Interview Gas Powered Games interview at QuakeSkills

[bossjimbob]

Very cool. Any books you would recommend related to game design theory?

Best of luck getting the indie thing going.

 

[Araanor]

http://www.gamedev.net/columns/books/

 

[Section8]

To tell you the truth, I've never actually checked out any books on the subject. Take a look at Araanor's link, because gamedev.net is a good site for design reference.

 

[bossjimbob]

Much obliged. Thanks.

 

[RumbleFish]

I apologize for dredging up an old thread, especially since this is my first time posting, but I feel I must speak out on what I'm seeing here.
I've been visiting this website off-and-on for almost two months now and have enjoyed the news I receive on new RPG's that may be coming out.
However, I have not been impressed with the comments I usually see about the games, interviews and the like.
I especially felt the vitriol hurled at Dungeon Seige, Chris Taylor, and "Boss Jim Bob" were unnecessary.
You ("St. Proverbius," "chrisbeddoes", "Araanor" et al) talk about RPG's like you've invented them.
You say Dungeon Seige "sucks" because it doesn't give you the "true RPG experience."
Well, by your own definition, the games you steal your forum avatars from aren't real RPG's either. They are not free-form, you-take-control kinds of things. They are pseudo-linear at best and just as boring.
I love both Fallout games and Geneforge. But they are not the end-all-be-all of games.
Can you wrest control of the slave guild and rule the wastes with an iron fist in FO2?
Can you kill Trajkov and lead the Sholai back to their homeland?
No, you cannot. There are very specific endings laid out before you even begin. It has already been determined what has been possible. The only differences you have is your choice of allegiance, and what you feel like skipping.
And to always whip out Diablo2 as some sort of holy grail of action and RPG is just silly.
How is wearing your left mouse button out with constant clicking more "involved" than the combat of Dungeon Seige? Sure, you can choose from different attacks to use, but it's just different graphics you use to kill with.
The only games I've ever played (and still playing by the way) that have interactive combat are Morrowind and Daggerfall.
Turn-based combat in Fallout and Fallout2 is not a fair comparison since you can only control one character out of all of your team. You can only give vague directions to the others and hope they don't get killed. How is that a better system than Dungeon Seige?
"St. Proverbius" throws out the forum-bashing of Dungeon Seige as some sort of litmus test to its "crappiness." Well, I hate to burst your bubble, but that's the WORST way to judge the success of a game.
Go back and check those old posts, the ones that said they loved it the first week it was out. Now check the ones who are complaining. Are they the same people? Is it even half? I wager it isn't. It's a simple fact of the internet that the ones who don't like a game are the ones on taking their time on the forums to voice their displeasure. I've only been on the forums of a game site once, and that was to confirm a situation in Morrowind that I could not change (freeing a certain group of slaves, in case anyone cared).
I would rather play than go on some board and say I love it, only to be beaten down by the game-haters as some sort of "fanboy."
You yourself, "St. Proverbius" are gulty of this. You take the time to say how much you hate the new console Fallout game on FOUR DIFFERENT FORUMS. Yet, how many forums did you go to proclaim your love of Fallout? I would think none. Why? Because you were enjoying the damn game, that's why. Because you would rather play it than eat or sleep. Because it touched you in ways no woman could (if ever). That's why forums are so negative. Hell, look at me. I didn't say anything on these boards until now.
I mean come on, man. You've gone on this Harbringer kick long enough. So what if you don't like it. Anyone who visits this web site once knows that. Do you really have to post ELEVEN reviews on the site?
My definition of an RPG? It has stats, skills, and some variation of the word "mana" or uzi in it.
If someone had fun with the game, and they feel it is some variation of the words Role-Playing Game, then what does it matter? The most basic conotation of those words is a game in which you play a role. How does any game not fit into that?
Can you do anything you want in a Pen & Paper RPG? No, you cannot. You have to follow what the GM wants you to do. And if you don't, there are consequences. Don't believe me? Next convention you go to, try a Living City campaign setting and suggest the group splits up. "You can't do that," the GM will say. "Why not?" you reply. "It's not allowed."
No RPG, and sure as hell no CRPG, let's you do anything you want. No game can account for so much variability. If you enjoy it, then it's done it's job FOR YOU. If not, then it failed ONLY YOU.
"Boss Jim Bob" was nothing but polite on this forum, but you saw fit to ridicule his opinions. I think it's refreshing to hear someone's opinion on a game coming from a completely different perspective. The "arm-chair programmer" rant is getting a little stale, don't you think?
CRPG's are like Walt Whitman poems, don't get into an argument about who's opinion is right,, because there isn't a right opinion..

