Guy on blog: Diablo 3 vs Fallout 3
- Thread starter Per
- Start date
Jiggly McNerdington
Look, Ma! Two Heads!
I'm also slightly worried they'll pull a Hellgate and include an optional subscription service. Plus the more colorful art kinda gets on my tits too.
That said, this jumped to my #1 most excited about slot. Beating out Fallout 3 (Which has lost points over time even though I'm still looking forward to it), Spore (Which was crushed by the sound of Mass Effect PC's awful copy protection), and Dawn of War 2 (Which lost points due to the "5 squads no base building" thing). COME ON BLIZZARD, DON'T FUCK THIS UP.
That said, this jumped to my #1 most excited about slot. Beating out Fallout 3 (Which has lost points over time even though I'm still looking forward to it), Spore (Which was crushed by the sound of Mass Effect PC's awful copy protection), and Dawn of War 2 (Which lost points due to the "5 squads no base building" thing). COME ON BLIZZARD, DON'T FUCK THIS UP.
Seymour the spore plant
Still Mildly Glowing
Bodybag said:
And what exactly would your point be? First you say the analogy is invalid, now you say that Diablo 3 may not be a faithful sequel. Which one is it?
Bodybag said:
It looks to me as if you're having quite a lot of second thoughts there, so I wouldn't say that. Nice trolling, though.
First, even though the game made the switch to 3D and so it's technically not isometric, the actual perspective remains exactly the same it's always been.
Special attacks and combos are the greater part of Diablo since 2 took over with skills, overriding "standard melee" very quickly; plus, note that this Barb's mana is constantly replenishing, so it seems to me that he's just overpowered to show off the game. The whole "life orbs" mechanic does bother me a bit, but we know precious little of it and there still are potions in Diablo 3. Take a look at the gameplay video again, after the Barb kills the skeletons with shields, he opens a chest which drops a "minor health potion".
I personally liked the Necro a lot, but the Witch Doctor is pretty much like him - disease taking poison's place, plus summons, walls and curses (terror and confuse both being in the video).
Bodybag said:
Heh. How does the other side of the fence feels? No really, if this was about Fallout and someone stated anything close to your Necro line you'd be all over them.
EDIT: Oh yeah, forgot to say that the respec thing is not actually confirmed yet, just being considered. Don't know what I feel about that though, I don't think I've ever played a game with this feature.
Bodybag
Look, Ma! Two Heads!
Jiggly McNerdington said:
I've seen that guys "color correction" pic on this subject, and I think it's kind of funny he didn't include any pics of act 2 or 3, which were a ton more colorful than that damn dungeon. It was speculated (confirmed?) that Act 1 was completed fairly early in the development cycle, which helps explain why things generally look more Diablo 1ish artwise, but the jazzier visuals of Lut Gholein and Kurast came later on, during the many delays. Even the Hell level is more colorful than Act 1, all things considered.
Now that they have DirectX 10 shaders and volumetric light, I can't begrudge the dev team for wanting to use them. Don't worry though - if the hordes complain loud enough, Blizzard's already shown with SC2 that they're not above "tightening up the graffix" when deemed necessary.
I've enjoyed every blizzard game apart from WoW and that's purely because I don't enjoy MMO's I expect continuity of core gameplay features and adding new intuitive gameplay features from them if I got anything less I would feel gimped, Also artwork as always seems to have gotten a pretty and evolved look to it. Comparing them to beth is pretty unfair on beth they stand know chance in the developer quality comparison it's like comparing valve with those guys who made turok.
Ol' Vomitbag said:
Goddammit. That's a shame, the Act 1 video looked pretty cool, very similar to D1. I disliked D2's jungle design, it had colors too bright for the setting.
As for shaders and whatnot, one thing is technology, another is design. Nothing stands in the way of using top-notch technology in order to capture the predecessor's dark atmosphere, and since the Art Director is Leonard Boyarsky... it could end up looking/designed in an awesome way.
Pretty ironic that Leon ended up working on the sequel of the original Fallout's main 'competitor' RPG.
Bodybag
Look, Ma! Two Heads!
