Diablo had really good art and strong presentation. If a game lacks those, then it's already falling short of Diablo.
I don't even care how it looks. All previews made it clear that it's going to be Diablo in 3D against zombies from hell in London, or something like that. How can anyone not like that game!?Originally Posted by steve
Diablo had really good art and strong presentation. If a game lacks those, then it's already falling short of Diablo.
The art direction and the animations were good but I think we ought to include the laughably low screen resolution of Diablo 2 in the "presentation" part. The game certainly didn't set any visual standards.
I was speaking of the original Diablo. I didn't like Diablo 2, so it's not a game that I would use as a measuring stick for appeal, personally.
You're smoking some crackrock there Ben; Diablo II was completely awesome, especially with the expansion pack.
On paper Hellgate seems pretty awesome, and all of the videos I've seen thus far make me really want to try it out for myself. :)
For the record, I talked to Roper this morning, who said they've made absolutely zero decisions or announcements on something like a subscription fee for Hellgate. He acknowledges that, once you go down the MMO path and you have customer service costs, you're going to need money to support that, but there's any of a number of models that could be used: a monthly fee, the Guild Wars model, or something else entirely.
So the bottom line is, although common sense dictates that there would likely be extra fees involved, it's pure speculation as to how that might work.
Also, as an aside, I was really, really impressed with what I saw of Hellgate. THe graphics may not be Crysis-jaw-dropping-ish, but it seems like a pretty interesting RPG and the ability to play it as an FPS has me dying to dive into it.
I'm with you, although I suspect we're in the very, very small minority. For me, I liked Diablo as a very atmospheric and stylish SP action/RPG. I saw D2 as a competitive online multiplayer thing, which isn't my deal. It lacked the original atmosphere and didn't build any sense of a world - saving for the night after killing Blood Raven and coming back the next day to find Blood Raven (and everyone else) alive and well killed the feeling for me.Originally Posted by Ben Sones
On Hellgate, they've managed to botch this PR exercise up by sending confusing messages. Keep quiet until you know what you are doing or be very careful about your wording.
I wouldn't mind the Guild Wars model at all, but I really hope they don't go for a "premium items" or "premium areas" buy-in model where you only pay for what you want (ala many free Korean MMOs these days).Originally Posted by sluggo
Hope I'm not repeating something here, but here's a blurb related to the whole subscription thing from www.hellgateguru.com's interview with Ivan (from FSS):
"Update: Since posting our original news item on the matter, Shacknews has been contacted by Electronic Arts, which is co-publishing the game along with Namco Bandai. EA noted that there has not in fact been any final decision made as to Hellgate: London's online pricing model, be it subscription-based or otherwise. We respect this situation, while maintaining that have reported fairly on statements we received. A full interview is forthcoming."
Yeah, we haven't made a final decision. Seriously, the directors debate about this quite a bit. Basically, we want to do ongoing content. We don't want it to be like Diablo where we had a patch and an expansion and that's that. We really want to do ongoing content. So the directors have to just figure out how the hell we're going to pay for that. Could be anything. Really.
$1 per character respec!Originally Posted by sluggo
(Seriously! I'd happily have paid $1 to get my level 7x sorceress a new talent spec to play with on the MP realms. Probably $2 or $3 really.)
My complaint from the video listed here is that it looked utterly boring. At least in D2 I had a couple of skills (minimum) that I had to keep up and choose between. The video was just "run, shoot, run, shoot, run, shoot". I don't know how this differs from "move, click, move, click, move, click" but it seems like it would to me. Maybe it's the lack of the overhead isometric view and the ensuing lack of strategy in planning how best to take out that back of 7.3E+10 death knights that is suggested by same.Also, as an aside, I was really, really impressed with what I saw of Hellgate. THe graphics may not be Crysis-jaw-dropping-ish, but it seems like a pretty interesting RPG and the ability to play it as an FPS has me dying to dive into it.
Well, to be fair, I think there'll be a LOT of gameplay variation once you get to try out the different classes. Like, for instance, if you're a hunter you shoot rainbowy beams with futurey guns, whereas a templar shoots rainbowy beams out of magical foci and a cabalist shoots dark beams of dark spirit energy (but with rainbowy edges) from maybe a demon skull-topped staff.
Did anyone else but Gamespot source this story on Monday? Because if Gamespot's story was accurate it sounds like they are either backpedelling or the announcement was just a trial baloon which they wanted to use to gauge interest but quickly found out it wasn't a very popular idea.Originally Posted by sluggo
How do you know there weren't other skills at work? I mean, I'm not clear on how watching a video of D2 would have looked much if any different. "All you do is run around and shoot arrows / cast Frost Nova!"Originally Posted by mouselock
Why would the view make much difference to the strategizing? A mob is a mob whether you're looking at them from their ground plane or from an overhead isoview.Maybe it's the lack of the overhead isometric view and the ensuing lack of strategy in planning how best to take out that back of 7.3E+10 death knights that is suggested by same.
I haven't watched the video, but conceptually I can't really see why a change in viewpoint would break the Diablo click-to-kill-mobs-forever formula so badly. And I can barely imagine the Flagship guys screwing up the mob-management multi-skill-spamming gameplay given their pedigree. Yet I trust you all (mostly) to have pretty solid gaming opinions. So something is not computing here. I'm'a wait for the demo, me.
The video looked boring, but I think a video of Diablo would, as you said, look equally boring. We'll have to see.Originally Posted by RepoMan
I don't know, I've seen some videos where there's a lot more crap on the screen. Lots of shit exploding = cooler than less shit exploding.
That's a compelling argument, but I still didn't like it. Loved Diablo, though.Originally Posted by Kunikos
Probably, though there are at least one or two other people here that also found D2 disappointing (like Desslock). I think it came up in a "games that you hated but everyone else liked" thread.Originally Posted by Dhruin
I haven't seen the video, but I have seen Hellgate being played. You don't necessarily play a game like Hellgate based on what you're seeing when you watch videos of the gameplay. All that stuff is just the expression of how you've spec'ed your character, what equipment you're using, who you're playing with, yadda yadda yadda. When I did the CGM story, I sat and watched Bill Roper play for nearly five hours, which would have been pretty dull if he hadn't been showing me all the character and inventory stuff.
FWIW, they seem to have some pretty cool ideas in terms of how weapons and armor work. The skill stuff wasn't really developed when I saw it several months ago, but I'm assuming the guys at Flagship who are veterans of Diablo know how to put together interesting skill trees.
Personally, I'm sold, although I'd hate to see it turned into a subscription based game. Ugh.
How do I know there weren't other skills at work? Did you watch the video? There was: Shoot stuff, and shoot lots of stuff.Originally Posted by RepoMan
There may be a wide and varied skill tree there that rivals D2, but I didn't see it. I'm not saying the game is DOMED!!!11! mind you, I'm just saying that video was pretty lackluster. Which maybe it's just, y'know, a crappy video. But I do recall D2 videos showing off all the stuff I could do, and I haven't yet seen such a video for Hellgate which has me worried a bit.
Well, it's a bit easier to figure "Okay, I'll charge in and frost nova the first five until they're dead, then after that the others will be in range for my ice ball of doom and I'll do that. That'll probably eat up my mana so I'll need to zip back out and potion up then." when you can see what's in room 1, 2 and 3. You tend not to have that visibility (and hence planning) in a first person (well, third person in the case of the video) view, y'know?Why would the view make much difference to the strategizing? A mob is a mob whether you're looking at them from their ground plane or from an overhead isoview.
Maybe you should watch the video? It looked decidedly and wholly un-Diablo like to me. The more I think about it, the more I think a lot of it is the switch to 1st/3rd person view rather than overhead isometric.I haven't watched the video, but conceptually I can't really see why a change in viewpoint would break the Diablo click-to-kill-mobs-forever formula so badly.
Well, you presume they were making a multi-skill-spamming type of game. Hey, I did too! But the video has me wondering whether that presumption is right. It looked pretty "Dynasty Warriors-ish" to me, and despite the fact that Dynasty Warriors is running around spamming attacks on large groups of enemies, I wouldn't consider it at all related to Diablo. (Note: Dynasty warriors uses swords, this video had guns. Also the demons weren't dressed in appropriate chinese period outfits.)And I can barely imagine the Flagship guys screwing up the mob-management multi-skill-spamming gameplay given their pedigree. Yet I trust you all (mostly) to have pretty solid gaming opinions. So something is not computing here. I'm'a wait for the demo, me.
Lots of backpedaling and clarifying from all sorts of people since they made that announcement about paying for MP
All of a sudden everyone is saying that the issue isn't nailed down, that paying for MP is one option, that they are still deciding.
I think it was fantastic as well, but there's something about D2's art that feels - murky? I honestly think there's something to be said for Diablo 1 having better "atmosphere". Diablo 1 also had my favorite song out of the entire series - the catacombs theme.Originally Posted by Kunikos
When I watch this Hellgate video again, trying to be levelheaded, I can honestly admit there was some cool stuff (I, for one, like the idea of not having to pick up items manually). And to be fair, videos of Diablo 2's gameplay wouldn't exactly rock my world either, yet I loved the final game. So I'm willing to let my expectations rise back up somewhat.On paper Hellgate seems pretty awesome, and all of the videos I've seen thus far make me really want to try it out for myself. :)
But I was burned by Throne Of Darkness (an Oriental-themed actionRPG from a few of the people who worked on either Diablo 1 or 2), which took what should have been a can't-miss formula of "Diablo + kung-fu" and screwed it up beyond belief. Therefore, every time I see something about Hellgate that doesn't blow me away, I think "oh no, not again".
I generally don't like the look of the videos and pictures either. At the beginning they actually turned me off, but I was still excited about the game, just because of the genre and developers. When I saw it in person that all changed. For whatever reason it just looks much better in person. I wouldn't say I was blown away but I definitely liked what I saw, and this was at the 2005 e3. I imagine it's only gotten a lot better since then.
I loved D2 single player, not really into multiplayer unless it's coop and the person is sitting with me in the same room, so the whole multiplayer fiasco is a bummer if true, but not a show stopper by any means.
While I wasn't impressed with the video either, I couldn't help but note that the
actual short-cut bar at the bottom of the screen was empty bar one piece of equipment. There were a mass of empty slots behind.
I mean, the video is a recording of a screen. In which case, who's playing the game? Is it at some press event? Is it someone playing who has no interest in any of the other skills - or perhaps doesn't even know how to use them?
Everyone I know who's seen Hellgate in the flesh or played it at all have been enormously impressed, so I can't believe this is actually it either. As the video really was a bit nob.
Why did you have to do that? I had suppressed all memory of this horrible mess of a game. Now I'm starting to worry again about Hellgate. :(Originally Posted by curst
Hah, that's a pretty damning argument. But Hellgate isn't being done by a "few" of the people who worked on Diablo; it's most of the major people who worked at Blizzard on Diablo.Originally Posted by curst
Why do people have to have a pedigree of working on the previous type of game in order to make a newer successor? I don't really get why people think it is mandatory... I'm pretty sure that Relic puts out good RTS games without having anyone from Blizzard working there.
I don't think it's mandatory but if you go back through game ads of the last 5-7 years, you'll see a lot of "From the co-creator of Starcraft" and "From the designers of Diablo" but if you read the fine print it was maybe "an animator who worked on Starcraft" or "a guy who helped photocopy production art for Diablo" and the games invariably were bad and disappointing.
You see this all the time in movie advertising: "From the co-assistant-executive producer of X-Men 2!" and "From the assistant key grip gaffer of The X-Files" and "From the assistant consulting 2nd unit director of Lord of the Rings."
Flagship really pretty much IS the Diablo I/II creators (aside from lead D2 designer Steig Heglund, who's lead on Gods and Heroes mmorpg now).
I just find the monthly fee thing disingenous when they seemed to be hawking a free "battle.net" service for all this time. Never in any preview I can think of did Roper or anyone else talk about mmorpg type fees.
I'm assuming either they have WoW $$$ in their eyes, or they maybe saw how Funcom is trying to start Conan as a single player offline game that ramps people up into the monthly fee portion.
Last edited by Geo; 01-11-2007 at 10:56 AM.
Yeah that usually doesn't mean shit either. That new movie "from the producer of X-Men" is going to be a big festering turd. Producers don't do anything except for finance a project, and if the script writing is ass it's all downhill from there. Mix with a bad director and you could have an all-star all-Oscar-winning cast and it'll still be a shit movie.
For games if you have one or two people from some popular game doesn't mean their new one will be any good, or that they will get rid of the bugs and polish enough before releasing (ie: having a good production and software engineering process).
If he fucks this up then he'll have to face some serious nerd rage.