Preview of the next Diablo

[ravagon]

Well they are ex-Blizzard so I presume they've come up with an answer to that.
Not to say that it's a good answer by any means of course ...

[FrustratedPoet]

I also will be following this game. I still play Diablo 2 from time to time and am huge fans of Blizzard games (which this effectively is from a design point of view at least). I doubt my poor little laptop will run it, but I'll keep an eye on the game's progress nevertheless.

Thanks for the heads-up nostromo!

[LDiCesare]

Without battle.net, it's going to be tough for it to gain an MP following.

They talked about a dedicated server. IT won't be battle.net but another game, but should serve the same purpose as well.
As for requiring skills to shoot in a FPS, I don't buy it. Maybe in the most modern ones, but when I played Castle Wolfenstein, Doom or Duke Nukem, I didn't really need any skill to hit the opponents. Clicking like crazy and mostly moving and maneuvering were what mattered.
RPG are supposed to play a role, things like interacting with NPCs, and have a kind of scenario.
I like Diablo, but it was already quite far from a RPG and this is going to be even farther.

[DrSpike]

Of course they'll have a good MP setup. This game will appeal to the same players that Diablo (2) did, and that playerbase is huge, even today.

[Dis]

don't tempt me to reinstall Diablo2 . I keep taking it off my hard drive saying I'm completely bored of it, only to get in the mood to play it again several months later.

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by nostromo


It looks like a FPS, but it ain't one. Its like Diablo but with a first-person view.

... so it is a FPS?

[DrSpike]

No it's a FPRPG.

[General Ludd]

I thought he said it was like Diablo. Where does the RPG come in?

[DrSpike]

Yeah but you think next to no popular games are RPy enough.

[General Ludd]

I can make exceptions for the limitations of computer games, but Diablo is so far off the spectrum it's laughable to call it an RPG.

What do stats / equipment have to do with roleplaying? It's a horrible miss use of the term. You might aswell call it a sim game - there's atleast a logical connection to statistics and "building" there.

[DrSpike]

You just have to accept that the vast majority of people who like RPGs don't necessarily like role playing.

[LDiCesare]

The real problem with RPG is that making "role play" requires non player characters able to interact with the player, and considering the vast amount of silly things a player can think of, it's almost impossible to code/script NPCs that would behave in a half consistent way. So RPGs become massively multiplayer because it's much more interesting to interact with real people than with limited bots. I'm sure many people who (have the time to) play MMORPG actually role play, even if the game has no more role playing things inside than Diablo. But Diablo MP is limited to cooperative hack'n'slash or duels, since there is no storyline behind.

[Dis]

that analysis is wrong

You'd think mmorpg's are better. But static computer NPC's are more capable of staying in character than these losers on the internet.

[LDiCesare]

Well, most NPCs are crap and most people playing MMORPG are also crap (you have the choice between spending your life in an artificial life or being unable to socialize in the artificial world). Still, I belive games where NPCs have good interaction abilities are quite rare. There are some games like that (Arcanum, Kotor...) but even there you are restricted to certain paths or interactions and must follow the main quest, whereas tabletop RPGs allow way more freedom. I don't think it's possible to provide a computer based game master and that's why gamemakers are treading easier paths: shooters/hack'n'slash/roguelikes on one end, massive multiplayer on the other.

[General Ludd]

I find the best roleplaying games are also strategy games. King of Dragon Pass is the best single player computer RPG that i can think of.