Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Diablo Pitch Document (1994) [pdf]

graybeardgames.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 184 posts

Re: Diablo Pitch Document (1994) [pdf]

#151

Post by e12e »

cubefox wrote: post #105
AOsborn wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> 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. 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.

One that comes to mind is Shadowlands (i at least remember it as not turn based..):

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadowlands_(video_game)

Re: Diablo Pitch Document (1994) [pdf]

#152

Post by e12e »

bexsella wrote: 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…

Indeed, i remember that anecdote. I experienced the reverse first hand: multiplayer Angband has a clock/ticks and it completely transforms the game - but IMNHO ends up ruining the fun.

Re: Diablo Pitch Document (1994) [pdf]

#153

Post by hnbad »

theresistor wrote: post #107
treve wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It actually sounds more like loot boxes to me!

It sounds like it’s taken pretty directly from Magic the Gathering booster packs, which makes sense given the timeline.

Certain games do have "content pack" DLCs like that though. I remember "horse armor" being somewhat of a running joke when DLCs were a fairly new concept because the game "Oblivion" released a DLC merely containing visible armor for the player character's horse.

I'd say loot boxes are closer to Magic booster packs than what the document describes as they both contain random content and may yield duplicates of what you already have, whereas the document describes themed sets of items and cosmetics. This is closer to the DLCs from publishers like Ubisoft that typically contain a small set of mostly cosmetic extra content and maybe some related side missions.

Re: Diablo Pitch Document (1994) [pdf]

#154

Post by notTooFarGone »

nottorp wrote: post #133
A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At the beginning? Sure. Eventually though a boredom does set it and a player seeks their own fun be it lore, own builds or something else like gauntlet. I am saying this as a person, who spent too much time on it already.

I quit when I realized getting +2 to minions on my headgear meant farming 100k of to roll the helmet endlessly. It's just like lootboxes but you farm them ingame. Still boring.

You really didn't understand crafting then. It's an optimization problem that you have to solve.

Analogy: You don't try to brute force passwords as it takes far too long, you look for smarter options. Same in PoE - you NEVER roll your gear with chaos orbs, you look for vectors to increase your chances.

The whole game is one optimization simulator and it tingles that part of my brain.

Re: Diablo Pitch Document (1994) [pdf]

#155

Post by green_man_lives »

westoque wrote: post #2

As a software engineer, I wonder how accurate they stuck to their said schedule at the last page.

Yeah the Gantt chart almost feels amateurish with how simple and optimistic it is. I would love to know how development actually went. I can't imagine building an entire game from scratch in just a year like that with such a small team.

Re: Diablo Pitch Document (1994) [pdf]

#156

Post by klodolph »

bashwizard wrote: post #91
klodolph wrote: post #27

Earlier 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.

Were you playing multiplayer? Multiplayer always starts with Butcher and Skeleton King.

Re: Diablo Pitch Document (1994) [pdf]

#157

Post by Supermancho »

tralarpa wrote: post #108
AOsborn wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> Diablo 1 did effectively create the genre as far as the history of gaming is concerned 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.

> Diablo 1 did effectively create the genre as far as the history of gaming is concerned

> Ha no.

This is unceremoniously ungracious and an obvious misinterpretation. Being the first is not the same as genre creation^. The games prior to Diablo 1 shared features, but weren't considered a formula for generating revenue beyond the novel mechanics.

^Herzog Zwei had elements of the modern RTS, but it is not considered genre defining.

Re: Diablo Pitch Document (1994) [pdf]

#158

Post by A4ET8a8uTh0 »

notTooFarGone wrote: post #154
nottorp wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I quit when I realized getting +2 to minions on my headgear meant farming 100k of to roll the helmet endlessly. It's just like lootboxes but you farm them ingame. Still boring.

You really didn't understand crafting then. It's an optimization problem that you have to solve. Analogy: You don't try to brute force passwords as it takes far too long, you look for smarter options. Same in PoE - you NEVER roll your gear with chaos orbs, you look for vectors to increase your chances. The whole game is one optimization simulator and it tingles that part of my brain.

Thank you. I was trying to find the words for why it seems so addictive and this captures it. I am now playing ruthless ( ssf hc btw ) and even though I keep getting smacked down, I keep trying to get back up. The mode forces you to work with what you have and optimize at all times.

Re: Diablo Pitch Document (1994) [pdf]

#159

Post by nottorp »

notTooFarGone wrote: post #154
nottorp wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I quit when I realized getting +2 to minions on my headgear meant farming 100k of to roll the helmet endlessly. It's just like lootboxes but you farm them ingame. Still boring.

You really didn't understand crafting then. It's an optimization problem that you have to solve. Analogy: You don't try to brute force passwords as it takes far too long, you look for smarter options. Same in PoE - you NEVER roll your gear with chaos orbs, you look for vectors to increase your chances. The whole game is one optimization simulator and it tingles that part of my brain.

Heh, I've been on all PoE crafting simulators and learned about the optimized paths.

The only difference is you don't use the relatively common chaos orbs but the much less common . Time spent grinding is the same.

Still a nope.

Re: Diablo Pitch Document (1994) [pdf]

#160

Post by nottorp »

A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: post #158
notTooFarGone wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You really didn't understand crafting then. It's an optimization problem that you have to solve. Analogy: You don't try to brute force passwords as it takes far too long, you look for smarter options. Same in PoE - you NEVER roll your gear with chaos orbs, you look for vectors to increase your chances. The whole game is one optimization simulator and it tingles that part of my brain.

Thank you. I was trying to find the words for why it seems so addictive and this captures it. I am now playing ruthless ( ssf hc btw ) and even though I keep getting smacked down, I keep trying to get back up. The mode forces you to work with what you have and optimize at all times.

I'm not talking about progression, which is pretty fun. I'm talking about what happens when you've done all content except those few last bosses...
Post reply on HN