Live data from Hacker News

Diablo Pitch Document (1994) [pdf]

graybeardgames.com

21–30 of 184 posts

Re: Diablo Pitch Document (1994) [pdf]

#21
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Couldn't disagree more. Played all of them, and the story in D4 is fantastic, not to mention the amazing cinematics. Well worth the asking price.

This is interesting to me, because I always figured the Diablo series was prized for its moment-to-moment gameplay, rather than for its story or cinematics.

What? The cinematics are absolutely incredible. Would definitely pay to watch a full Diablo movie.

Re: Diablo Pitch Document (1994) [pdf]

#22
post #15

It was a different time: “Condor plans to spend one year in the development of Diablo. Personnel will consist of: one designer, one chief programmer, 2 junior programmer, 2 art director/artists, 1 illustrator/sculptor, 3 pixel artists, and 1 sound FX person” So, 11 people for a year for Diablo. Meanwhile Diablo 4 took 300+ people 6+ years. So over 150x the cost, not accounting for the fact that game developers are pa…

The results are also vastly different as the expectations, the number of platforms to support, the quality of the cut-scenes, ... and the revenue.

But there are still indie games developed with such small teams. So, that is still a viable possibility.

Re: Diablo Pitch Document (1994) [pdf]

#23
post #7

My favourite story of Diablo's development (as relayed by David Brevik in the Diablo Postmortem - see below) is the part where Diablo was made real-time. He passionately championed that it should be more like Rogue or Moria purely turn-based and permadeath. That was until he implemented real-time movement in an afternoon and attacked a skeleton. This was a directive from Blizzard, and it effectively created the ARPG…

A trivial aside, and for which I apologise in advance - not least because it may have been merely a typo - but the correct phrase is "averse [to Google]", not adverse. "Averse to Google" == "disinclined to Google"; "Adverse to Google" == "has negative effects upon Google". I am assuming you meant the former.

https://grammarist.com/usage/adverse-averse/

https://www.dictionary.com/e/adverse-vs-averse/

Re: Diablo Pitch Document (1994) [pdf]

#26
post #7

My favourite story of Diablo's development (as relayed by David Brevik in the Diablo Postmortem - see below) is the part where Diablo was made real-time. He passionately championed that it should be more like Rogue or Moria purely turn-based and permadeath. That was until he implemented real-time movement in an afternoon and attacked a skeleton. This was a directive from Blizzard, and it effectively created the ARPG…

A trivial aside, and for which I apologise in advance - not least because it may have been merely a typo - but the correct phrase is "averse [to Google]", not adverse. "Averse to Google" == "disinclined to Google"; "Adverse to Google" == "has negative effects upon Google". I am assuming you meant the former. https://grammarist.com/usage/adverse-averse/ https://www.dictionary.com/e/adverse-vs-averse/

It was an honest typo, but it did make me think that at some point with the heat of the idea of the "Metaverse" in some circles, that Google could roll out a competing "Adverse".

Note: typo corrected.

Re: Diablo Pitch Document (1994) [pdf]

#27
post #5

An underrated choice of the original diablo is that it would only show you a subset of story quests and boss monsters in a single play-through. A few (like the butcher) would always show up, but for most others there'd be multiple options for which story quest would be in the game. A lot of games since include every quest in every playthrough (or change it based on what choices you make), and games like the Witcher 3…

The Butcher did not always show up. It just had a 2/3 chance of showing up. It’s easy to test for yourself, because you can restart the game and you only have to walk as far as the cathedral entrance to see if the quest appeared. It always appeared in multiplayer, but the quests are not randomized in multiplayer.

There are 16 quests in 6 groups, and 1 random quest from each of the first five groups is removed.

Re: Diablo Pitch Document (1994) [pdf]

#29
post #5

An underrated choice of the original diablo is that it would only show you a subset of story quests and boss monsters in a single play-through. A few (like the butcher) would always show up, but for most others there'd be multiple options for which story quest would be in the game. A lot of games since include every quest in every playthrough (or change it based on what choices you make), and games like the Witcher 3…

The only guaranteed quests are for Lazarus and Diablo at the end of the game. It was possible for the Butcher to not show up in any given playthrough. https://diablo-archive.fandom.com/wiki/Quests_(Diablo_I)
Post reply on HN