 

[Vault Dweller]

Wow, that's a big one. You must have been lurking for a long time to build such an anger and resentment.

the games you steal your forum avatars from

I wonder, was it really necessary to use the word 'steal' instead of, say, 'use'?

There are very specific endings laid out before you even begin. It has already been determined what has been possible. The only differences you have is your choice of allegiance, and what you feel like skipping.

There are indeed very specific endings that are manifestations of many actions and decisions that are entirely your to make and figure out. Any scenario including life itself has only so many possible end results regardless of the number of factors involved. For example, one of the possible endings of your life is being rich and famous, another is to die on the streets, by your logic "the only differences you have is your choice of allegiance, and what you feel like skipping". Although true in a nutshell, your argument is a huge understatement and over simplification.

How is wearing your left mouse button out with constant clicking more "involved" than the combat of Dungeon Seige? Sure, you can choose from different attacks to use, but it's just different graphics you use to kill with.

Common, think, don't make me call you stupid and ruin what could be the beginning of a beautiful relationship You have a truckload of skills leading to many possible, actually playable, very diverse in tactics combinations of one class out of five, not different graphics to kill with

The only games I've ever played (and still playing by the way) that have interactive combat are Morrowind and Daggerfall

Now, Morrowind on the other hand is a game of constant clicking, combat-wise, that is incredibly boring. Not as boring as DS though, as constant clicking keeps you from falling asleep

You can only give vague directions to the others and hope they don't get killed. How is that a better system than Dungeon Seige?

You really really don't get it, do you?

The rest is basically pointless crap, sorry to say that, that's boring to read and a waste of time to argue. You take basic concepts, twist them, support with pointless examples or analogies, throw in a couple of insults here and there, use your own behaviour pattern as a measuring stick, and call it a point of view. I, although usually very tolerant and respectful of other people's opinions, call it a waste of bandwidth.

 

[Spazmo]

You're starting to sound like Rosh, my dear Vault Dweller. You just need to curse more.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Well, I shall take it as a compliment

 

[Constipated Craprunner]

Yeah, only his whip hurts alot less!

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

I've been visiting this website off-and-on for almost two months now and have enjoyed the news I receive on new RPG's that may be coming out.

Good, glad you enjoy the coverage.

However, I have not been impressed with the comments I usually see about the games, interviews and the like.

You're free to make your own comments. That's what the comment/reply button does.

You say Dungeon Seige "sucks" because it doesn't give you the "true RPG experience."

No, Dungeon Siege sucks because it doesn't give you a game experience. It's like a movie where you just determine the pace of how fast the people travel at any given time.

Well, by your own definition, the games you steal your forum avatars from aren't real RPG's either. They are not free-form, you-take-control kinds of things. They are pseudo-linear at best and just as boring.
I love both Fallout games and Geneforge. But they are not the end-all-be-all of games.
Can you wrest control of the slave guild and rule the wastes with an iron fist in FO2?
Can you kill Trajkov and lead the Sholai back to their homeland?
No, you cannot. There are very specific endings laid out before you even begin. It has already been determined what has been possible. The only differences you have is your choice of allegiance, and what you feel like skipping.

Neither Fallout nor Geneforge were linear. In fact, they provide non-linearity throughout the entire game with the exception of where you start and where you end. Besides those two locations and events, you can do what you like in whichever order you like.

In the case of Geneforge, do you head up to Trajkov first or head up to deal with Goettsch instead? There's also two ways in to both encampments for those two, and several different ways of dealing with them.

Fallout is very similar in that there's the Master's vault location under the cathedral as well as the military base. Which one do you take out first? It's up to you. In fact, my first time through Fallout, I took out the Master first, then delt with the Vats because I thought the waterchip might be there in the master's vault.

