Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Interview Diablo 3: More RPG and isometric is a gameplay style

DarkUnderlord

Professional Throne Sitter
Staff Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2002
Messages
28,547
Tags: Diablo III

<a href="http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=220175">EuroGamer interviewed Jay Wilson, Lead Designer of Diablo 3</a>. He says a lot but here are some interesting bits I managed to stuff into a blockquote:
<br>
<blockquote>And then on the role-playing side, we've been focusing on more story. We want people to be able to ignore the story if they want, but we still want there to be a denser story, we want there to be a lot of scripted events that support the story, we want the story to be better formed and more interesting. Plus we want there to be some elements that allow players to feel like they're in a role-playing game. I think that one of the differences between Blizzard North and what we sometimes call Blizzard South is that Blizzard South, led by our creative director Chris Metzen, is just a little bit more story-focused. That's not a knock, but it can't help but be something that gets into the game now, because it's also a value that I have.
<br>
<br>
<b>Eurogamer: Why do you think so few RPGs have gone with the isometric perspective - and why did you choose to stick with it?</b>
<br>
<br>
Because our industry is a technology industry and is very focused on innovation, there's this push to always advance. For us, yeah, we want to advance too, but the camera has nothing to do with that. The camera is a gameplay style, and a vastly unexplored gameplay style, especially with RPGs. It's so under-explored, and it makes for such good gameplay, it's so approachable, it's so eloquent.
<br>
<br>
This is the mistake I think a lot of developers make. They don't make it about the game they want. They make it about the tech they want to run, or the new engine, or the cut-scenes that they want to make. Somebody else asked: doesn't it restrict your scale and scope? Well, we use our cinematics for that, that's what they're for, that's why we make them, so that the game can be what it needs to be on its own.
<br>
<br>
So no, there was never a doubt. In my mind there was never a doubt that we were going to go isometric at all, it wasn't even under consideration, because it had to be Diablo. For me, that was one of those things - people look at the art style and say oh, they're not Diablo any more - if we'd come out and we weren't isometric, then I would agree with that.</blockquote>
<br>
Just to re-cap, Jay says that if you change the camera style, it's not the same game anymore. Time will tell whether changing camera styles works for Bethesda.
<br>
<br>
Spotted @ <a href="http://www.gamebanshee.com">GameBanshee</a>
 

Vaarna_Aarne

Notorious Internet Vandal
Joined
Jun 1, 2008
Messages
34,585
Location
Cell S-004
MCA Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2
inwoker said:
Time will tell whether changing camera styles works for Bethesda.
When Bethesda changed camera styles? Remind me, please.
I'm wondering about this too...

Didn't they reach the ultimate pinnacle of teh IMMERSHUN zenith with first-person viewpoint?
 

Sovy Kurosei

Erudite
Joined
Dec 29, 2004
Messages
1,535
Didn't somebody from Bethesda say that Interplay/Black Isle would have made a first person Fallout instead of an isometric Fallout but didn't have the means/know how/technology to?
 

JarlFrank

I like Thief THIS much
Patron
Joined
Jan 4, 2007
Messages
34,360
Location
KA.DINGIR.RA.KI
Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
Sovy Kurosei said:
Didn't somebody from Bethesda say that Interplay/Black Isle would have made a first person Fallout instead of an isometric Fallout but didn't have the means/know how/technology to?

Yes.
 

DarkUnderlord

Professional Throne Sitter
Staff Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2002
Messages
28,547
inwoker said:
Time will tell whether changing camera styles works for Bethesda.
When Bethesda changed camera styles? Remind me, please.
Yeah, Garrett said it but I'm talking about the change from Fallout / Fallout 2 (isometric) to Fallout 3 (first-person). Bethesda are changing the camera style from that which was used in the original games. If you apply what Jay says, then they've lost the point by focussing on the technology instead of the game-play.
 

Korgan

Arbiter
Joined
Apr 13, 2008
Messages
4,238
Location
Fahrfromjuden
Blizzard is awesome, duh. Srsly, I wouldn't mind a DARKNGRITTY D3, but I love where this is going, all in all.
 

BearBomber

Scholar
Joined
Jun 2, 2008
Messages
566
JarlFrank said:
Sovy Kurosei said:
Didn't somebody from Bethesda say that Interplay/Black Isle would have made a first person Fallout instead of an isometric Fallout but didn't have the means/know how/technology to?

Yes.

WRONG! Dumbfuck polish journalist said that . He used talking heads as a proof. :facepalm
 

asper

Arcane
Joined
Nov 14, 2007
Messages
2,232
Project: Eternity
DarkUnderlord said:
Eurogamer: Why do you think so few RPGs have gone with the isometric perspective

(...)

The camera is a gameplay style, and a vastly unexplored gameplay style, especially with RPGs.

Uh, "few rpgs" have gone with an isometric perspective? An isometric camera is an "unexplored gameplay style" in rpgs?

Did I miss something? Or are they only taking into account modern games
 

inwoker

Arcane
Glory to Ukraine
Joined
Apr 27, 2007
Messages
16,906
Location
Kyiv, Ukraine
DarkUnderlord said:
inwoker said:
Time will tell whether changing camera styles works for Bethesda.
When Bethesda changed camera styles? Remind me, please.
Yeah, Garrett said it but I'm talking about the change from Fallout / Fallout 2 (isometric) to Fallout 3 (first-person). Bethesda are changing the camera style from that which was used in the original games. If you apply what Jay says, then they've lost the point by focussing on the technology instead of the game-play.
They didn't change anything. They would if their previous titles were iso. Fallout 3 is not sequel to 1 and 2. It's sequel to Oblivion.
 

