/thread. Like holy shit go play action games or some shit if you just want to smash things.
Nope. Character creation is love, character creation is life. Besides, he's being coy, what they wanted was to attract people who don't like RPGs and ADHD kids, which they did.
>do you agree with a man describing what he wanted some time ago
Frick no op, i disagree, he wanted a strawberry milkshake and not that made up shit
Nope. Character creation is love, character creation is life. Besides, he's being coy, what they wanted was to attract people who don't like RPGs and ADHD kids, which they did.
They intentionally went for addictive game mechanics.
D1 was first game with exaggerated emphasis on loot hoarding. Building character through stats is less important than doing builds with loot, and to get the right loot you had to grind and keep replaying the game ad infinitum.
>Building character through stats is less important
You know you can go play diablo right now instead of making shit up about it right?
Its not like its some super obscure title where you wouldn't get caught if you made shit up about it
What’s incorrect about what he said? The game relies more upon collecting rare loot with a low probability to drop than it does on planning out your characters stats and abilities. There’s no skills or feats, only four simple stats, and they’re basically just to meet gear prerequisities.
Have you played Diablo 1? Would you care to explain how the deep character building system is actually more important than grinding for gear? I’ll give you a godly plate of the whale and a kings sword of haste if you can.
>The game relies more upon collecting rare loot with a low probability to drop than it does on planning out your characters stats and abilities
You can't even equip that "rare loot" if you don't have the stats for it. Stats are how classes are differentiated. Diablo 1 isn't the same as Diablo 2. >Have you played Diablo 1
You clearly haven't.
6 months ago
Anonymous
>You can't even equip that "rare loot" if you don't have the stats for it.
Did you miss where I said >only four simple stats, and they’re basically just to meet gear prerequisities. >You clearly haven't [played Diablo 1]
Did you miss where I said >I’ll give you a godly plate of the whale and a kings sword of haste if you can
Bro, I was playing D1 on Battle.net in 1997. Were you even alive then? To trade items you had to go stand apart in town and each person drop their item and then both people would walk over and pick it up. Except people had cheats so they could cast spells in town so they could use telekinesis to steal your shit, or they could just cast firewall where players joined the game so they'd die instantly before they finished loading in.
What the frick is with people on this board who, upon someone disagreeing with them about a video game, immediately jump to "you're lying and you never even played the game you're talking about"
6 months ago
Anonymous
>What the frick is with people on this board who, upon someone disagreeing with them about a video game, immediately jump to "you're lying and you never even played the game you're talking about"
it isn't just this board or even just video games, it's a secondary/midwit thing. they project that everyone else is getting their opinions from youtubers/articles because they are. they do it with everything.
6 months ago
Anonymous
>You can't even equip that "rare loot" if you don't have the stats for it. Stats are how classes are differentiated.
D1 has very simple stat mechanics. Each class gets his own primary stats, the rest of them are secondary. There are no incentives to upgrade your stats in a different way. It's loot that is main character builder, get something nice, build your stats so you can equip it.
>You can't even equip that "rare loot" if you don't have the stats for it.
Did you miss where I said >only four simple stats, and they’re basically just to meet gear prerequisities. >You clearly haven't [played Diablo 1]
Did you miss where I said >I’ll give you a godly plate of the whale and a kings sword of haste if you can
Bro, I was playing D1 on Battle.net in 1997. Were you even alive then? To trade items you had to go stand apart in town and each person drop their item and then both people would walk over and pick it up. Except people had cheats so they could cast spells in town so they could use telekinesis to steal your shit, or they could just cast firewall where players joined the game so they'd die instantly before they finished loading in.
What the frick is with people on this board who, upon someone disagreeing with them about a video game, immediately jump to "you're lying and you never even played the game you're talking about"
>What the frick is with people on this board who, upon someone disagreeing with them about a video game, immediately jump to "you're lying and you never even played the game you're talking about"
There's plenty of pent up and frustrated individuals across all boards. Problem are those that can't articulate themselves properly, so they only lash back with insults. I wouldn't put them all into zoomer/kids territory, there's plenty of boomers as well that have fried their brains with drugs and alco.
6 months ago
Anonymous
>There are no incentives to upgrade your stats in a different way
what the frick do you mean by "different way"
You don't pump up strength exclusively as a warrior and you put points in intelligence as a rogue to cast some rudimentary spells.
Class also determines your maximum stats so you can't just make your wizard into a warrior by pumping up stats to "equip loot"
6 months ago
Anonymous
Your play style is determined by your class, yes. Warrior will always be best in melee, rogue always best in ranger, sorc best at casting due to their hardcoded attack/cast rates. No one is arguing that a warrior can be a great spellcaster by equipping sorc gear. What is being argued is that Diablo pioneered the modern trend of grinding for increasingly powerful generic random loot with low drop rates. Gambling mechanics. Even had that butthole Wirt “pay me 50 gold just to see what I have for sale”. For a given character class, your “build” is far more determined by gear rather than your stat allocation, which is simplistic and essentially fixed for a given class.
6 months ago
Anonymous
>diablo pioneered something that has been standard for RPGs since wizardry
this is why theres no point in arguing with zoomers
6 months ago
Anonymous
>thinks zoomers played Diablo 1 >cannot compute the difference between a traditional RPG with detailed character building mechanics and an ARPG with simplified character building mechanics, which instead incorporated gambling mechanics and equipment-based builds
6 months ago
Anonymous
zoomers played Diablo 1
I don't
Can you zoomers not even read anymore?
6 months ago
Anonymous
>I don't
Then why would you respond to someone discussing a game zoomers didn’t play with “lol zoomers”, jackass? You’re not even contributing to the conversation, you’re just being an argumentative homosexual for the sake of being a homosexual.
6 months ago
Anonymous
You know those read numbers that appear on your post?
You can click on them to learn what conversation is happening instead of zooming out.
6 months ago
Anonymous
The point everyone is arguing, and the one that your thick skull is incapable of comprehending, is that D1 differs from traditional RPGS primarily in how characters progresses through the game. In traditional games loot drops play a minor role. They're predetermined, aren't present at all with merchants taking their spot, but mainly, are of secondary nature. Diablo is the reverse of that, loot is of major importance, whole builds are determined by what drops. PVP battles are less about skill and a lot more about who has better equipment. Farming is present, and is even vital requirement for completing the game on highest difficulties. This goes more about D2 and subsequent games, but it did start with D1.
