GameSpy - Should Diablo III have been first person?
I'll admit it. My first ever hands-on time with any Diablo game occurred just 24 hours ago, when my inexperienced Demon Hunter took his first fumbling steps into the Diablo III beta's dark and ominous dungeons. It took just three hours before I'd hacked and slashed my way to the main storyline's satisfying conclusion, but in that short period of time my eyes were opened to an entirely new perspective on a gaming world. As a lover of first person games, the isometric camera system in Diablo III felt very unfamiliar, and I inevitably wondered why Blizzard didn't make the leap to first person like so many other developers. This led me to wonder - should Diablo III have been a first person game, and what are the pros and cons of this approach? Let's find out.
yuastnav wrote on Sep 23, 2011, 11:57:
Mhm I was not aware that there are roguelike multiplayer games.
The only one I knew was the online component of dungeon crawl stone soup which is more of a score-based ladder system or something like that.
The thing is that I wouldn't want to give up the round based concept of something like nethack.
It would not be impossible to make multiplayer, though, it would just be kinda difficult and straining on all the players because you'd always have to wait for the other player before you could make your turn again.
But thanks, I'll check that link out.
BurntSoul wrote on Sep 23, 2011, 10:58:yuastnav wrote on Sep 23, 2011, 08:52:
Something like nethack or dungeon crawl doesn't really work with coop.
Why? Can't we get creative and make it work?
First off I would never want Diablo III to be an FPS. However, I do think there is room for an FPS that has the Roguelike qualities of the diablo series as well as games like nethack/dungeon hack.
You probably already know this, but the Diablo series' roots were derived from the 'roguelike' game (random hack and slash + dungeon crawler adventure game, random loot drops). There are also multiplayer roguelike games. Go check the wiki on roguelikes to see it. Why is Diablo/Diablo II still being played today? I believe it's because of the Co-op, and the fact that the game is different enough based on random dungeon levels and item drops.
So why does this formula have to stay in the realm of isometric view?
There are more than a few FPS games right now that have everything Diablo has, excluding the level randomization. The story is generally the same: Kill bad guys + boss with quest, get loot, stay alive, level up and do it again.
FPS play + Randomization of levels and the options for them (before the game begins) are the only components that would need to be added.
What has to stay basically the same? The general storyline.
Future new campaigns could be created with new content, textures, creatures and tilesets - while the story changes with which baddies/bosses to kill. Alternatively, the original story could be retrofitted on the fly with a different tileset for that game (Kill boss A but now he lives in a dungeon as opposed to a castle, or he lives in the desert as opposed to the jungle).
You can also add randomly generated and/or recurring side-quests. MMORPGs do it all the time. Even if you didn't want that kind of randomization, you could create specific side-quests but randomly place them in the 'levels' when a new game starts or add more or less side-quests (or none at all).
This keeps things interesting and fresh.
You see, I'd rather be creative to solve this as opposed to saying it just cannot work.
yuastnav wrote on Sep 23, 2011, 08:52:
Something like nethack or dungeon crawl doesn't really work with coop.
Beamer wrote on Sep 22, 2011, 18:50:
Know what never works with FP? Randomly generated content. It works in Diablo because you're so removed from the landscape that you don't notice how sparse and repetitive it is. Zoom down to eye level and you will.
BurntSoul wrote on Sep 22, 2011, 17:00:
Okay, for Diablo 3 to be an FPS? No F'n way, the guy is trolling for controversy. However, I do like the idea of a NetHack game in an FPS. In other words, give me the RPG elements. But also give me a completely random maps to cover. Also, I'd like to randomly create the map/dungeon/castle based on specific things like Dungeon Hack. Will I need food to survive, or not? More or Less creatures per level of dungeon? How many levels down? How large of a map can I create on the fly? Which tileset(s) to use? How much magic? Permadeath or not? You get what I mean. Finally, bring on the option for co-op gaming as well as single player and I'm good. Bonus? LAN only play and Dedicated server files, of course![]()
Creston wrote on Sep 22, 2011, 16:48:
So, good on you, Gamespy. Your thirteen year old mouthbreather of an editor got you a few hits, and your continued slide into obsolescence continues unabated.
PHJF wrote on Sep 22, 2011, 12:37:
asdf Al;sdSDJ FLKJASGKLWE LGKERJALGKHJASLKFHSDJLKG JAGLFHGSJLFSHLSKAFJSDALKFJHAGLKJ HGELKWHGERAJGFKHALKJFDA!~@#$!@$!$JRKL FDG FLKGJ SDALHJSDA KSDJAFSD@#LK% QJ@%L!??!~?!!?@!?!@?!@!@?
Fuck, it appears when I bang my head against the keyboard like a fucking moron I don't end up with a stupid fucking op ed for Gamespy. Maybe I'll try again.
Cutter wrote on Sep 22, 2011, 16:40:nin wrote on Sep 22, 2011, 16:20:
So it was all a stunt then...
Now, what did I say a the beginning of this thread?
eunichron wrote on Sep 22, 2011, 16:17:
And this is the guy that is editor-in-chief of Gamespy.
Creston wrote on Sep 22, 2011, 16:02:
He seems to be trying really hard to make a serious case, so I doubt he's trolling. But even if so, he's a cunt either way.
I was actually more surprised that Gamespy still exists.
Creston
nin wrote on Sep 22, 2011, 15:06:DG wrote on Sep 22, 2011, 13:13:qisometric camera system in Diablo III felt very unfamiliar,
How do you get to be a gaming "journalist" yet have not used iso before?
Thisexplainsconfirms a lot.
Wasn't there someone on here awhile back talking about how good gaming journalism is these days? And that just because they're young, doesn't mean they don't know the scene?
Oh yeah, here we go.