Seymour the spore plant said:
I said nothing about it not being faithful. I'd rather not scream strawman at you, though, because that shit's weak, but my point is it's different enough from the last game to cause concern with many fans of the series. It is simply not a matter of "more of what everyone wants." I mostly like what I see, but I'm speaking for myself there.
What? Other than the (completely unforgivable) omission of the Necro and the fact that I'll likely have to wait untill I'm WAY too old to still be playing videogames, I'm totally on board for this game. And grow some freaking thicker skin, dude. You're a NMAer, for chrissakes!
As far as the gameplay video indicated, sure. Don't be alarmed it the game ships with a free rotating camera, though! That's all I'm saying. Also, ISO is, generally speaking, a faux-3d workaround for 2D art. Sometimes it's used in a purely artistic capacity, but not in this case. Now the game is Full 3D, and the gameplay apaprently incorporates that. Note all the crazy physics stuff going on? it's not just window dressing anymore, guys.
For most people, combat was a few basic repetitions of two or three main skills and the standard melee. The skill tree made such specializations necessary. This is changing, how much or if it's for the better remains to bee seen, but so far so good.
And I know there's potions still in the game. GoW had potions too, what's your point? Did you EVEN listen to the narrator talk about the mechanics? I think it's a good change, but don't act like this isn't huge or anything. Some people aren't as receptive to change as you and I. Know what I mean
If this keeps up I'm just going to totally disregard that guy's blog thing and talk excliusively about Diablo here. In fact, I'm going to go ahead and encourage everyone else to do that as well; it'll be way more productive.
But, no(!), the Witch Doctor is not the same. I think one of the guys in a Q&A (Boyarsky, again?!) indicated that nothing they're doing with the WD would in any way proclude them from including the Necro if they thought they had a good enough idea for him, or something to that effect. Smells like an expansion add-in, the bastards
Only if I disagreed. It's easy to forget I'm also Fallout fan, since I don't love it so much that it turns to hate for F3.
Depends on how it's implemented, but cookie cutter builds and rerolls both suck; good riddance, I say.
Ausir said:
Curse those misleading German videos, stating false information.
I've been looking for a game with a class like the Necro for many, many years. Just off the top of my head theres Guild Wars (summons aren't persistent), World of Warcraft (just one pet at a time), City of Villains (6 pets max), Mythos (the best, probably, but the pets have poor pathfinding), Hellgate London (you can't have more than 10 points in a skill even with gear, no corpse explosion), pretty sure there is more. I was desperate for a summoning class in games like Sacred, Loki, Titans Quest. None of these games comes anywhere close to the simple Necro strategy of skeletons to defend and dent the waves, and corpse explosion to wipe them out. To me it seems they will probably limit the summons of the Witch Doctor, maybe because in 3D it wouldn't work as well to have as many as the Necro. Frankly I don't care.
Diablo is, to me, just a handful of things:
1) Character planning. With no respecs and limited skill points you had to specialize to succeed. This limits the possible skill combos but creates a few dozen sub-classes that mostly play differently.
2) Epic battles. In games like WoW you fight 2 mobs at a time max, in Diablo you fight dozens. D3 appears to have these huge fights which is a big plus.
3) Loot. D3 apparently has class restricted loot but what was great about D2 was picking the best gear for your specialization from hundreds of choices, and planning your stats to meet your needs.
Diablo might be an action RPG but when you consider stat planning, loot planning, and skill planning, its an incredibly detailed process of character development, and thats what RPGs are really about.
Unfortunately if the game lacks a class with infinite (relatively), persistent summons and corpse explosion, my search for a game with another true Necro class will continue.
I suppose this threat isn't the best place for that rant but really with D3 just announced yesterday, Beth's F3 is the furthest thing from my mind. Although when I saw the gameplay footage I immediately thought, "and Bethsoft says you can't have a good game with old school camera angles."
Diablo is, to me, just a handful of things:
1) Character planning. With no respecs and limited skill points you had to specialize to succeed. This limits the possible skill combos but creates a few dozen sub-classes that mostly play differently.
