Fowyr
Arcane
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2009
- Messages
- 7,671
Diablo II is an amazing game that everyone here probably played for hundreds of hours
I have played maybe half an hour of it. You know, I have some standards.
Diablo II is an amazing game that everyone here probably played for hundreds of hours
You're comparing Diablo, an attempt at creating a new genre, a real-time roguelike suitable for casual play with the old roguelike genre when I've explicitly stated that Diablo was intentionally developed as a stripped-down version
Tell that to publishers that started demanding every RPG to have real-time combat, making TB virtually extinct for over a decade, until nu-XCOM showed it was in fact commercially viable.The problem with Diablo is that it barely qualifies as RPG - there's next to zero build variety, and what little variety there is only affects whether it'll be your left or right mouse button that breaks off first. Sure, it might still be a good action game, I have no idea about that, it's not my jam. But the fact is that every two out of three RPGs in the decade following Diablo's release were Diablo clones - that is to say, repetitive action games sprinkled with a few stats. If that's not the definition of decline, I don't know what is.
Diablo 1 to Diablo 2 to Diablo 3 has mood/visuals-decline, Dragon Age 1 to 2 to 3 shows clear mechanics decline, but just because a genre of simplified action RPGs has evolved out of the core RPG genre isn't per se decline, they didn't replace normal RPGs, they just offered more variety on top of it
1) Not the point. It's not about what I played at the time (I had found abandonware sites thankfully) but about what (disastrous) effect Diablo had on the RPG industry.Tell that to publishers that started demanding every RPG to have real-time combat, making TB virtually extinct for over a decade, until nu-XCOM showed it was in fact commercially viable.The problem with Diablo is that it barely qualifies as RPG - there's next to zero build variety, and what little variety there is only affects whether it'll be your left or right mouse button that breaks off first. Sure, it might still be a good action game, I have no idea about that, it's not my jam. But the fact is that every two out of three RPGs in the decade following Diablo's release were Diablo clones - that is to say, repetitive action games sprinkled with a few stats. If that's not the definition of decline, I don't know what is.
Diablo 1 to Diablo 2 to Diablo 3 has mood/visuals-decline, Dragon Age 1 to 2 to 3 shows clear mechanics decline, but just because a genre of simplified action RPGs has evolved out of the core RPG genre isn't per se decline, they didn't replace normal RPGs, they just offered more variety on top of it
You should have played Japanese games at the time, there was no lack of TB games
No, that's bullshit. It wasn't by chance that Blizzard stumbled on a dumbed-down RPG design that would appeal to casual crowds, they invented it on purpose. It's absolutely fair to blame them for what came next; they couldn't not have foreseen it.It's not Diablo's fault if other companies dumb down the RPG genre further, it's the consumer's fault for voting with their wallet.
Are you fucking retarded? I was attacking Oblivion before you were fucking born and I was defending Diablo even the what, 15 years ago when I registered here you goddamn moron; not because of any peer pressure but because it was my genuine opinion.You attack Oblivion because it's the norm in this site but if the norm was to attack Diablo, you would attack it.
The problem with Diablo is that it barely qualifies as RPG - there's next to zero build variety
Oh yes. Skill trees. Don't even get me started on skill trees.The problem with Diablo is that it barely qualifies as RPG - there's next to zero build variety
Try Diablo 2 instead.
Diablo, an attempt at creating a new genre