A friend of mine would build his Warrior around Butcher's Axe, and would simply quit the game and start again if his quest wouldn't roll. There's knockback bow build for Rogue, and if you were playing highest difficulties, you either cheated, or had to use one of few builds per character that required autistically precise loot combos. Acquiring it was not achievable in a single playthrough. Trading was present, but it was more or less just trading with a cheater. Still better than what they have now, where it's all about real world cash, but it's hard to deny that predatory game mechanics were present in D1 from the get go. Also, now that I think about it, it's mechanics of resetting traders stock, may be the first case of gambling roulette in gaming. But I'd really put that one into inadvertent segment.
Yeah, instead of prescribing kids meth-lite(Adderall), having a lot of energy and not wanting to sit in a boring classroom, was called being a child. Maybe a "sugar high" for those who had no idea what a real drug is like.
Sometimes I'm in the mood for that, sometimes I'm in the mood for a friend/life simulator aka RPG.
I'm never not in the mood for builds in either case so when they dumb that down is when I actually get annoyed.
I'd play the shit out of a Diablo MMO for example of where I could have a backstory etc.
Partial agree.
A good role-playing game shouldn't depend solely on a length character creation phase which may or may not have any impact on the game for its role-playing aspect.
A good RPG would see the player get into the game quickly and start making gameplay decisions immediately which start to shape their character in their own way, which is far more meaningful than forcing the player to sit down for 30-60 mins thinking about every detail of their character, when they could simply be playing those details.
Unfortunately, Blizzard aren't really capable of doing something like that since their games have historically been built atop fake progression/fake roleplaying foundations that aren't designed to be truly fun or engaging, but rather predatory and dopamine feeding.
Obviously it's the correct course in Diablo. If the player is to spend time creating a character, it better have meaningful impact on the playthrough.
Skyrim approach is the best, where you can build your character on the go, make choices based on experience inside the game, and change course as you please.
>Skyrim approach is the best, where you can build your character on the go, make choices based on experience inside the game, and change course as you please.
In Skyrim you can easily make a character who is good at everything, which goes against the entire point of an RPG.
>Skyrim approach is the best, where you can build your character on the go, make choices based on experience inside the game, and change course as you please.
Characters should not be blank slates right from the start in an RPG because you end up running into the issue of your character either being incredibly incompetent or hyper-competent (like in the case of Skyrim) right from the get go. It fails to represent your character's background and what sort of strengths and weaknesses they might possess as a result.
>Characters should not be blank slates right from the start in an RPG
Unlike your tabletroony shit even skyrim has racial stats and abilities.
Now scoot off on your adventurer wheelchair with your super special tiefling that can do everything
>Unlike your tabletroony shit even skyrim has racial stats and abilities.
Why does 5e live rent free in your head? I'm not even talking about D&Dogshit. Furthermore, racials are just a skeleton, they aren't what defines your character. SHITrim took the concept literally however, and all character building choices at the beginning of the game start and end with choice of race. >with your super special tiefling that can do everything >while defending Skyrim of all games
You have no self-awareness.
>Why does 5e live rent free in your head
Why are you pretending as if your flavor of tabletroony shit is any different?
Theres a reason why you mongoloids infest video game boards instead of festering in your tabletroony ones.
>Why are you pretending as if your flavor of tabletroony shit is any different?
Because >Now scoot off on your adventurer wheelchair with your super special tiefling that can do everything
Is referring specifically to the system Dungeons & Dragons: 5th Edition, you disingenuous homosexual.
6 months ago
Anonymous
have a nice day wienermunching homosexual
6 months ago
Anonymous
I'm talking about video game RPGs. You? Can't shut the frick up about D&D.
6 months ago
Anonymous
>I'm talking about video game RPGs
Are you going to pretend that gayfinder games aren't absolutely pozzed beyond belief?
6 months ago
Anonymous
I don't see how that's relevant or pertains to the discussion at all because I'm talking about video game RPGs as a whole BEFORE Skyrim came out, Skyrim troony. Even Oblivion had an actual proper character creation system.
6 months ago
Anonymous
>I don't see how that's relevant
Well yeah, you're a moronic tabletroony.
6 months ago
Anonymous
I'm probably far less dysgenic than you, on account of not being a twiggy homosexual with intestinal parasites kek.
It's a good approach for an ARPG that just wants to toss you into the action ASAP. Blizzard North also did a phenomenal job making the game as user friendly and casual as possible. Go play Diablo, then go play any other RPG released in 1996 or earlier, it's immediately obvious how much more intuitive it is to operate.
Although in fairness, this may be because it resembles modern games purely by virtue of having been influential and spawning many imitators.
Depends entirely on the game but imo character building should take place over the course of the game rather than having a stupidly huge list of every possible thing at the start that you pick from like that one pathfinder game
I'm trans so i hate games that don't let me pick gender and backstory because otherwise i can't make my female self insert and give her a backstory that reflects my fetish like gangraped by orcs or magic trans potions and stuff.
Blizzard always did gameplay better than story, with minor exceptions like WC3.
So yes. Going for gameplay without the bullshit was a based idea. They had since tried to force their shit story & 'cinematic gameplay' to matter and it always backfired because it was always terrible. >tfw decard cain dies to a literal who filler boss in diablo 3 after surviving falling like 30 floors down into new tristram catacombs
I'm still mad about that >Leah literally saw demons, undead and other shit ransacking her town >"Nah bruh its just uncle's fairy tales lol"
>character creation is gameplay
It would be in good games, but blizzard was never strong at balance, build variety or world reactivity, so their games would always work best with a pre-defined character that's a part of their setting and isn't inherently tied to player's expectations.
A great example of this failing was cyberpunk where the game offered you a choice of appearance / background, but it didn't matter at all in the game and just felt like a waste of time, because the on-rails story just gave you some filler dialogue lines that did fricking nothing, and that's all there was to acknowledging your character creation, or whether you picked penis 1 or penis 2.
>>tfw decard cain dies to a literal who filler boss in diablo 3 after surviving falling like 30 floors down into new tristram catacombs >I'm still mad about that
Wasn't just a literal who it was a rainbow butterfly troony don't forget, because the gamedevs were mad about le chuds who didn't want Diablo the game about literal hell on earth to be full of disneyfied bullshit so the patriarchy symbolically had to be killed this way as their little statement.
This was a package set of changes along with grrrl Diablo, rainbow cow zone, and rainbow Diablo tshirts against a backdrop of Anita Sarkeesian yelling about tropes at the time and gamergate going on in the background.
Turns out they all got let go and D4 cranked the gore and realism up double so they were on the wrong side of history in that regard.
I'm not just still mad, you'll still never convince me all of the above isn't true exactly for the reasons as I have outlined them.
I believe the lore states that like 80% of humanity was wiped out during the events of D2. So like, a worldwide war that affected every single culture on the planet war carried out. So literally what institution is telling her demons aren't real? There would be no higher learning system that denied it. There would be no atheists. And then only on top of this layer of stupidity do you go, "And oh ya she literally watched it happen." Most moronic story line I've ever seen.
The other acts weren't any better. "The price has been acting strange as of late. But we must find the demon of deception first!" Ya, it's the prince. The prince is the demon. 4 hours later "HAHA I The Prince, AM THE DEMON." Ya we know.
Then the final act - "You may have stopped my dastardly plans but you won't stop my next plan that I will outline now!" "Ok you stopped that plan as well, but you won't stop my NEXT plan muahahahaha."
And then all that homosexuals come out and say "Hey buy blizzard fixed a lot of the issues, give credit where it's due."
Didn't add pvp. Didn't add in any reason for multiplayer to even exist, let alone justify making it always online. Can't make a game for others to select like in d2 so you actually find people similar interests and goals. No need to trade with anyone, the auction house will always have better gear for free basically. Until like, very late end game. But again why play at all, you're totally alone. Frick that game and the people who enjoy it.
>diablo 3
I couldn't get into it
for some reason they gave Leoric the Mordekaiser treatment or whatever you wanna call this
the most interesting part of D3 is the development hell
?t=1139
Here's a question: why did nearly all the ex Diablo guys' games suck ass? Only Torchlight 1 and 2 were above average.
I don't like games that make me spend way too much time in character creation, reading about bunch of potential options and combinations from which you'll pick one of three best builds anyway.
I prefer hands-on approach to character building - give me blank state/bare bone character and let me actually collect resources and mold my character's skillset during gameplay. Early DnD, Roguelikes and even damn most of JRPGs got it right. Let me start as a shiter with a dagger, cloack and sack of gold in hostile environment and frick off.
He is right in the sense that there was a market for a less RP and more action based game play while still keeping the aspect of a progressively evolving character.
Hence why it became a different genre altogether. Not like this needs to be some ARPG vs CRPG argument.
hes just talking about sandbox design
a sandbox type game doesn't stop you from creating classes
>Do you agree
no because if you really have to babysit someone then Gothic 1 did it better where classes are based on factions that you encounter in the game and can join later
in the beginning you are classless (no faction)
on the other hand it makes the game way harder if it's sandbox garbage like Outward and you are left to fend for yourself but I don't think any dev would want to make a sandbox ARPG
He just wanted to showcase the actual gameplay and since Character Creation is in the "way" he just simply removed it in favor of pre-established classes
In a sense, CharGen is/was meaningless in the face of just picking a class you want to play
He made a game that was so popular that people copied it for years and moronic C(ope)RPG players are still trying to defend RTWP because of it
He was right and thats what hurts tabletrannies the most.
How many of them actually made crucial decisions in Diablo. How many of them even really understood why Diablo was good. Diablo would have probably sucked ass except during development they decided to make combat real time instead of turn based and the lead dev openly opposed this decision. It's also hard to actually execute a good idea even if you have one. Money. Logistics.
Most '' diablo clones '' like Hellgate attempted to combine too many things (mmo / third person / first person / shooter / ARPG / always online before fast internet was widespread / randomly generated but high fidelity shooter levels)
Diablo was simple. Top down, click them until they die, use some skills that did damage in funky patterns.
All diablo clones attempt to re-invent the wheel and the square wheel they replace the original wheel with are mostly shit, while games that stick to the basics (Path of Exile, Torchling, Titan Quest that Van Hellsing game) are generally at least playable
At a certain point a good percent of players started caring more about the “end game” instead of the game. And having fun. These people are in hell now. Running a hamster wheel that never ends and every single one of them hates.
Watching Asmongold is funny. He’s so possessed with hateread but every time he acts like he’s open minded and ready to play a new great game. By week 3 hes gone from optimist, to supporter, defender, to attacker, to the main critic of the game. And all his fallowed wallow in hateread. But they don’t stop. They never stop. They don’t just play good games, and if the game doesn’t exist, they don’t go outside. They keep grinding that gear. Playing that great end game.
>They keep grinding that gear. Playing that great end game.
Even back when Diablo 2 was new, this was pretty funny. In D1, the cow level was just a meme/battle.net urban legend. Then they add it to D2 as a joke, but it ended up all people did was just run the fricking cow level slaying hell bovines then quitting without killing the cow boss so they could do it again. Then, when the expansion pack came out, everyone moved on to just running the very last level of act 5 over and over again. No one even played the rest of the game, except as a pretext to get a new character to the point where they could grind. I thought it was insane, even as a high schooler.
Kinda. One of the biggest turnoffs to playing Morrowind is spending an hour and a half having to alt+tab out and look up guides and wikis trying to understand which of these dozens of skills is really important because I can softlock my game by fricking up at character creation.
Agree. I wanted to boot up a new game last night but kept dreading how every game (mostly rpgs) had 2 hours of character creation and 10 hours of prologue so i just ended up farting around on a multi player game
It's not just him making that point and it's not just about video games. There are a lot of people who prefer the simpler character generation of games like Basic D&D to its more modern counterparts.
Sometimes you want to play a game where you need to make a spreadsheet and plan every characters progression from 1 to level cap before you can start playing, and sometimes you don’t
I think there is a sweet spot between going into action and staying in the character creator for 6 hours. Is there any game that lets you define your character's story and details WHILE you play in small bits?