This design scheme is radically different from most CRPGs where you have the set beginning and end, and are forced to walk the set path from Begin to Point A to Point B to Point C on up through Point X to Point Y to Point Z to Ending.

And to always whip out Diablo2 as some sort of holy grail of action and RPG is just silly.

How is wearing your left mouse button out with constant clicking more "involved" than the combat of Dungeon Seige? Sure, you can choose from different attacks to use, but it's just different graphics you use to kill with.

Because Diablo 2 is exceptional at what it does. You actually are involved in the combat and because of the skill trees, you have gobs of means of killing things. They're also hardly different graphics, as the attacks have many different combat statistics which they affect in combat, such as Attack Rating, Damage Rating, Range, what type of damage they inflict, and so on.

This as opposed to Dungeon Siege where combat is handled for you by the AI. You just move close enough to the enemy and watch the AI fight it out for you. It's much, much too passive.

The only games I've ever played (and still playing by the way) that have interactive combat are Morrowind and Daggerfall.

Turn-based combat in Fallout and Fallout2 is not a fair comparison since you can only control one character out of all of your team. You can only give vague directions to the others and hope they don't get killed. How is that a better system than Dungeon Seige?

How is it better than Dungeon Siege? Because you're controlling one character as opposed to no characters. Furthermore, Fallout has many options in combat, depending on what you use, if you even bother with combat at all! You can elect to be the kind of guy that doesn't kill anything at all, and you can still make it through Fallout. However, if you go with Hand to Hand combat, you have a variety of attacks you can perform, and various locations where you can aim your attacks on an enemy if you chose to do so. The same thing goes for melee and gun skills.

"St. Proverbius" throws out the forum-bashing of Dungeon Seige as some sort of litmus test to its "crappiness." Well, I hate to burst your bubble, but that's the WORST way to judge the success of a game.

Go back and check those old posts, the ones that said they loved it the first week it was out. Now check the ones who are complaining. Are they the same people? Is it even half? I wager it isn't. It's a simple fact of the internet that the ones who don't like a game are the ones on taking their time on the forums to voice their displeasure. I've only been on the forums of a game site once, and that was to confirm a situation in Morrowind that I could not change (freeing a certain group of slaves, in case anyone cared).

You should also factor in that there'll be a lot of people so pissed off with a title, or find it so utterly boring, that they won't bother getting involved with the community because they're displeased.

I would rather play than go on some board and say I love it, only to be beaten down by the game-haters as some sort of "fanboy."

Actually, if the game is well recieved and continues to be well recieved, you won't be able to bitch about a game on it's forum without the "fanboys" beating you down about how much it rules.

This isn't the case with Dungeon Siege because there's very little to the game because it's so heavily automated, it's easy to get bored with it. I think that's an extremely valid complaint.

You yourself, "St. Proverbius" are gulty of this. You take the time to say how much you hate the new console Fallout game on FOUR DIFFERENT FORUMS. Yet, how many forums did you go to proclaim your love of Fallout? I would think none. Why? Because you were enjoying the damn game, that's why. Because you would rather play it than eat or sleep. Because it touched you in ways no woman could (if ever). That's why forums are so negative. Hell, look at me. I didn't say anything on these boards until now.

Actually, I enjoyed Fallout so much, I did get involved on numerous forums and have been since I first played the game. I've been involved on DAC since it was fallout2.net and No Mutants Allowed since it was on GameStats. In fact, I single handedly ran Vault13.net for a year since the guys that founded it took a hiatus because I loved the game so much. I loved Fallout so much, I wanted to get involved in the community.

I mean come on, man. You've gone on this Harbringer kick long enough. So what if you don't like it. Anyone who visits this web site once knows that. Do you really have to post ELEVEN reviews on the site?

Um.. Yeah.. I do. Because there's that whole news page thing. Reviews are news.

My definition of an RPG? It has stats, skills, and some variation of the word "mana" or uzi in it.

If someone had fun with the game, and they feel it is some variation of the words Role-Playing Game, then what does it matter? The most basic conotation of those words is a game in which you play a role. How does any game not fit into that?