Nightjed

Liturgist
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
675
Location
Wasteland
bah, 10-15 years ago games were very different from each other, today every freaking game looks the same, either a halo-look-alike or a devil-may-cry-look-alike, not even long running franchises keep their old style, fallout going fps, prince of persia and jedi knight turning into god of war, and every other over-the-shoulder shooter cloning gears of war.

diablo 3 will pile another mountain of money for blizzard anyway, with isometric perspective, medium system reqs and dated looking graphics, i hope that will change something inside those stupid game publisher suits heads, only time will tell
 

Ogg

Prophet
Patron
Joined
Jan 14, 2008
Messages
1,005
Location
River Seine
Codex 2012 Serpent in the Staglands Dead State Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Codex USB, 2014 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 BattleTech
inwoker said:
They didn't change anything. They would if their previous titles were iso. Fallout 3 is not sequel to 1 and 2. It's sequel to Oblivion.

I would go further: FO3 is an expansion pack for Oblivion. Same engine, same gameplay, same game.
 

RainSong

Scholar
Joined
May 13, 2008
Messages
256
Location
potato motherland
Ogg said:
inwoker said:
They didn't change anything. They would if their previous titles were iso. Fallout 3 is not sequel to 1 and 2. It's sequel to Oblivion.

I would go further: FO3 is an expansion pack for Oblivion. Same engine, same gameplay, same game.

According to you Planescape Torment is expansion pack for Baldurs Gate.
 

Mech

Cipher
Joined
Jul 15, 2004
Messages
635
I suppose it is inevitable that every news thread turns into a discussion about Fallout or Bethesda on this site. How sad.
 

Murk

Arcane
Joined
Jan 17, 2008
Messages
13,459
RainSong said:
According to you Planescape Torment is expansion pack for Baldurs Gate.

while i wouldn't agree with his words - i think he meant that fallout3's gameplay will be so similar to oblivion that it may as well have been a mod

torment's gameplay was vastly too different to have just been a "mod"

if you want to call it a total conversion mod, then yeah fine - but that's all games that are built off the same engine are anyway
 

LCJr.

Erudite
Joined
Jan 16, 2003
Messages
2,469
Inziladun said:
Baldur's Gate Release date: 30 November 1998
Planescape:Torment Release date: December 12, 1999

I was looking at the Mac release. har har me stupid.
 

MetalCraze

Arcane
Joined
Jul 3, 2007
Messages
21,104
Location
Urkanistan
Sovy Kurosei said:
Didn't somebody from Bethesda say that Interplay/Black Isle would have made a first person Fallout instead of an isometric Fallout but didn't have the means/know how/technology to?

Probably that's why all their sequels remain true to the originals in that regard :roll: (we can consider Obsidian to be a BIS reincarnation as it led by the same people)
 

Vysilir

Novice
Joined
Jan 2, 2008
Messages
2
Blizzard gets it right yet again.

Bethesda doesn't get it, but they'll still make a gigantic pile of money and A+++ reviews praising their innovative camera.
 

Xi

Arcane
Joined
Jan 28, 2006
Messages
6,101
Location
Twilight Zone
Oh damn, my account was suspended and I cannot post for a few days. Blah what a fucktard moderator! :D

Some of you will not relate to this, however, because it is beyond your younger minds to comprehend as all you know is the modern industry and you've been trained into thinking that these modern technologies are better because they look better.

The above was among a series of statements you made in the Diablo thread in Community Discussion which pulled the topic away from its original course and dragged it into a mire of petty personal insults, swipes and bickering, which you participated in and aggravated.

This is completely unacceptable behaviour on this forum so I am issuing a formal warning and suspending your posting privileges for 3 days.

Please think very carefully about your next post

Princess

I stated very truthful remarks, and some of this forum's members could not handle it. In fact if you re-read the post you will see how what i was saying is in fact very on topic and that I was the one being flamed. Obviously it's very subjective, but I guess that's just the way it goes. Keep controlling the flow of truth. Send it packing for all I care, just don't be surprised when people say "I told you so." Censorship is merely the crux of control, yet who controls the controllers? Anyway, you're doing your part I just don't agree with the forum rules and I hardly violated them if you check the post again. Look at how people attacked me, not the other way around.

Hell, I've been on this forum off and on for more time than probably 90% of those posters combined. I know the stupidity of the average forum poster here, but does that mean I should not post truthful remarks? Shall I just go with the flow so as not to incite some jerk to flame me? And then when they do shall I just ignore them instead of addressing them individually in a well mannered fashion?(Which I did.) I guess I will just return to a forum that is more open minded, and where far more in depth conversations take place. Enjoy moderating these retards and wasting your personal time for nothing. Pretty futile if you ask me, but I guess joy is in the eye of the beholder. Or simply perception in this case. So have fun, I think i will just never return. Feel free to ban this account forever, it really doesn't bother me.

Enjoy your communist forum.

(My response, though I think it was blocked.)
 

Bradylama

Arcane
Joined
Jul 24, 2006
Messages
23,647
Location
Oklahomo
DarkUnderlord said:
Yeah, Garrett said it but I'm talking about the change from Fallout / Fallout 2 (isometric) to Fallout 3 (first-person). Bethesda are changing the camera style from that which was used in the original games. If you apply what Jay says, then they've lost the point by focussing on the technology instead of the game-play.

That's unfounded, though. Bethesda changed the camera because they don't want to design gameplay for something other than what utilizes first-person. Bethesda made a very specific gameplay-related decision.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom