Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Ad platform for the meta verse
Diablo Pitch Document (1994) [pdf]
101–110 of 184 posts
Re: Diablo Pitch Document (1994) [pdf]
#102My 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…
I have no clue why, but the Diablo style dungeon-crawler ARPGs are literally the only subgenre of game that I have not found a single game from which I like. I keep trying examples because it's such a strange (and popular) hole in my tastes. Games I've tried: - Diablo - Diablo II - Nox - Dungeon Siege - Divinity - A few others I'm probably forgetting.
Path of Exile fundamentally changed my view on the genre and enabled me to retrospectively re-evaluate many of the ARPGs I had played to this point.
The granular level of control you have over your playstyle and strategy is incredible; it is insane how rewarding it is to be the first person to create a new approach to playing a character and have this build succeed in combat.
I highly recommend giving it a shot if you at all enjoy the cerebral, long term planning aspects of gaming.
Re: Diablo Pitch Document (1994) [pdf]
#103How things have deviated since Diablo 2, I’m so saddened by the lack of creativity in D4 compared to path of exile
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.
Re: Diablo Pitch Document (1994) [pdf]
#104Earlier quoted context omitted.
Diablo 4 has no sense of progression because enemies level up as you do. In fact they increase in power faster than you, under the assumption you'll be itemising optimally, so if you level up but don't update your items fast enough, you'll find that mobs actually get harder and harder to defeat as you increase in level.
The level scaling is a really bizarre design choice. Every game with this feels bad. There is no sense of progression as your character gets punished for levelling up. Some game designers think it’s a great idea though - hence it’s in D4. I’d love to hear their take.
Even though it still feels weird I can see why they did it: since the game is not linear at all (I think you can even do the first 3 acts in any order) compared to other Diablo games (didn't play 3) they kinda need to do this so you don't breeze through zones. It also helps when playing with under/over leveled friends since they just use the same system to prevent you from rushing them.
Personally I prefer linear narrative and gameplay for Diablo (it's like making linear games is a sin nowadays) but it's probably a wise choice given other design choices? Or at least understandable. It allows them to send you back and forth across regions and still present a challenge.
Anyways: I'm liking D4 (I'm surprised to say this of a Blizzard game in 2023) so not the worst design ever.
Re: Diablo Pitch Document (1994) [pdf]
#105Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nitpick: ARPG games are much older than Diablo[1], though Diablo might be considered pioneering a special type of ARPG. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_role-playing_game#Histo...
I think it is pretty fair to say that Diablo 1 did effectively create the genre as far as the history of gaming is concerned. The commercial and mainstream impact of that game vs anything prior to that is on a different magnitude. A similar comparison is saying that Apple didn't invent touchscreen phones - sure, but the iPhone had such an overwhelming impact that it shook up the entire industry. Relevant phone compar…
Definitely not, there were many successful Japanese ARPGs long before that, like Dragon Slayer, Hydlide, The Legend of Zelda, Final Fantasy Adventure, Secret of Mana etc. Diablo may have created its own subgenre.
Re: Diablo Pitch Document (1994) [pdf]
#106Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
What? I've played D1 about 50 times and not once have The Butcher not showed up.
Re: Diablo Pitch Document (1994) [pdf]
#107The "Marketing" section practically describes modern DLC. Fortunately, they weren't able to implement any of it -- probably, among other reasons, because the logistics of physical disc distribution and merchandising were too complicated -- but perhaps it could be said that they were 15 years ahead of their time.
It actually sounds more like loot boxes to me!
Re: Diablo Pitch Document (1994) [pdf]
#108Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nitpick: ARPG games are much older than Diablo[1], though Diablo might be considered pioneering a special type of ARPG. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_role-playing_game#Histo...
I think it is pretty fair to say that Diablo 1 did effectively create the genre as far as the history of gaming is concerned. The commercial and mainstream impact of that game vs anything prior to that is on a different magnitude. A similar comparison is saying that Apple didn't invent touchscreen phones - sure, but the iPhone had such an overwhelming impact that it shook up the entire industry. Relevant phone compar…
Ha, no. Legend (1992), Tower of Souls (1995), Dragonstone (1994),... And that was just on the Amiga/Atari/PC. I guess people more familar with consoles have many more examples.
Re: Diablo Pitch Document (1994) [pdf]
#109Re: Diablo Pitch Document (1994) [pdf]
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
This, part of building your character is the power fantasy you get when you go to weaker zones and absolutely obliterate everything. With the current system, you actually end up getting weaker as you level up
But why should I do that? I don't get that argument. I've never went back to a low level zone in any game just for the purpose of "obliterating everything". If there is a quest I missed, sure. But what's the point doing that?
In D4 when you pass through or go back to a zone you've been in, and the monsters are tougher, it feels awful.