2) Epic battles. In games like WoW you fight 2 mobs at a time max, in Diablo you fight dozens. D3 appears to have these huge fights which is a big plus.
3) Loot. D3 apparently has class restricted loot but what was great about D2 was picking the best gear for your specialization from hundreds of choices, and planning your stats to meet your needs.
Diablo might be an action RPG but when you consider stat planning, loot planning, and skill planning, its an incredibly detailed process of character development, and thats what RPGs are really about.
Unfortunately if the game lacks a class with infinite (relatively), persistent summons and corpse explosion, my search for a game with another true Necro class will continue.
I suppose this threat isn't the best place for that rant but really with D3 just announced yesterday, Beth's F3 is the furthest thing from my mind. Although when I saw the gameplay footage I immediately thought, "and Bethsoft says you can't have a good game with old school camera angles."
Bodybag
Look, Ma! Two Heads!
Ausir said:
Neither was the Barbarian, or any of the other classes in D2. Are you going somewhere with this?
D1 was fun and it had the somewhat unique feature of getting skills from books found in the game. But really in all respects it is an inferior action RPG to pretty much all action RPGs that followed it. It can claim a dark atmosphere and it can even claim to be a founder of the genre but really, Diablo 2 wrote the book.
The point that is being overlooked, which is the most important one, is that when you look at the screens of Dialbo 3, you can instantly tell that you're looking at a Diablo game.
When you look at the shots for Fallout 3, they could be from any action game. They don't look like a fallout game at all.
When you look at the shots for Fallout 3, they could be from any action game. They don't look like a fallout game at all.
Jiggly McNerdington
Look, Ma! Two Heads!
Oh, yeah. I'm not trying to say all of Diablo 1 and 2 were as dark as some of the "Desaturation" pictures I've seen floating around, just that they weren't as bright as Diablo 3. It's a pretty minor complaint anyway, and I bitched similarly about Diablo 2's dungeons being better lit than Diablo 1's. Didn't really detract from the game for me, but I sort of missed it. Still didn't change the fact that I played a hell of a lot more D2 than D1.Bodybag said:
Which confuses the hell out of me.
Because if you want to make a console shooter.....you don't buy the rights to make Fallout 3. That makes no sense.
I gotta think that the business side, and the "creative" side of Bethesda on this one, were separate. I gotta think that the business side is what bought the IP.
Or, the group over there....really is dumb. Not meant as an insult or anything, but just plain dumb people, who lucked into being successful. Which makes it funny that the press would believe that he's actually a genius.
I mean look at Oblivion. It is, at it's heart...just a bad game. That was praised, and sold fantastically. WTF? I would say that being a launch title for the 360 certainly helped that cause.
shihonage
Made in USSR
A bit off subject, just an opinion on D3...
I am 100% sure that Blizzard will nail the "feel" of the game, and it will sell a zillion of copies.
That said, I find it sad that the game's visuals now became "just another 3D engine". The graphics are lacking gritty edge and distinctiveness and there's too many cheesy-looking magical effects on the screen at all times.
And those health power-ups that drop in addition to health potions... there's such a thing as over-simplification. Let's leave some Diablo in our Diablo game, shall we... this ain't no crap arcade game.
I am 100% sure that Blizzard will nail the "feel" of the game, and it will sell a zillion of copies.
That said, I find it sad that the game's visuals now became "just another 3D engine". The graphics are lacking gritty edge and distinctiveness and there's too many cheesy-looking magical effects on the screen at all times.
And those health power-ups that drop in addition to health potions... there's such a thing as over-simplification. Let's leave some Diablo in our Diablo game, shall we... this ain't no crap arcade game.
FeelTheRads
Vault Senior Citizen
Bodybag said:
Oh, my.. another one of those "it's not ISO, it's 3D". The point, you pocket lint, is that it is in the same perspective as the previous games. I don't care if some architect will come with calculations and show me it's not exactly isometric... it's a top-down perspective and that's it.
And what if you can move the camera? As long as it can be fixed in this position (like in Van Buren for example) it doesn't matter.