That's kind of like saying because you put lime in your outhouse, you're a Sewer Treatment Plant Owner. Sure, you're treating sewage, but that's hardly what the term means.

"Boss Jim Bob" was nothing but polite on this forum, but you saw fit to ridicule his opinions. I think it's refreshing to hear someone's opinion on a game coming from a completely different perspective. The "arm-chair programmer" rant is getting a little stale, don't you think?

There's a huge difference between ridicule and disagreement. I completely disagree that Dungeon Siege is a good game, let alone a good CRPG.

CRPG's are like Walt Whitman poems, don't get into an argument about who's opinion is right,, because there isn't a right opinion..

You can argue why you don't like those poems, though!

 

[Section8]

Can you do anything you want in a Pen & Paper RPG? No, you cannot. You have to follow what the GM wants you to do. And if you don't, there are consequences. Don't believe me? Next convention you go to, try a Living City campaign setting and suggest the group splits up. "You can't do that," the GM will say. "Why not?" you reply. "It's not allowed."

Any GM worth their salt would not handle this in said manner. In fact, most Dungeon/Game Master's Guides tout this as one of the worst things you can do. A decent GM would let the group split up and beset it's now independent members with insurmountable but escapable challenges. Make it clear that there is a completely rational reason why it's a bad choice to split up, but it's a choice the players are free to make.

On the matter of Dungeon Siege, I find most of the rational criticism it gets is regarding it being a poor game, not a poor RPG. Granted there are always "Dungeon Siege isn't an RPG so don't call it one!" comments, but they don't tend to hold the same conviction.

 

[Sol Invictus]

Thanks for all the feedback, yet again. Section 8 was kind enough to post his thoughts at the end of the article, and I was grateful for his tasteful and insightful commentary.

Please don't get the impression that I'm trying to change your opinion. As I stated before, Dungeon Siege I found unique in that it simplified what I considered the dull qualities of that genre. Obviously, his vision of design was vastly different than what some people enjoy in those games, and it was bound to draw some flak.

Since most people consider healing up and buying stuff in the store to be boring parts of the genre, Chris Taylor may as well go all out and have the game do those things for the 'player' in DS2 so the player won't need to do anything.

 

[Sol Invictus]

Can you do anything you want in a Pen & Paper RPG? No, you cannot. You have to follow what the GM wants you to do. And if you don't, there are consequences. Don't believe me? Next convention you go to, try a Living City campaign setting and suggest the group splits up. "You can't do that," the GM will say. "Why not?" you reply. "It's not allowed."

Now, I'm not in a particularly caring mood to reply to the rest of what you've said but I will respond to this paragraph: "It's not allowed" is clearly a limitation of the GM, and not of the campaign. I've played with some good GMs in Planescape and they've allowed such things as splitting up the party and even gone as far as having two rival parties, members of which originally belonged to the same group but suffered from internal strife due to faction and alignment disagreements:

e.g. one harmonium member joined group A while the other joined group B because neither of them could agree on what 'harmony' meant exactly. They had separate alignments and as such had different viewpoints on the matter.

They had to fight the crap out of each other in the end and all players ended up in the Blood War on the same side. Irony. Not to mention a damn good campaign.

 

[bossjimbob]

Thanks for all the feedback, yet again. Section 8 was kind enough to post his thoughts at the end of the article, and I was grateful for his tasteful and insightful commentary.

Please don't get the impression that I'm trying to change your opinion. As I stated before, Dungeon Siege I found unique in that it simplified what I considered the dull qualities of that genre. Obviously, his vision of design was vastly different than what some people enjoy in those games, and it was bound to draw some flak.

Since most people consider healing up and buying stuff in the store to be boring parts of the genre, Chris Taylor may as well go all out and have the game do those things for the 'player' in DS2 so the player won't need to do anything.

Then my dreams will come true. I can sit back in my recliner with a beer in one hand, popcorn in the other, and let the game play itself for me. My prayers have been answered!

Ok, enough with the jokes. Look people, I have my opinions, and you have yours. Let's just leave it at that. This is fast becoming a fruitless exchange. My opinion - DS is good. Yours - DS is bad. Case closed. RumbleFish, thanks for coming to my defense, whoever you are. I think you said it best with this quote: CRPG's are like Walt Whitman poems, don't get into an argument about who's opinion is right,, because there isn't a right opinion.

