0 there is dramatically less negativity and the negativity that does come up tends to be more constructive than just hateful lashing out.

    I, Clavdivs, The God declare that there were literally 2.7 million people who bought RoS and how many of them are actually playing (or enjoying, for that matter) is unknown – claim that they all are is the same as claiming that 9.3 million players still enjoy D3V.

    Of course we can’t know how many are still playing now. What we do know is a whole lot of people liked D3V enough that they were willing to pay $40 for more of it. That the xpac managed to do solid numbers despite extremely harsh online backlash makes it even more of a clear sucecss.

Comments are closed.