Temple of The Roguelike Forums
Announcements => Traditional Roguelikes (Turn Based) => Topic started by: guest509 on May 19, 2012, 03:29:07 AM
-
This is sort of a joke post. I know you all know D3 is out.
Figured I'd start a discussion about it here. There is a Roguelike Radio broadcast as well, here.
http://roguelikeradio.blogspot.com/2012/05/episode-35-diablo.html?showComment=1337397084321#c8950786154004896746
So my take is that I like Diablo 3, but it's not the roguelike qualities that make me like it. I like the real time combat, the graphics and pazazz. The A+ production values. The spectacle. I like the social aspect where I get to blow up baddies with my friends. I'm primarily a social gamer, I pretty much only play Roguelikes alone, and maybe some space conquer/civ style games once in a while. Most of my gayming happens with my friends, and we will be playing the crap out of Diablo 3.
It's roguelikes qualities are pretty much NIL though. The procedural levels might as well be static as they add no real replayability or surprise to the game. The story line is linear pretty much, the quests are the same each time, so the random dungeons add nothing. For randomness in dungeons to matter the player would have to make their own middle story. Instead of being pushed along a plot the game need only provide a beginning back story and an end goal (kill diablo). All of the plot point quests during the actual game play tend to negate the replayability and cause the random dungeon design to lose any real impact over a more static design.
I also distrust completely the $$$ auction house. I'd be interested in making money off of it, but think it likely to become an issue. I also really wish there were PvP competitions. My group thrives on that sort of thing.
NOTE: Hey Getter, this might be in the wrong forum?
-
i think above other things, the storytelling in diablo 3 is superb. The bits of lore always popping up is a nice feature. Of course i'm sure there are plenty of people that hurriedly click the x button whenever dialogue comes up :P Fyi i believe pvp of some kind is coming down the road.
-
Yeah they said they cut PvP so they could get the game out in time. This seems like a ridiculous statement given the decade of time they've had to produce the game. But hey, what do I know about making A+ games?
I'm the type of player that will click right through the lore. I have no interest in it. Story wise all I need is a goal.
"Kill Diablo? He's a really bad dude? Okay, let's do it!"
-
Nah, I'd say it counts as a fair bit for Announcements or Roguelike World depending---whether folk here pay it enough mind to mention, hopefully, nifty updates that tremendously improve the game like....oh...an offline single player divorced from the damn auction house remains to be seen.
For my part, I look forward to Triangle Wizard feasting off the essence of general nifty bits/improvements and discarding the rest as it has been doing all this while. 8)
-
It's not an interesting game, but I guess those who liked previous Diablo games like it. I can't think a reason why.
-
I know it'd be interesting to see if the next DiabloRL release out of Chaosforge manages to be a more substantial update in general than III was to II.
Also, it would be amusing if Blizzard loses their minds completely and thinks to put up an offline single player mode that can be purchases from the Audction house ingame.
-
I've been playing this game a bit and it is definitely an improvement over Diablo II.
The interface is better, you can more easily hotkey 6 different abilities. Those 6 abilities are chosen from a group of 24. Each of the 24 abilities can be modded by 1 of 5 runes per ability. You can shift these in and out at any time. So you can strategize and customize quite a bit in how you want to tackle different content.
Also it is much easier to see which gear is better and make decisions on which to wear.
The UI is much more customizable.
Other than that it's Diablo. If you dig that type of game you'll dig it.
It's rogue inspired, but is definitely not a roguelike.
-
Well, the question "Is Diablo a roguelike" (or was it a roguelike ever) can be answered more easily than with other games.
Of course it once was inspired by roguelikes, but it always was done in a way which you would today call "casual". The Diablo series is, in my opinion, a "casual roguelike-like". It sacrifices thoughtful tactics and the typicals roguelike's many interaction possibilities for two clear concepts: Killing monsters and hunting items in a randomized world. Killing and item-hunting for the sake of its own, without much distraction.