Games are like music, art, and film. There is no right or wrong, just opinion.

8)

Thanks, as usual, for the entertainment.

 

[MF]

True enough. But I'm not calling a Van Gogh a Picasso.

No. that's a stupid comparison.

I'm not calling Britney Spears music. Or even good listening entertainment. It's crap, from every perspective. The only good thing about it is the marketing. That's were things go wrong.

Marketing-induced 'art' is no longer art.

The otherway around is perfectly possible though.

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

Then my dreams will come true. I can sit back in my recliner with a beer in one hand, popcorn in the other, and let the game play itself for me. My prayers have been answered!

It'd make an interesting sceensaver, that's for sure. It'd be like Beams, only with swords and spells. :D

Ok, enough with the jokes. Look people, I have my opinions, and you have yours. Let's just leave it at that. This is fast becoming a fruitless exchange. My opinion - DS is good. Yours - DS is bad. Case closed.

No, yours is also DS = BAD, you just don't know it yet!

 

[Sol Invictus]

I admit that while Dungeon Siege can be fun, it isn't my opinion of something 'entertaining'. Just the same, a lot of people enjoy the WWF, but I see it for what it is - a fake exchange of blows and grapples. I have a tremendous respect for the actors/athletes for their intense devotion to the act/show/sport but I can't say I enjoy wrestling. I watch dramas like Law and Order, The Practice and Third Watch and intelligent detective shows like CSI for my daily entertainment. I enjoy movies like "American Beauty" on weekends. I'm sure a lot of people find what I enjoy to be tremendously boring and prefer instead to stick to their regular dose of WWF Smackdown! and mindless movies like "Romeo Must Die".

What remains to be said is that Dungeon Siege is not a role-playing game. Whether it may or may not be fun and exciting for many can't in any way change that fact. And neither should the fact that it isn't an RPG make it any less enjoyable for those who do indeed enjoy it. Why should that term add or detract from the game for what it is?

Calling Dungeon Siege an RPG due to its minor stats and weapons upgrades is akin to calling Quake 3's multiplayer feature a 'real-time tactical game' for the teamwork and coordination. While that term could refer to Quake 3 to those unfamiliar with computer game genres, the RTTG genre title in actuality specifically refers to games like Fallout Tactics and Commandos, and to some extent - Baldur's Gate.

 

[Rosh]

And another one comes like a moth to a flame.

Only if they had the presence of mind to formulate their reply into some legible paragraphs, although the run-on nature of the reply does befit the diarrhetic spiel contained therein.

I apologize for dredging up an old thread, especially since this is my first time posting, but I feel I must speak out on what I'm seeing here.
I've been visiting this website off-and-on for almost two months now and have enjoyed the news I receive on new RPG's that may be coming out.
However, I have not been impressed with the comments I usually see about the games, interviews and the like.
I especially felt the vitriol hurled at Dungeon Seige, Chris Taylor, and "Boss Jim Bob" were unnecessary.
You ("St. Proverbius," "chrisbeddoes", "Araanor" et al) talk about RPG's like you've invented them.

Hyperbole, five yard penalty.

You say Dungeon Seige "sucks" because it doesn't give you the "true RPG experience."
Well, by your own definition, the games you steal your forum avatars from aren't real RPG's either. They are not free-form, you-take-control kinds of things. They are pseudo-linear at best and just as boring.
I love both Fallout games and Geneforge. But they are not the end-all-be-all of games.
Can you wrest control of the slave guild and rule the wastes with an iron fist in FO2?
Can you kill Trajkov and lead the Sholai back to their homeland?
No, you cannot. There are very specific endings laid out before you even begin. It has already been determined what has been possible. The only differences you have is your choice of allegiance, and what you feel like skipping.

Re-read your own bullshit. Yes, every game has pretty much a predestined outcome. Or, as the better ones have, multiple outcomes.

Say, are there multiple endings with most BioWare games? Or, for that matter, most of BIS' work or most other so-called CRPGs?

