Maybe I'm just ignorant, but aside from the fact it is released by one of the biggest developers around, I don't see anything enticing about it. The latest trailer just doesn't sell, and I frankly am quite amazed to see there are still people excited about it. Don't get me wrong, I'm not bashing the game, but for what's been shown to the public so far, even though it's in-game rendering being turned into a machinima, I didn't notice anything particularly stunning or breath-gasping.
Compare the latest monk trailer to other games' trailers. Wolfenstein for example: people were like "meh, just another WWII first person shooter". The response was below luke warm, and I agreed. But Diablo 3 just came off as a cheaper looking knock off of the other ten Diablo 2 clones out there, and besides featuring some fancier animations, it didn't look like anything special, compared to say Borderlands. Yet the reception seems to be very hot. For the sake of nostalgia, I can understand that people are excited, but the comments over at RPS seem to indicate genuine interest in...the new features. Exactly what's new? Someone guide me where the hype is leading? Honestly I am underwhelmed by the trailers and gameplay, and what's even more baffling is how people can look at other (imo) better trailers and claim they're boring, yet with Diablo 3 it's a totally different story.
I don't think it's entirely fanboyism, because some of the comments indicated they weren't interested in the previous Diablo games before, but if not that, then what? I...just can't grasp this. I'm puzzled. Nothing makes sense anymore :(

To be honest, neither I see anything special about D3. For me it is just another overhyped grinding clickfest.
My friend used to bother me with every little update about the game (ZOMG nu fallen pics! ZOMG nu class info! Epic game !!1), until I told him to stop with that shit. Funny thing is, that he will pirate the game. The same goes about him and Starcraft 2.
Maybe I don't expect anything from games and hype, because many games were just crap, despite the hype and expensive advertisements. Another friend was awaiting Quake 4. He watched all trailers at least a thousand times. Then he bought it and after a week I asked him about Q4. He replied just:"that game sucks hard".

Agreed. If those very videos were not of a Blizzard game named Diablo no one would give a shit about the game.

I like his beard so I will play the Monk.
His beard isn't as magnificent as mine, but naturally, that much magnificence is not possible on current tech yet.

If the monk trailer is an example of a cut scene using in-game graphics then I hope they keep those to a minimum.

Yeah, the Monk cut-scenes were ridiculous to say the least, but the gameplay I've seen is in the usual rock-solid diablo style....

First of all; you've seen a 5-minute clip of the game. Not enough to make any kind of conscious decision.
Second; I hear people complaining about the graphics all the time. Blizzard have always managed to hit a sweet spot between graphical glory and not overdoing it so that 70% of the world's computers could never run the game. That's a subtle but important detail. I think the graphics look quite fluent and good.
New features? Not much is known at this stage, that's why you aren't finding any articles listing all the new features. Blizzard are keeping their cards close to their chest and releasing only tidbits of information at a time. To be honest the amount of new information we got out of Blizzcon was disappointingly low.
I do however know about two new features;
- Clicking 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8 then opening inventory and reassigning health potions to your quickbar is gone. Instead, health globules drop from dead monsters, and are consumed upon walking over them. This is a change I think will work out well as far too much time was spent dragging potions around in Diablo 2.
- The world is now massive and nonlinear. In Diablo 2, it was still very much linear, and the places you could go very limited. This is changed and a big portion of the world can be found in the game, with many optional sidequests (Diablo 2 had about 1 pr. act). This should make the game feel a lot more like an actual RPG.
Overall, I can't wait for the release. Blizzard never disappoints.

I agreed. I loved Diablo 1 and enjoyed D2 and I find the world and story interesting. I want the game with the story. It looks fun. Just because other games look "funner" does mean this won't be fun.
Karl

You just reinforced my point. It's not just the fact that I'm not wow-ed, it also baffles me why people are wow-ed, when, as you put it, there's "not enough to make any kind of conscious decision".
The graphics are average, nothing to write home about, but I can tell you this. If the game shown wasn't Diablo, but something by Ascaron, I don't think people are going to praise them for their "art direction".

I'm hyped for D3 only because I'm enjoyed D1+2 so much.
Theres nothing particularly special about the series, but I just prefer it to other similar games.
I hope they have a few rendered videos, those were the bulk of the setting and story of the Diablo 2 for example, and I thought it worked very well.

Oh, I think the graphics during game play look great. I just think the monk cut scene was bad. Not just because of the graphics either. The whole thing just looked very poorly executed compared to Blizzards normal work.

Amen. Preach it.

Diablo 2 looked pretty naff, even for its time. The application of Diablo's random environments to surface areas in Diablo 2 backfired and created mostly incredibly bland, boxy environments in the first two acts. The rainbow coloured creatures didn't help maintain its dark, gritty image either.
Yet despite this, the gameplay was nailed down almost perfectly. Especially replay value. Gameplay should be the main focus of any game and I think it's the promise of even greater potential in the gameplay department that's really selling this game to people. It's taking the best bits of the predecessors and, for the most parts, leaving behind the worst.
How many action RPGs have proven as timeless and replayable as the Diablo series?
Okay, so when they realised that something was different about Diablo 3 - looked back at Diablo 2 - then reached the conclusion that they needed to make Diablo 3 Rainbow Sparkletiems in order for it to be authentic Diablo, they did indeed bugger things up.
Another example of how, if you want to resurrect an old IP, you don't for one moment try to make it aesthetically similar to its predecessors. As much as the fanboys hate it, that's something Fallout 3 got right, from the start.
But on the whole, it should still be a great game. Even if it's more visually naff than it was before they 'fixed' it. And that's why there is so much promise in this title.

I see it as mainly hype and fans behind the previous Diablo games. Blizzard are also still seen as one of the teams that end up with titles of a high standard, (not saying they are, or are not now), so there is a lot of interest in it.
While I enjoyed the first two, I'm not really following D3 as it's still (supposedly) so far away from release.

Firstly, I'm fairly sure that the main change in graphical style between D2 and D3 is the switch to full 3D. The "too colourful" graphical issue was a perception issue based on the limited amount of screenshots available early on, and the comparisons with WOW.
Secondly, changing things for Fallout 3 made it commercially successful (tapping into the Oblivion market), which from a business sense may be correct, but has fundamentally changed the course of the series. The changes in to Diablo 3 will be generally smaller, as the game appears to play in a similar way to D2, as shown from the limited videos we've seen so far.