Ya, and Elder Scrolls game. Spend 5 minutes in character creator. Write head canon myself. Play the game as my head canon character would. Role play.
I haven’t actually played DND but the more I learn of it the gayer it sounds in terms of translating to a video game. Can see more clearly why so many rpgs suck, they all have that vile influence.
>Do you agree with the creator of Diablo?
Agree with his assertion that that was what he aimed to do? He's not (directly) saying one style is better than the other. There's room for both. Complexity isn't bad and simplicity isn't bad.
He did a good job though, Diablo's simplicity is one of its great strengths.
very few people on the team of Diablo did a good job at fricking anything when there was a major argument about whether the game should be turn based. the crowd even laughed when one of them frickers said on stage at a panel "damn this is awesome" upon first playing the first real time iteration after fighting to stop the shift and being voted against by the whole team.
the entire IP has consist of "how do we frick up the game massively" and due to how subversion and innovation works they were correct to do so for D1 and 2 but as time went on it turned out that fricking up on purpose for no reason is not how you continue to make good things. the entire shitshow of D3 is the evidence that constantly pushing for mentally deficient removal of core features like a wife who decides she doesnt like the "feng shui" of the living room every 4 months is exactly how you reveal you dont know how to make a frickin game and never did even when one of your projects turns out successful
>the entire IP has consist of "how do we frick up the game massively" and due to how subversion and innovation works they were correct to do so for D1 and 2 but as time went on it turned out that fricking up on purpose for no reason is not how you continue to make good things. the entire shitshow of D3 is the evidence that constantly pushing for mentally deficient removal of core features like a wife who decides she doesnt like the "feng shui" of the living room every 4 months is exactly how you reveal you dont know how to make a frickin game and never did even when one of your projects turns out successful
The teams that made Diablo 1 and 2, and Diablo 3, were basically completely separate. Diablo devs left Blizzard to make Torchlight, Diablo 3 and onward was made by the WoW trannies.
which is why i brought up the example of the foundation for the original being so contentious. The team on the series have always tried to push boundaries and from 2 onwards they even thought so far as to push some of the cargo off the ship to "make it more spacious" when alot of the shit they pushed off was the shipment everybody was expecting.
then when the frickin ship arrived at port and everyone was asking where the frick the good stuff went they said "yeah we just thought nobody would want any of that boring stuff"
>They keep grinding that gear. Playing that great end game.
Even back when Diablo 2 was new, this was pretty funny. In D1, the cow level was just a meme/battle.net urban legend. Then they add it to D2 as a joke, but it ended up all people did was just run the fricking cow level slaying hell bovines then quitting without killing the cow boss so they could do it again. Then, when the expansion pack came out, everyone moved on to just running the very last level of act 5 over and over again. No one even played the rest of the game, except as a pretext to get a new character to the point where they could grind. I thought it was insane, even as a high schooler.
i completely see why devs decide "nah get fricked" and leave companies when they work to try and stay sane and keep the vision of the project, and then both their colleagues and the players fall into the pit of just listening to each other and the thing turns to shit because its designed by commitee.
The walking issue is actually a great example. They did not want real time combat. They fought against it. That’s how I feel about the entire genre. It’s stuck in the past. It’s stuck in that turn play mentality. They should entirely abandon the isometric view imo. Let the series evolve into something else. It’s why nobody really cares about the series. Or they play for a week and quit. Let some hardcore company make some autistic isometric aarpg and let Diablo move forward. But they won’t. They will continue on with that same mentality they had in d1 that they accidentally overcame. They could have gone two paths after D2, a WOW mmo route or an Elder Scrolls route or maybe something in between. But they chose to stay exactly the same and instead only add predatory systems and remove the few good remaining systems like encouraging any aspect of player interaction.
>The teams that made Diablo 1 and 2, and Diablo 3, were basically completely separate. Diablo devs left Blizzard to make Torchlight, Diablo 3 and onward was made by the WoW trannies.
It took me a while to swallow this pill, but yeah. Just because it's being made under the same company name, it doesn't mean it's the same people working on it. The team can be completely different, dishonestly banking on the goodwill and reputation of their forebears. When people expect a series to still be good because they recognize the studio name, it's inevitably going to lead to disappointment.
Diablo 2 really was the first instance of "this game is called an RPG and I like it so I like RPGs", Oblivion being the next. Really ruined RPG design discussion by bringing in outsiders.
It all depends on what you are trying to do with the game. Being able to remove things that do not help your vision is equally important as adding things. If Diablo had a bunch of character creation stuff it it wouldn't have been such a big hit among people who just wants to smash things and even for RPG enthusiasts it would have just given false expectations and frustrations when the rest of the game didn't live up to what the intro falsely promised them. Simple things executed well are better than complex things executed poorly.
It’s definitely slower paced than any modern ARPG. It was fun when it came out, I haven’t played it in decades though. I’ve played Diablo 2 recently and it’s still
fun, though repetitive.
You might enjoy it, or you might be spoiled by playing newer games that copied its formula and added to it (for better or for worse).
I like it. Give it a try. It was updated recently with full multiplayer quest support which adds some pretty neat content if you are to play it with friends. Still good at single player. Nothing respawns so you cannot grind.
What's /vrpg/'s take on mods for D2 anyhow? I generally feel like they succeeded much more at keeping what made D2 successful than Blizz's abortive attempts at milking the franchise.
he's 100% right, backed by the success of diablo 1 and 2. dialogue trees, avatar creation, and romance are gigantic waste of time and don't contribute to gameplay
Not entirely.
His take is moronic, he comes across as if he disliked the roleplaying part of Role-Playing Games.
An RPG doesn't NEED to dump 50 hours of characterization and maake you adjust 2000 parameters from the get go though. It can and should be fleshed out along the way as you play through the game.
"Man, I just really hate all this roleplaying shit in RPGs!"
What a stupid fricking take.
>captcha: HMGAY
/thread. Like holy shit go play action games or some shit if you just want to smash things.
>"Man, I just really hate all this roleplaying shit in RPGs!"
BASED
fpbp
Diabe-girlkes would need to go out of their way to become RPGs
Nope. Character creation is love, character creation is life. Besides, he's being coy, what they wanted was to attract people who don't like RPGs and ADHD kids, which they did.