Drop the straw men already, assface. Just because they don't let you do everything doesn't mean they are in themselves poor or are comparatively poor. Your argument built upon the above is quite laughable and painfully irrelevent when it pertains to Dungeon Siege. In truth, I'd say it would hurt your own position if anything.

And to always whip out Diablo2 as some sort of holy grail of action and RPG is just silly.
How is wearing your left mouse button out with constant clicking more "involved" than the combat of Dungeon Seige? Sure, you can choose from different attacks to use, but it's just different graphics you use to kill with.

Because Diablo 2 is more interactive, or did that fly over your head?

There's a reason why Dung Siege only had a brief spurt in good sales. Most of it was from pre-orders. Then it died off quickly as people found out there was less of a game than the aformentioned Diablo. Or even Diablo 2.

In addition, we do not "whip out Diablo2 as some sort of holy grail of action and RPG", yet instead we use it as a marker to compare the level in which developers try to pass off similar work, sometimes for a higher price tag (cip Harbinger).

Of course, that would have been obvious if you had indeed been around here as long as you claim.

Thanks for the obvious lying. Shithead.

The only games I've ever played (and still playing by the way) that have interactive combat are Morrowind and Daggerfall.

Now this is one of the parts that makes your post an obvious troll, and I'm thinking it may be in sarcasm. If so, good job. If not, then I pity you for the imbred bastard your mother/aunt brought you into the world as. Holding down a mouse button and moving the mouse around, and clicking repeatedly, are neither interactive combat compared to that of Fallout or Geneforge. Hell, given Diablo 1/2 on the higher difficulties, it changes a LOT away from just a lot of repetitive clicking.

Turn-based combat in Fallout and Fallout2 is not a fair comparison since you can only control one character out of all of your team. You can only give vague directions to the others and hope they don't get killed. How is that a better system than Dungeon Seige?

Congratulations for proving you know jack shit about CRPGs. The person you control in Fallout and Fallout 2 is the PC, player character. The rest are NPCs, non-player characters. There's still a lot more interactivity in that one person than the autopilot system in Dung Siege.

"St. Proverbius" throws out the forum-bashing of Dungeon Seige as some sort of litmus test to its "crappiness." Well, I hate to burst your bubble, but that's the WORST way to judge the success of a game.
Go back and check those old posts, the ones that said they loved it the first week it was out. Now check the ones who are complaining. Are they the same people? Is it even half? I wager it isn't.

I'll wager that most of those people who did like it for that brief period and then haven't come back to complain just put aside the game for something better and let it collect dust.

It's a simple fact of the internet that the ones who don't like a game are the ones on taking their time on the forums to voice their displeasure. I've only been on the forums of a game site once, and that was to confirm a situation in Morrowind that I could not change (freeing a certain group of slaves, in case anyone cared).

Heh...you might want to re-read the above again. You're trying to point something out as fact when you also say you've only been on the forums of a game site once. Which is it?

I would rather play than go on some board and say I love it, only to be beaten down by the game-haters as some sort of "fanboy."

Relevence: 0%
Sniveling: 98% and climbing

You yourself, "St. Proverbius" are gulty of this. You take the time to say how much you hate the new console Fallout game on FOUR DIFFERENT FORUMS. Yet, how many forums did you go to proclaim your love of Fallout? I would think none. Why? Because you were enjoying the damn game, that's why. Because you would rather play it than eat or sleep. Because it touched you in ways no woman could (if ever). That's why forums are so negative. Hell, look at me. I didn't say anything on these boards until now.

News flash, moron, he's posted about the good things of Fallout on far more than those you claim he's complained about the console Fallout title. There you go again with the assuming and hyperbole, proving that yet again you're a clueless twit.

I mean come on, man. You've gone on this Harbringer kick long enough. So what if you don't like it. Anyone who visits this web site once knows that. Do you really have to post ELEVEN reviews on the site?

So he should just post about ONE review a site posts and then not cover any more reviews other people make?

Kid, that makes for some REALLY stupid news reporting.

My definition of an RPG? It has stats, skills, and some variation of the word "mana" or uzi in it.

Now this HAS to be a troll. There's no way someone could be that retarded naturally.

(snip rest of the clueless bullshit)

Someone get rid of this ovbvious trolling assclown.