But that's okay, because it IS fun. I didn't play Diablo 3 and probably won't, because you always have to stay online. But Torchlight and Torchlight 2 will surely be on my computers.
In fact, Blizzard games where one of the most important sources of inspiration for LambdaRogue. LambdaRogue is more inspired by Diablo and World of Warcraft than by roguelikes, both in terms of interface, story, and game mechanics (Well, perhaps that's the explanation why LambdaRogue does not appeal to "true" roguelike players, but gets its players from other places :D Yesterday I played with a soldier and it was a VERY Diablo'ish feeling *gg* )
-
Definitely a roguelike-like.. I don't like those kind of games. I liked Diablo I and II but I have a lot more fun with roguelikes.
The problem with roguelike-likes is that they often rely only on farming.. and the lack of randomization makes the gaming experience dull.
Let's talk about the first level of the small cave in Adom.. just a few steps distant from the first village, and there you can find dozens of different enemies, quarterstaffs of devastation, swords of sharpness.. that's what I want, not mindless farming in random-like levels with just the same 3-4 monsters over and over again and no real surprise about the stuff they drop.
-
just a few steps distant from the first village, and there you can find dozens of different enemies, quarterstaffs of devastation, swords of sharpness..
On the other hand, "just a few steps from the first village", such variety should not exist in a believable world -- things with martialic names like "quarterstuff of devastation" should be in far-away hidden places, not ten steps away from your home.
It would be okay to start with such variety, but then either tell the player that the village he starts is already a far-away-place, or don't let him start in a village.
Also, if among the first items you find there is already a "quarterstaff of devastation", what quarterstaff do you find after hours of play? A "great quarterstaff of infinite devastation (+100)"? ;)
Diablo may start slowly, but it's exact the hunt for big treasure that keeps players addicted. Besides, the best items are only to be found in the high difficulty levels.
-
On the other hand, "just a few steps from the first village", such variety should not exist in a believable world -- things with martialic names like "quarterstuff of devastation" should be in far-away hidden places, not ten steps away from your home.
Why? if you talk about realism, then I think it's more unrealistic the impossibility to find a uber-weapon or more than 4-5 kinds of enemies in the same place.
But I wasn't talking about realism.. just gaming experience.
Also, if among the first items you find there is already a "quarterstaff of devastation", what quarterstaff do you find after hours of play? A "great quarterstaff of infinite devastation (+100)"? ;)
Nothing like that.. you already found one of the most powerful weapons of the game. But then a rust monster eats it away! or you mistakenly read a "swords to bread" scroll.. or a gush of water hits you.. or it's just a stone block instead of water and you die, haha.
Diablo may start slowly, but it's exact the hunt for big treasure that keeps players addicted. Besides, the best items are only to be found in the high difficulty levels.
Yes I know.. but it's a hunt that rewards patience and tedious gameplay (=farming) rather than tactics. I remember there were some strategy in the skill-tree selection in Diablo II, but still very limited and stable compared to a deep roguelike such as Adom or DoomRL.
.. anyway we're talking about personal tastes!
Besides, back in the days Diablo I has been one of my favourite videogames for a good time.
It was something new in the scene.. the music were great, the graphics very nice (I remember the initial village.. how fascinating).. and descending to the depths of hell! coolness.
-
I love the Diablo story (hell is cool), but really Din's Curse is the better game IMO.
-
Why? if you talk about realism, then I think it's more unrealistic the impossibility to find a uber-weapon or more than 4-5 kinds of enemies in the same place.
But I wasn't talking about realism.. just gaming experience.
No, I don't talk about realism, but about believability. An unrealistic world can be very believable, if carried out without contradicting itself. This "suspension of disbelief" relates directly to gaming experience: Part of believability in "kill monsters and loot treasure"-games (like Rogue, Angband, Diablo, ...) is that it should be challenging to get the best items.
Of course nowadays roguelikes are a little more diverse, and roguelikes are still more complex than Diablo.
Yes I know.. but it's a hunt that rewards patience and tedious gameplay (=farming) rather than tactics. I remember there were some strategy in the skill-tree selection in Diablo II, but still very limited and stable compared to a deep roguelike such as Adom or DoomRL.
.. anyway we're talking about personal tastes!
Indeed, and none of the tastes is better than the other; I just wish that Diablo would not be seen from such an elitist "roguelikes are way better than stupid Diablo" perspective. Sometimes this is an unspoken thing here ...
-
.. but they are!
Ok ;D
-
I think this view is not alone amongst roguelike fans. I've seen a lot of negative comments made lately about the shallowness of D3 from people that have never played RLs.
I was at a game conference today actually where one speaker said playing Diablo is like panning for gold in a river. Some are willing to sit and pan through the dirt and get excited when they find a glint of gold. Others take a step back, see the size of the pan in comparison to the river and think "What a waste of time".
Like it if you want, but don't label others elitist for picking out obvious flaws.
-
Part of the disconnect perhaps stems from how Incredibly different a direction Blizzard went in for DIII versus, say, the various ambitious community mods that slowly managed to crop up over the many years, often having to dodge around patches and all sorts of nonsense. D1 to DII was a progression on a few fronts, and based on the mods, what folks were hankering for was more and different and deeper----really it parallels the whole vanilla Angband and the many variants syndrome. People wanted more of the sorts of things that "If Only.." Blizzard would pay more attention to the post release support after the LoD expansion that the sky was the limit, yet they were derailed by their pesky other projects like Starcraft and WoW. Whereas Angband eventually garnered the likes of Quickband, something like Sil, and currently a Minimalband sifting things out----I'm not aware offhand of any "streamlining" or reductionist stuff for D2 or D1.
Based on what I've seen, Blizzard has either outright cut much in the way of variety, like the shrines and quest rewards for instance, or structured things in such a way as the bulk of the payoff and decision making is rather backloaded. Given the RMA scheme, one can't help but reckon this is rather intentional to keep people playing, as the longer somebody plays to get to a groove of satisfaction the more likely they will at least "sample" the auction house and potentially get hooked as the potential revenue stream for it astounding considering the current sales figures that put it in the neighborhood of already 6 million+.
Given the massive dev period, and general literacy capabilities, Blizzard obviously had a pulse on the community clamor for all of these years and yet chose this model to adopt...perhaps with ample "suggestion" from the Activision side of things.
-
Like it if you want, but don't label others elitist for picking out obvious flaws.
We have to divide between two things:
1. Game mechanics of the typical Hack and Slash genre, as defined by the 1st Diablo
2. Diablo 3 as latest member of this genre
What I wanted to say is that sometimes it is a feeling (just a feeling, unbound to any specific person) that the RL scene tends to behave a little elitist in regard to 1. Not necessarily here, but also in the many "Is Diablo a rl?" threads in the past, in the newsgroups. It usually pointed out tha the Hack and Slash genre once was influenced by roguelikes, but has sacrificed complexity for commercial success.
My impression is simply that some rl people don't like it, if games clearly influenced by roguelikes, but with less complexity are commercially more successful than true rls with lots of complexity. See also the discussions on Dungeons of Dredmor.
That Diablo 3 has its own flaws and may be even shallow within its own genre is another question and may well be true :)
-
Yeah, I agree there are elitist dicks that seem to want to be as exclusive as possible. But thankfully I think there are more voices around these days to defend the likes of Torchlight or Dungeons of Dredmor (not that either game is perfect, but they're both better than many popular traditional roguelikes).
-
Yeah, I agree there are elitist dicks that seem to want to be as exclusive as possible. But thankfully I think there are more voices around these days to defend the likes of Torchlight or Dungeons of Dredmor (not that either game is perfect, but they're both better than many popular traditional roguelikes).
Agreed :)