Nobody believed ADD (as it was known at the time) was real back when Diablo was released, zoomer.
They intentionally went for addictive game mechanics.
D1 was first game with exaggerated emphasis on loot hoarding. Building character through stats is less important than doing builds with loot, and to get the right loot you had to grind and keep replaying the game ad infinitum.
>Building character through stats is less important
You know you can go play diablo right now instead of making shit up about it right?
Its not like its some super obscure title where you wouldn't get caught if you made shit up about it
What’s incorrect about what he said? The game relies more upon collecting rare loot with a low probability to drop than it does on planning out your characters stats and abilities. There’s no skills or feats, only four simple stats, and they’re basically just to meet gear prerequisities.
Have you played Diablo 1? Would you care to explain how the deep character building system is actually more important than grinding for gear? I’ll give you a godly plate of the whale and a kings sword of haste if you can.
>The game relies more upon collecting rare loot with a low probability to drop than it does on planning out your characters stats and abilities
You can't even equip that "rare loot" if you don't have the stats for it. Stats are how classes are differentiated. Diablo 1 isn't the same as Diablo 2.
>Have you played Diablo 1
You clearly haven't.
>You can't even equip that "rare loot" if you don't have the stats for it.
Did you miss where I said
>only four simple stats, and they’re basically just to meet gear prerequisities.
>You clearly haven't [played Diablo 1]
Did you miss where I said
>I’ll give you a godly plate of the whale and a kings sword of haste if you can
Bro, I was playing D1 on Battle.net in 1997. Were you even alive then? To trade items you had to go stand apart in town and each person drop their item and then both people would walk over and pick it up. Except people had cheats so they could cast spells in town so they could use telekinesis to steal your shit, or they could just cast firewall where players joined the game so they'd die instantly before they finished loading in.
What the frick is with people on this board who, upon someone disagreeing with them about a video game, immediately jump to "you're lying and you never even played the game you're talking about"
>What the frick is with people on this board who, upon someone disagreeing with them about a video game, immediately jump to "you're lying and you never even played the game you're talking about"
it isn't just this board or even just video games, it's a secondary/midwit thing. they project that everyone else is getting their opinions from youtubers/articles because they are. they do it with everything.
>You can't even equip that "rare loot" if you don't have the stats for it. Stats are how classes are differentiated.
D1 has very simple stat mechanics. Each class gets his own primary stats, the rest of them are secondary. There are no incentives to upgrade your stats in a different way. It's loot that is main character builder, get something nice, build your stats so you can equip it.
>What the frick is with people on this board who, upon someone disagreeing with them about a video game, immediately jump to "you're lying and you never even played the game you're talking about"
There's plenty of pent up and frustrated individuals across all boards. Problem are those that can't articulate themselves properly, so they only lash back with insults. I wouldn't put them all into zoomer/kids territory, there's plenty of boomers as well that have fried their brains with drugs and alco.
>There are no incentives to upgrade your stats in a different way
what the frick do you mean by "different way"
You don't pump up strength exclusively as a warrior and you put points in intelligence as a rogue to cast some rudimentary spells.
Class also determines your maximum stats so you can't just make your wizard into a warrior by pumping up stats to "equip loot"
Your play style is determined by your class, yes. Warrior will always be best in melee, rogue always best in ranger, sorc best at casting due to their hardcoded attack/cast rates. No one is arguing that a warrior can be a great spellcaster by equipping sorc gear. What is being argued is that Diablo pioneered the modern trend of grinding for increasingly powerful generic random loot with low drop rates. Gambling mechanics. Even had that butthole Wirt “pay me 50 gold just to see what I have for sale”. For a given character class, your “build” is far more determined by gear rather than your stat allocation, which is simplistic and essentially fixed for a given class.
>diablo pioneered something that has been standard for RPGs since wizardry
this is why theres no point in arguing with zoomers
>thinks zoomers played Diablo 1
>cannot compute the difference between a traditional RPG with detailed character building mechanics and an ARPG with simplified character building mechanics, which instead incorporated gambling mechanics and equipment-based builds
zoomers played Diablo 1
I don't
Can you zoomers not even read anymore?
>I don't
Then why would you respond to someone discussing a game zoomers didn’t play with “lol zoomers”, jackass? You’re not even contributing to the conversation, you’re just being an argumentative homosexual for the sake of being a homosexual.
You know those read numbers that appear on your post?
You can click on them to learn what conversation is happening instead of zooming out.
The point everyone is arguing, and the one that your thick skull is incapable of comprehending, is that D1 differs from traditional RPGS primarily in how characters progresses through the game. In traditional games loot drops play a minor role. They're predetermined, aren't present at all with merchants taking their spot, but mainly, are of secondary nature. Diablo is the reverse of that, loot is of major importance, whole builds are determined by what drops. PVP battles are less about skill and a lot more about who has better equipment. Farming is present, and is even vital requirement for completing the game on highest difficulties. This goes more about D2 and subsequent games, but it did start with D1.
A friend of mine would build his Warrior around Butcher's Axe, and would simply quit the game and start again if his quest wouldn't roll. There's knockback bow build for Rogue, and if you were playing highest difficulties, you either cheated, or had to use one of few builds per character that required autistically precise loot combos. Acquiring it was not achievable in a single playthrough. Trading was present, but it was more or less just trading with a cheater. Still better than what they have now, where it's all about real world cash, but it's hard to deny that predatory game mechanics were present in D1 from the get go. Also, now that I think about it, it's mechanics of resetting traders stock, may be the first case of gambling roulette in gaming. But I'd really put that one into inadvertent segment.
Yeah, instead of prescribing kids meth-lite(Adderall), having a lot of energy and not wanting to sit in a boring classroom, was called being a child. Maybe a "sugar high" for those who had no idea what a real drug is like.
Sometimes I'm in the mood for that, sometimes I'm in the mood for a friend/life simulator aka RPG.
I'm never not in the mood for builds in either case so when they dumb that down is when I actually get annoyed.
I'd play the shit out of a Diablo MMO for example of where I could have a backstory etc.
WoW was the Diablo MMO. It just had a warcraft skin. Absolutely everything about it but appearance was Diablo and not Warcraft.
nothing about it was diablo
its closer to one those warcraft 3 hero campaigns than anything diablo related
Partial agree.
A good role-playing game shouldn't depend solely on a length character creation phase which may or may not have any impact on the game for its role-playing aspect.
A good RPG would see the player get into the game quickly and start making gameplay decisions immediately which start to shape their character in their own way, which is far more meaningful than forcing the player to sit down for 30-60 mins thinking about every detail of their character, when they could simply be playing those details.
Unfortunately, Blizzard aren't really capable of doing something like that since their games have historically been built atop fake progression/fake roleplaying foundations that aren't designed to be truly fun or engaging, but rather predatory and dopamine feeding.
Obviously it's the correct course in Diablo. If the player is to spend time creating a character, it better have meaningful impact on the playthrough.
Skyrim approach is the best, where you can build your character on the go, make choices based on experience inside the game, and change course as you please.
>Skyrim approach is the best, where you can build your character on the go, make choices based on experience inside the game, and change course as you please.
In Skyrim you can easily make a character who is good at everything, which goes against the entire point of an RPG.
>Skyrim approach is the best, where you can build your character on the go, make choices based on experience inside the game, and change course as you please.
Characters should not be blank slates right from the start in an RPG because you end up running into the issue of your character either being incredibly incompetent or hyper-competent (like in the case of Skyrim) right from the get go. It fails to represent your character's background and what sort of strengths and weaknesses they might possess as a result.
if the game does not start your character as a fertilized egg it's not a real rpg
>Characters should not be blank slates right from the start in an RPG
Unlike your tabletroony shit even skyrim has racial stats and abilities.
Now scoot off on your adventurer wheelchair with your super special tiefling that can do everything
>Unlike your tabletroony shit even skyrim has racial stats and abilities.
Why does 5e live rent free in your head? I'm not even talking about D&Dogshit. Furthermore, racials are just a skeleton, they aren't what defines your character. SHITrim took the concept literally however, and all character building choices at the beginning of the game start and end with choice of race.
>with your super special tiefling that can do everything
>while defending Skyrim of all games
You have no self-awareness.
>Why does 5e live rent free in your head
Why are you pretending as if your flavor of tabletroony shit is any different?
Theres a reason why you mongoloids infest video game boards instead of festering in your tabletroony ones.
>Why are you pretending as if your flavor of tabletroony shit is any different?
Because
>Now scoot off on your adventurer wheelchair with your super special tiefling that can do everything
Is referring specifically to the system Dungeons & Dragons: 5th Edition, you disingenuous homosexual.
have a nice day wienermunching homosexual
I'm talking about video game RPGs. You? Can't shut the frick up about D&D.
>I'm talking about video game RPGs
Are you going to pretend that gayfinder games aren't absolutely pozzed beyond belief?
I don't see how that's relevant or pertains to the discussion at all because I'm talking about video game RPGs as a whole BEFORE Skyrim came out, Skyrim troony. Even Oblivion had an actual proper character creation system.
>I don't see how that's relevant
Well yeah, you're a moronic tabletroony.
I'm probably far less dysgenic than you, on account of not being a twiggy homosexual with intestinal parasites kek.
It's a good approach for an ARPG that just wants to toss you into the action ASAP. Blizzard North also did a phenomenal job making the game as user friendly and casual as possible. Go play Diablo, then go play any other RPG released in 1996 or earlier, it's immediately obvious how much more intuitive it is to operate.
Although in fairness, this may be because it resembles modern games purely by virtue of having been influential and spawning many imitators.
Depends entirely on the game but imo character building should take place over the course of the game rather than having a stupidly huge list of every possible thing at the start that you pick from like that one pathfinder game
I'm trans so i hate games that don't let me pick gender and backstory because otherwise i can't make my female self insert and give her a backstory that reflects my fetish like gangraped by orcs or magic trans potions and stuff.
Blizzard always did gameplay better than story, with minor exceptions like WC3.
So yes. Going for gameplay without the bullshit was a based idea. They had since tried to force their shit story & 'cinematic gameplay' to matter and it always backfired because it was always terrible.
>tfw decard cain dies to a literal who filler boss in diablo 3 after surviving falling like 30 floors down into new tristram catacombs
I'm still mad about that
>Leah literally saw demons, undead and other shit ransacking her town
>"Nah bruh its just uncle's fairy tales lol"
>Going for gameplay without the bullshit was a based idea
i'm confused by what you mean by this, character creation is gameplay
>character creation is gameplay
It would be in good games, but blizzard was never strong at balance, build variety or world reactivity, so their games would always work best with a pre-defined character that's a part of their setting and isn't inherently tied to player's expectations.
A great example of this failing was cyberpunk where the game offered you a choice of appearance / background, but it didn't matter at all in the game and just felt like a waste of time, because the on-rails story just gave you some filler dialogue lines that did fricking nothing, and that's all there was to acknowledging your character creation, or whether you picked penis 1 or penis 2.
>>tfw decard cain dies to a literal who filler boss in diablo 3 after surviving falling like 30 floors down into new tristram catacombs
>I'm still mad about that
Wasn't just a literal who it was a rainbow butterfly troony don't forget, because the gamedevs were mad about le chuds who didn't want Diablo the game about literal hell on earth to be full of disneyfied bullshit so the patriarchy symbolically had to be killed this way as their little statement.
This was a package set of changes along with grrrl Diablo, rainbow cow zone, and rainbow Diablo tshirts against a backdrop of Anita Sarkeesian yelling about tropes at the time and gamergate going on in the background.
Turns out they all got let go and D4 cranked the gore and realism up double so they were on the wrong side of history in that regard.
I'm not just still mad, you'll still never convince me all of the above isn't true exactly for the reasons as I have outlined them.
I believe the lore states that like 80% of humanity was wiped out during the events of D2. So like, a worldwide war that affected every single culture on the planet war carried out. So literally what institution is telling her demons aren't real? There would be no higher learning system that denied it. There would be no atheists. And then only on top of this layer of stupidity do you go, "And oh ya she literally watched it happen." Most moronic story line I've ever seen.
The other acts weren't any better. "The price has been acting strange as of late. But we must find the demon of deception first!" Ya, it's the prince. The prince is the demon. 4 hours later "HAHA I The Prince, AM THE DEMON." Ya we know.
Then the final act - "You may have stopped my dastardly plans but you won't stop my next plan that I will outline now!" "Ok you stopped that plan as well, but you won't stop my NEXT plan muahahahaha."
And then all that homosexuals come out and say "Hey buy blizzard fixed a lot of the issues, give credit where it's due."
Didn't add pvp. Didn't add in any reason for multiplayer to even exist, let alone justify making it always online. Can't make a game for others to select like in d2 so you actually find people similar interests and goals. No need to trade with anyone, the auction house will always have better gear for free basically. Until like, very late end game. But again why play at all, you're totally alone. Frick that game and the people who enjoy it.
>diablo 3
I couldn't get into it
for some reason they gave Leoric the Mordekaiser treatment or whatever you wanna call this
the most interesting part of D3 is the development hell
?t=1139
>Only Torchlight 1 and 2
I remember Mythos
>I remember Mythos
Yeah only you remember it.
>do you agree with a man describing what he wanted some time ago
Frick no op, i disagree, he wanted a strawberry milkshake and not that made up shit
I don't like games that make me spend way too much time in character creation, reading about bunch of potential options and combinations from which you'll pick one of three best builds anyway.
I prefer hands-on approach to character building - give me blank state/bare bone character and let me actually collect resources and mold my character's skillset during gameplay. Early DnD, Roguelikes and even damn most of JRPGs got it right. Let me start as a shiter with a dagger, cloack and sack of gold in hostile environment and frick off.
He is right in the sense that there was a market for a less RP and more action based game play while still keeping the aspect of a progressively evolving character.
Hence why it became a different genre altogether. Not like this needs to be some ARPG vs CRPG argument.
Character creation, dialogue trees, etc all that shit is for trannies.
Simple character creation and plot-centered dialogue options (if any) are the best.
hes just talking about sandbox design
a sandbox type game doesn't stop you from creating classes
>Do you agree
no because if you really have to babysit someone then Gothic 1 did it better where classes are based on factions that you encounter in the game and can join later
in the beginning you are classless (no faction)
on the other hand it makes the game way harder if it's sandbox garbage like Outward and you are left to fend for yourself but I don't think any dev would want to make a sandbox ARPG
He just wanted to showcase the actual gameplay and since Character Creation is in the "way" he just simply removed it in favor of pre-established classes
In a sense, CharGen is/was meaningless in the face of just picking a class you want to play
No?
Also Diablo isn't an RPG.
He made a game that was so popular that people copied it for years and moronic C(ope)RPG players are still trying to defend RTWP because of it
He was right and thats what hurts tabletrannies the most.
Here's a question: why did nearly all the ex Diablo guys' games suck ass? Only Torchlight 1 and 2 were above average.
How many of them actually made crucial decisions in Diablo. How many of them even really understood why Diablo was good. Diablo would have probably sucked ass except during development they decided to make combat real time instead of turn based and the lead dev openly opposed this decision. It's also hard to actually execute a good idea even if you have one. Money. Logistics.
Most '' diablo clones '' like Hellgate attempted to combine too many things (mmo / third person / first person / shooter / ARPG / always online before fast internet was widespread / randomly generated but high fidelity shooter levels)
Diablo was simple. Top down, click them until they die, use some skills that did damage in funky patterns.
All diablo clones attempt to re-invent the wheel and the square wheel they replace the original wheel with are mostly shit, while games that stick to the basics (Path of Exile, Torchling, Titan Quest that Van Hellsing game) are generally at least playable
Path of Exile has long stopped being playable and its current playerbase is 100% made of mentally ill people stuck in the hamster wheel
Lmfao
At a certain point a good percent of players started caring more about the “end game” instead of the game. And having fun. These people are in hell now. Running a hamster wheel that never ends and every single one of them hates.
Watching Asmongold is funny. He’s so possessed with hateread but every time he acts like he’s open minded and ready to play a new great game. By week 3 hes gone from optimist, to supporter, defender, to attacker, to the main critic of the game. And all his fallowed wallow in hateread. But they don’t stop. They never stop. They don’t just play good games, and if the game doesn’t exist, they don’t go outside. They keep grinding that gear. Playing that great end game.
>They keep grinding that gear. Playing that great end game.
Even back when Diablo 2 was new, this was pretty funny. In D1, the cow level was just a meme/battle.net urban legend. Then they add it to D2 as a joke, but it ended up all people did was just run the fricking cow level slaying hell bovines then quitting without killing the cow boss so they could do it again. Then, when the expansion pack came out, everyone moved on to just running the very last level of act 5 over and over again. No one even played the rest of the game, except as a pretext to get a new character to the point where they could grind. I thought it was insane, even as a high schooler.
yeah, i stopped playing around bestiary or whatever it was. i pity those guys.
Kinda. One of the biggest turnoffs to playing Morrowind is spending an hour and a half having to alt+tab out and look up guides and wikis trying to understand which of these dozens of skills is really important because I can softlock my game by fricking up at character creation.
We need more 'pick-up-and-play' games. RPGs do not mix with that.
You have brain damage.
Agree. I wanted to boot up a new game last night but kept dreading how every game (mostly rpgs) had 2 hours of character creation and 10 hours of prologue so i just ended up farting around on a multi player game
Character creation is gameplay, storyhomosexualry is not. Trve RPGs are always slow-burn kinoludo.
Yes. Any time the player is not in control the devs have fricked up. Usually this refers to exposition being used in place of story.
Chimpanzees need games too
Sometimes, character creation and early parts of a game can be SUCH a drag. Other times it's the most fun part.
What game actually does give you a personality text before it gives you a class?
Yes yes pokemon, what else?
ultima 4 moronic zoomer
ESLs and underage ruin this site. 20-30yo chads are King.
SMT Strange Journey
Morrowind gives you the option to do that.
>no you don't understand you have to play a Black person paladin
>how can you play a paladin without being a Black person, it makes no sense anon
It's not just him making that point and it's not just about video games. There are a lot of people who prefer the simpler character generation of games like Basic D&D to its more modern counterparts.
Sometimes you want to play a game where you need to make a spreadsheet and plan every characters progression from 1 to level cap before you can start playing, and sometimes you don’t
I think there is a sweet spot between going into action and staying in the character creator for 6 hours. Is there any game that lets you define your character's story and details WHILE you play in small bits?
Ya, and Elder Scrolls game. Spend 5 minutes in character creator. Write head canon myself. Play the game as my head canon character would. Role play.
I haven’t actually played DND but the more I learn of it the gayer it sounds in terms of translating to a video game. Can see more clearly why so many rpgs suck, they all have that vile influence.
diablo is an enormous tragedy and should never have been made
>Do you agree with the creator of Diablo?
Agree with his assertion that that was what he aimed to do? He's not (directly) saying one style is better than the other. There's room for both. Complexity isn't bad and simplicity isn't bad.
He did a good job though, Diablo's simplicity is one of its great strengths.
very few people on the team of Diablo did a good job at fricking anything when there was a major argument about whether the game should be turn based. the crowd even laughed when one of them frickers said on stage at a panel "damn this is awesome" upon first playing the first real time iteration after fighting to stop the shift and being voted against by the whole team.
the entire IP has consist of "how do we frick up the game massively" and due to how subversion and innovation works they were correct to do so for D1 and 2 but as time went on it turned out that fricking up on purpose for no reason is not how you continue to make good things. the entire shitshow of D3 is the evidence that constantly pushing for mentally deficient removal of core features like a wife who decides she doesnt like the "feng shui" of the living room every 4 months is exactly how you reveal you dont know how to make a frickin game and never did even when one of your projects turns out successful
>the entire IP has consist of "how do we frick up the game massively" and due to how subversion and innovation works they were correct to do so for D1 and 2 but as time went on it turned out that fricking up on purpose for no reason is not how you continue to make good things. the entire shitshow of D3 is the evidence that constantly pushing for mentally deficient removal of core features like a wife who decides she doesnt like the "feng shui" of the living room every 4 months is exactly how you reveal you dont know how to make a frickin game and never did even when one of your projects turns out successful
The teams that made Diablo 1 and 2, and Diablo 3, were basically completely separate. Diablo devs left Blizzard to make Torchlight, Diablo 3 and onward was made by the WoW trannies.
which is why i brought up the example of the foundation for the original being so contentious. The team on the series have always tried to push boundaries and from 2 onwards they even thought so far as to push some of the cargo off the ship to "make it more spacious" when alot of the shit they pushed off was the shipment everybody was expecting.
then when the frickin ship arrived at port and everyone was asking where the frick the good stuff went they said "yeah we just thought nobody would want any of that boring stuff"
i completely see why devs decide "nah get fricked" and leave companies when they work to try and stay sane and keep the vision of the project, and then both their colleagues and the players fall into the pit of just listening to each other and the thing turns to shit because its designed by commitee.
The walking issue is actually a great example. They did not want real time combat. They fought against it. That’s how I feel about the entire genre. It’s stuck in the past. It’s stuck in that turn play mentality. They should entirely abandon the isometric view imo. Let the series evolve into something else. It’s why nobody really cares about the series. Or they play for a week and quit. Let some hardcore company make some autistic isometric aarpg and let Diablo move forward. But they won’t. They will continue on with that same mentality they had in d1 that they accidentally overcame. They could have gone two paths after D2, a WOW mmo route or an Elder Scrolls route or maybe something in between. But they chose to stay exactly the same and instead only add predatory systems and remove the few good remaining systems like encouraging any aspect of player interaction.
Spiritual successor to Diablo is Grim Dawn.
>The teams that made Diablo 1 and 2, and Diablo 3, were basically completely separate. Diablo devs left Blizzard to make Torchlight, Diablo 3 and onward was made by the WoW trannies.
It took me a while to swallow this pill, but yeah. Just because it's being made under the same company name, it doesn't mean it's the same people working on it. The team can be completely different, dishonestly banking on the goodwill and reputation of their forebears. When people expect a series to still be good because they recognize the studio name, it's inevitably going to lead to disappointment.
Diablo 3 was a shitshow because it's made by a guy who has never played an action rpg in his life.
Diablo 2 really was the first instance of "this game is called an RPG and I like it so I like RPGs", Oblivion being the next. Really ruined RPG design discussion by bringing in outsiders.
Considering this was intended to be a dungeon crawler and not a role-playing game, yes.
It all depends on what you are trying to do with the game. Being able to remove things that do not help your vision is equally important as adding things. If Diablo had a bunch of character creation stuff it it wouldn't have been such a big hit among people who just wants to smash things and even for RPG enthusiasts it would have just given false expectations and frustrations when the rest of the game didn't live up to what the intro falsely promised them. Simple things executed well are better than complex things executed poorly.
but were talking about Diablo so as of late its simple things executed poorly
I agree with him that Blizzard doesn't make RPGs
Is Diablo 1 fun? I'm not a fan of fast paced games and I heard it's slower than PoE.
It’s definitely slower paced than any modern ARPG. It was fun when it came out, I haven’t played it in decades though. I’ve played Diablo 2 recently and it’s still
fun, though repetitive.
You might enjoy it, or you might be spoiled by playing newer games that copied its formula and added to it (for better or for worse).
No it aged like shit.
Even if I like slow games?
I like it. Give it a try. It was updated recently with full multiplayer quest support which adds some pretty neat content if you are to play it with friends. Still good at single player. Nothing respawns so you cannot grind.
What's /vrpg/'s take on mods for D2 anyhow? I generally feel like they succeeded much more at keeping what made D2 successful than Blizz's abortive attempts at milking the franchise.
Plugy. That’s it. Just play single player with /players 8, map hack, unlimited shared stash, and at-will respec.
I always knew diablo was a dumbed down rpg for dimwits.
Not every game has to be a good RPG. Diablo is a good game despite being a bad RPG.
A good example of having roleplaying game mechanics but little to no roleplaying.
he's 100% right, backed by the success of diablo 1 and 2. dialogue trees, avatar creation, and romance are gigantic waste of time and don't contribute to gameplay
Not entirely.
His take is moronic, he comes across as if he disliked the roleplaying part of Role-Playing Games.
An RPG doesn't NEED to dump 50 hours of characterization and maake you adjust 2000 parameters from the get go though. It can and should be fleshed out along the way as you play through the game.