 

[POOPERSCOOPER]

hey

Lol.

Your a prince Rosh, you know that?

 

[Sol Invictus]

Re: hey

Lol.

Your a prince Rosh, you know that?

Yeah, he's a regular Prince Charles. Charismatic, intelligent, and has bad teeth. But maybe you can leave the last part out.

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

Re-read your own bullshit. Yes, every game has pretty much a predestined outcome. Or, as the better ones have, multiple outcomes.

Very good point, Rosh. This is one feature I thuroughly enjoy seeing in games like Geneforge and Fallout, which is why I gravitate more towards them than other CRPGs. Having multiple outcomes to the finale of the game is a great design feature on many levels. It not only shows the player what he's done to change the world, but it also means the player has a number of divergent choices within the game itself.

In addition, we do not "whip out Diablo2 as some sort of holy grail of action and RPG", yet instead we use it as a marker to compare the level in which developers try to pass off similar work, sometimes for a higher price tag (cip Harbinger).

Harbinger also opens the door wide for this comparason by slapping, IT'S DIABLO IN SPACE on the box. They also compare their title to Diablo often in interviews as well, so it's hard to claim that I invented making the comparason between the two titles.

 

[RumbleFish]

Rosh, next time take your mom's dick out of your ass before you post you little fucking wortless peice of fly excrement on dog shit.

You don't value my opinion, jackass? Fine. I don't value you either.
It irritates the shit out of me that you can't fucking post without fucking swearing every other fucking word and trying to make it fucking sound like you're somehow fucking intelligent to the fucking Rosh fanboys out there. You think only by belittiling the other person it makes you sound better, eh assface? Will I got news for you, dipshit. It only serves to piss me off more.
All games are linear, it's just which order you do them in that changes, not the potential outcome. To twist my words into something else is a weak arguement at best.
An RPG is whatever the hell you want it to be. And I agree with what's-his-name that said if someone enjoys it, then who cares? Some of you seem to think that it isn't an RPG unless it's a 3rd person isometric perspective, but how is that more immersive in the game world than 1st person? I don't think it is.
As for my point about Morrowind and Daggerfall, it was only that you have to move the mouse and click which, by definition, is more interactive than simply clicking.
And Diablo/Diablo 2 aren't good action/rpg games at all. To use them as a comparitor for all other action/rpgs elevates it's status.
Also, Silverback didn't start calling it "Diablo in space", I think that was Gamespot or Gamespy. They are only guilty of perpetuating that tagline.

You don't know what a troll is, motherfuckers, so bite my ass and call it candy 'cause I'm outta here.

PS Read the Living City Rules, it's how it's done in conventions - no splitting up of the party. And thinking I like BIS/Interplay games like Baldur's Gate is the biggest insult I read.

 

[Jarinor]

You think only by belittiling the other person it makes you sound better, eh assface? Will I got news for you, dipshit. It only serves to piss me off more.

Really? You've got to be shitting me.

All games are linear, it's just which order you do them in that changes, not the potential outcome.

Let's consider the definition of 'linear' for a moment...

lin·e·ar adj.
Of, relating to, or resembling a line; straight.

In, of, describing, described by, or related to a straight line.
Having only one dimension.
Characterized by, composed of, or emphasizing drawn lines rather than painterly effects.

Why, I do believe it's at odds with yours! Don't start with the "it means a different thing in games assface" response, because that's just retarded, and if you can't figure out why, then no one can help you.

To twist my words into something else is a weak arguement at best.

And you haven't done that, along with the online attitudes, personas and everything else of everyone you've criticised here?

 

[Sol Invictus]

RumbleFIsh, you are in need of a serious kick to the crotch for even allowing yourself to perpetuate the copious amount of stupidity contained in your inane remarks. You're such a bloody hypocrite that you don't even realize how you've managed to describe yourself in your alleged angry response towards what Rosh had written. Hypocrisy can only go so far.

 

[Araanor]

You don't know what a troll is, motherfuckers, so bite my ass and call it candy 'cause I'm outta here.

Funny, my phrase-book for Trollish clearly states this as a variant of the "I lost, I'm gonna tell mom on you and I'm never coming back here anymore. WAAH!"