Quick recap: Jay Wilson mentions at BlizzCon that Battle.net will be monetized in some way or another. Cue justified outrage.
Today, Joystiq spoke with Blizzard's Rob Pardo regarding the minor controversy to which he cleared up the issue by saying that there will be absolutely no subscription fees to play Diablo III.
So Julian (Jay) Wilson told us that you guys are looking monetize Battle.Net in some way. Is that right?
Wow, that's an evil way of putting it. Julian's turning into a business guy on me. Here's the way I would put it. We're definitely not looking at turning Diablo into a subscription based game. It's clearly not an MMO, so it's not appropriate to do a business model like that. The way we approach all of our games now, is we come up with what we think is a great game, and then we wrap the appropriate business model around it. If that's just a box price, then that's that.
With Battle.Net we're definitely looking at possible different features that we might be able to do for additional money. We're not talking about Hellgate or anything like that. We're not going to tack things on. I think World of Warcraft is a great example to look at. We charge people if they want to switch servers or if they want name changes, things that aren't core to the game experience, they're really just optional things that some people want. It takes us some development work to do it, so it makes sense to charge for it. We would never do something like say to get the full game experience, you'll have to pay extra.
Hellgate directly referenced. Flagshipping avoided.
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Wizard Skill Tree Revealed - hellforge
Shacknews has posted up their write up of the demo straight from the floor at BlizzCon.
The skill trees are split into three branches, Storm, Arcane and Conjure. The frost tree is mainly made up of Cold and Lightning spells. Arcane contains various armours, a magic missile, and the old favourite teleport. Lastly Conjure, contains many fire skills including the old favourites such as Hydra and Meteor.
Blizzard
-Rank 0/1
--Mana Cost: 70
--Call down shards of ice to pelt an area dealing 6-10 cold damage per second for 3 seconds. Critical hits from cold damage freeze targets.
Teleport
-Rank 0/1
--Mana Cost: 23
--Teleport to the selected location up to 40 feet away.
Slow Time
-Rank 0/1
--Mana Cost: 20
--Warp space and time, slowing nearby monsters and projectiles. Enemy attack cooldown increase: 1 second(s)
Hydra
-Rank 0/1
--Mana Cost:
--Unknown Creates a multi-headed beast that attacks your enemies with bolts of fire.
Skill work differently from how the used to in Diablo 2. Now main skills can only have one point in them, and you can develop it further through a separate 15 point skill subspec. The subspec can then take the tree in one of three directions, letting you specialise even further.
As an example, in the Conjure skill tree, there are just two spels at level 3 so far. They both have a common subspec though, which takes them into one of three possible directions, however you could just max out all three of these and create really powerful level 3 skills.
The subspecs don't always relate to the main skills in the tree, but are rather passives that can help out all of you skill sets. To top this off, there is now runes to contend with, which are used on skills as you can see in our Q&A writeup.
As an example, if you have a lightning skill and you use a rune which multiplies it, you then get a chain lightning skill instead. Using this same rune on an illusion skill, can mean that you multiply into more than one clone of yourself.
It is worth checking out each skill tree on your own to see what I mean.
As an aside, Australian website GamesOn.net has a reporter at the show conducting a liveblog which you can read here.
The Rune System.
Runes are a random drop, used for all classes. They have a significant impact on skills - with a system that encourages experimentation. The system uses elements taken from other systems that the devs found and liked. Random drops, being the main thing - and skill customisation / crafting.
Basic Monster Deaths
Other half of the visceral equation Physical forces Damage flavoured deaths Critical deaths - "we wanted to make them noticeable... so they *have* to explode!" (different and awesome deaths, mainly - dependent on attacks, damage, and characters)
Crazy monster deaths:
Special deaths - some monsters have hand-crafted animations that are theirs specifically. Skill-driven Deaths - "you can't have a disintegrate skill if it doesn't actually disintegrate something" - so there are now locusts, acid bursts, that sort of thing. The death is very much part of the skill. Rare Deaths - Characters are full of "evil" - so when they die, obviously, they have to explode. Why? "Explosions are cool!"
It is worth noting that the liveblog also describes the rune system for skills, so is once again worth checking out.
The skill trees are split into three branches, Storm, Arcane and Conjure. The frost tree is mainly made up of Cold and Lightning spells. Arcane contains various armours, a magic missile, and the old favourite teleport. Lastly Conjure, contains many fire skills including the old favourites such as Hydra and Meteor.
Blizzard
-Rank 0/1
--Mana Cost: 70
--Call down shards of ice to pelt an area dealing 6-10 cold damage per second for 3 seconds. Critical hits from cold damage freeze targets.
Teleport
-Rank 0/1
--Mana Cost: 23
--Teleport to the selected location up to 40 feet away.
Slow Time
-Rank 0/1
--Mana Cost: 20
--Warp space and time, slowing nearby monsters and projectiles. Enemy attack cooldown increase: 1 second(s)
Hydra
-Rank 0/1
--Mana Cost:
--Unknown Creates a multi-headed beast that attacks your enemies with bolts of fire.
Skill work differently from how the used to in Diablo 2. Now main skills can only have one point in them, and you can develop it further through a separate 15 point skill subspec. The subspec can then take the tree in one of three directions, letting you specialise even further.
As an example, in the Conjure skill tree, there are just two spels at level 3 so far. They both have a common subspec though, which takes them into one of three possible directions, however you could just max out all three of these and create really powerful level 3 skills.
The subspecs don't always relate to the main skills in the tree, but are rather passives that can help out all of you skill sets. To top this off, there is now runes to contend with, which are used on skills as you can see in our Q&A writeup.
As an example, if you have a lightning skill and you use a rune which multiplies it, you then get a chain lightning skill instead. Using this same rune on an illusion skill, can mean that you multiply into more than one clone of yourself.
It is worth checking out each skill tree on your own to see what I mean.
As an aside, Australian website GamesOn.net has a reporter at the show conducting a liveblog which you can read here.
The Rune System.
Runes are a random drop, used for all classes. They have a significant impact on skills - with a system that encourages experimentation. The system uses elements taken from other systems that the devs found and liked. Random drops, being the main thing - and skill customisation / crafting.
Basic Monster Deaths
Other half of the visceral equation Physical forces Damage flavoured deaths Critical deaths - "we wanted to make them noticeable... so they *have* to explode!" (different and awesome deaths, mainly - dependent on attacks, damage, and characters)
Crazy monster deaths:
Special deaths - some monsters have hand-crafted animations that are theirs specifically. Skill-driven Deaths - "you can't have a disintegrate skill if it doesn't actually disintegrate something" - so there are now locusts, acid bursts, that sort of thing. The death is very much part of the skill. Rare Deaths - Characters are full of "evil" - so when they die, obviously, they have to explode. Why? "Explosions are cool!"
It is worth noting that the liveblog also describes the rune system for skills, so is once again worth checking out.
BlizzCon - Diablo III Gameplay Q&A - hellforge
Blizzard just finished conducting their Q&A Panel, and here are some of the things that they shared:
General:
No decision made on powerlevelling.
There will be respecs.
Classes do not have 'roles' like an MMO would. All classes are DPS classes.
There's hell, nightmare, normal modes (but we knew this already).
Deaths:
Special deaths - some monsters have hand-crafted animations that are theirs specifically.
Skill-driven Deaths - "you can't have a disintegrate skill if it doesn't actually disintegrate something" - so there are now locusts, acid bursts, that sort of thing. The death is very much part of the skill.
Rare Deaths - Characters are full of "evil" - so when they die, obviously, they have to explode. Why? "Explosions are cool!"
Basic Monster Deaths
Other half of the visceral equation Physical forces Damage flavoured deaths Critical deaths - "we wanted to make them noticeable... so they *have* to explode!" (different and awesome deaths, mainly - dependent on attacks, damage, and characters)
Runes:
Runes modify skills, and there are tier levels in runes.
You can swap runes in your skills. Runes drop frequently. Runes are solely a modification of your skills, not items like D2. Higher tier runes have a greater effect. High end runes are rare and are a big find.
For example, runes can make skills cost less, or do more damage, or perform other changes to your skills (e.g. knockbacks and reflecting damage). A teleport skill with the "strike" rune does damage to nearby enemies that you teleport close to.
Skill System:
- Evolution of Diablo 2 Skill System
- Synergies integrated as new skills
- Skill Runes (new system)
- Respec (although it's not designed yet)
- Simple to understand
- Compelling earlygame and lategame (taking difficulty levels into consideration)
- Large variety of build possibilities
- Supportive of 6 active skills
Skill system has you focusing on six or so skills of your choice throughout the game. No more swapping between the same 2 skills over and over.
The problem with Diablo 2's skill system is that it really focused people into 2 or 3 main skills of the same element, so immunities were imbalancing. Immunities will be toned down.
The focus on the new system is to target six skills, and not 2 or 3.
New spells announced for Witch Doctor:
Firebat Swarm, Plague of Toads
The Wizard's Disintegrate:
Disintegrate is a ranged skill that allows you to hold down your mouse button and move your mouse around to sweep the beam everywhere. It gets stronger the longer you leave it on, but uses exponentially more energy.
Other Questions:
Will there be a Paladin / Hammerdin or similar class?
We haven't announced it yet
Does Wirt have a fourth leg?
Possibly. Post suggestions on the Official Forum on what you'd like to see, because Blizzard wants to bring him back.
Is there a secret cow level?
It's a secret.
General:
No decision made on powerlevelling.
There will be respecs.
Classes do not have 'roles' like an MMO would. All classes are DPS classes.
There's hell, nightmare, normal modes (but we knew this already).
Deaths:
Special deaths - some monsters have hand-crafted animations that are theirs specifically.
Skill-driven Deaths - "you can't have a disintegrate skill if it doesn't actually disintegrate something" - so there are now locusts, acid bursts, that sort of thing. The death is very much part of the skill.
Rare Deaths - Characters are full of "evil" - so when they die, obviously, they have to explode. Why? "Explosions are cool!"
Basic Monster Deaths
Other half of the visceral equation Physical forces Damage flavoured deaths Critical deaths - "we wanted to make them noticeable... so they *have* to explode!" (different and awesome deaths, mainly - dependent on attacks, damage, and characters)
Runes:
Runes modify skills, and there are tier levels in runes.
You can swap runes in your skills. Runes drop frequently. Runes are solely a modification of your skills, not items like D2. Higher tier runes have a greater effect. High end runes are rare and are a big find.
For example, runes can make skills cost less, or do more damage, or perform other changes to your skills (e.g. knockbacks and reflecting damage). A teleport skill with the "strike" rune does damage to nearby enemies that you teleport close to.
Skill System:
- Evolution of Diablo 2 Skill System
- Synergies integrated as new skills
- Skill Runes (new system)
- Respec (although it's not designed yet)
- Simple to understand
- Compelling earlygame and lategame (taking difficulty levels into consideration)
- Large variety of build possibilities
- Supportive of 6 active skills
Skill system has you focusing on six or so skills of your choice throughout the game. No more swapping between the same 2 skills over and over.
The problem with Diablo 2's skill system is that it really focused people into 2 or 3 main skills of the same element, so immunities were imbalancing. Immunities will be toned down.
The focus on the new system is to target six skills, and not 2 or 3.
New spells announced for Witch Doctor:
Firebat Swarm, Plague of Toads
The Wizard's Disintegrate:
Disintegrate is a ranged skill that allows you to hold down your mouse button and move your mouse around to sweep the beam everywhere. It gets stronger the longer you leave it on, but uses exponentially more energy.
Other Questions:
Will there be a Paladin / Hammerdin or similar class?
We haven't announced it yet
Does Wirt have a fourth leg?
Possibly. Post suggestions on the Official Forum on what you'd like to see, because Blizzard wants to bring him back.
Is there a secret cow level?
It's a secret.
New Class Revealed: The Wizard - hellforge
BlizzCon is well under way, and the moment that every Diablo fan has been waiting for since the game was announced barely three months ago has finally arrived: the announcement of the new class.
Behold...
THE WIZARD
Holy ****! Who would have figured that?
The description reads: Youthful and headstrong, the upstart Wizard manipulates the primal forces of the universe to vanquish foes.
Joining the previously revealed classes of the Barbarian and the new Witch Doctor, the Wizard is a powerful spellcaster said to manipulate the powers of the elements.
The Wizard is reminiscent of the Sorceress class from Diablo II, and comes equipped with Charged Bolt and Magic Missile spells.
Other spells known to the Sorceress, such as the Frost Nova, Tornado and Blizzard make a strong return in the newly minted Wizard.
Each of the three announced classes, the Wizard, Barbarian and Witch Doctor are playable in both male and female forms. In the demo, the male Wizard is unavailable.
The demo has the player making his or her way through the dense foliage of Tristram Woods into the Tristram Church Dungeon.
More information will be posted within this article as it becomes available!
Behold...
THE WIZARD
Holy ****! Who would have figured that?
The description reads: Youthful and headstrong, the upstart Wizard manipulates the primal forces of the universe to vanquish foes.
Joining the previously revealed classes of the Barbarian and the new Witch Doctor, the Wizard is a powerful spellcaster said to manipulate the powers of the elements.
The Wizard is reminiscent of the Sorceress class from Diablo II, and comes equipped with Charged Bolt and Magic Missile spells.
Other spells known to the Sorceress, such as the Frost Nova, Tornado and Blizzard make a strong return in the newly minted Wizard.
Each of the three announced classes, the Wizard, Barbarian and Witch Doctor are playable in both male and female forms. In the demo, the male Wizard is unavailable.
The demo has the player making his or her way through the dense foliage of Tristram Woods into the Tristram Church Dungeon.
More information will be posted within this article as it becomes available!
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
No Guns, No Spellbooks, No DX10 - hellforge
Blizzard's been saying "no" to many feature requests in the past couple of days, some of which are desirable, others less so. Sp3tSnAz has already made the initial posts regarding these topics, but I'd like to chime in on this one...
No Guns
Jay Wilson suggested not awhile back that the next announced class would be certain to make some fans of Diablo ‘very angry'. Speculation about the next class went up like fireworks with everything from gunslingers to mechanized robots being suggested by anxious fans in Diablo III's various forums, to which Blizzard's community manager, Bashiok, has posted a response:
Well, you have to realize that it's been 20 years, and in technological terms that can be a very long time. We're trying to create a world that's not static, its filled out, and with that it's an advancing world. With that amount of time, and also the loss of the Arreat Summit much of the remaining barbarian culture has focused on... nah I'm just kidding, there aren't any guns.
Cheeky! But he's not fooling anyone. I'm still adamant that the next class will be a rifle-wielding Sarah Palin who wears the skins and furs of her fallen enemies.
No Spellbooks
Spellbooks featured strongly in the original Diablo as being the only way for a character to learn new skills. Each character, regardless of class, was limited in his spellcasting abilities simply by the amount of spellbooks he or she discovered in the course of the game. This of course resulted in much imbalance and added not a small amount of tedium to the game as a whole. In short, it wasn't very well implemented; more suited to its roguelike predecessors rather than action RPGs of which Diablo was the first of its kind. Bashiok speaks:
That came back in Diablo II too eventually in the form of rune words, and I don't think it really worked out too well in the end. I do think it actually could be designed and implemented properly; balanced, etc. but...
For me the more important question though is what impact does it have on the class you're playing and also our knowledge of the Diablo world? Is a class nothing more than someone who read from a book, or is holding a specific item? No, they're very specific and very iconic figures (heroes even) from very distinct styles and backgrounds. The characters we play are these concentrated images of their cultures, beliefs, etc. Everything they do resembles who they are and where they're from, and what does it mean to then piecemeal that out to any one who just happens to throw a couple runes in to an item.
It worked better in Diablo (1) I think. Conceptually it was a bit easier to digest just because of the basic pen and paper underpinnings, and the heroes were far more generic. It was also far less obtrusive.
In Diablo II though, for me anyway, it always undermined the uniqueness of playing a specific class, and also what it meant to be that character. Aside from everything else it caused.
Ouch.
No DX10
Overhyped, poor-performing and completely unnecessary, DirectX 10, a technological advancement originally hailed as the bringer of Next-Generation Graphics has since been trumped by ingenuity and clever, engine-based innovation in games like Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare.
Newly minted titles like Warhammer Online: Age of Reckoning have even dropped their support for DirectX 10 in light of the problems and performance issues it delivers. With only high-end games like Crysis and World in Conflict featuring it in its full form, DX10 has very little to showcase.
A number of complete failures like Hellgate: London and Age of Conan to which poor performance and unnecessary lengths of QA were wasted upon can be owed entirely to their implementation of DX10, it would not surprise me if Blizzard decided not to opt in for its use, either:
We haven't announced any final support for DirectX versions/system requirements. I'll say that right now we're not using any DirectX10 features, but we potentially could.
It seems unlikely that DX10 will ever make it in, especially since they plan to release Diablo III on the Mac as well as the PC.
No Guns
Jay Wilson suggested not awhile back that the next announced class would be certain to make some fans of Diablo ‘very angry'. Speculation about the next class went up like fireworks with everything from gunslingers to mechanized robots being suggested by anxious fans in Diablo III's various forums, to which Blizzard's community manager, Bashiok, has posted a response:
Well, you have to realize that it's been 20 years, and in technological terms that can be a very long time. We're trying to create a world that's not static, its filled out, and with that it's an advancing world. With that amount of time, and also the loss of the Arreat Summit much of the remaining barbarian culture has focused on... nah I'm just kidding, there aren't any guns.
Cheeky! But he's not fooling anyone. I'm still adamant that the next class will be a rifle-wielding Sarah Palin who wears the skins and furs of her fallen enemies.
No Spellbooks
Spellbooks featured strongly in the original Diablo as being the only way for a character to learn new skills. Each character, regardless of class, was limited in his spellcasting abilities simply by the amount of spellbooks he or she discovered in the course of the game. This of course resulted in much imbalance and added not a small amount of tedium to the game as a whole. In short, it wasn't very well implemented; more suited to its roguelike predecessors rather than action RPGs of which Diablo was the first of its kind. Bashiok speaks:
That came back in Diablo II too eventually in the form of rune words, and I don't think it really worked out too well in the end. I do think it actually could be designed and implemented properly; balanced, etc. but...
For me the more important question though is what impact does it have on the class you're playing and also our knowledge of the Diablo world? Is a class nothing more than someone who read from a book, or is holding a specific item? No, they're very specific and very iconic figures (heroes even) from very distinct styles and backgrounds. The characters we play are these concentrated images of their cultures, beliefs, etc. Everything they do resembles who they are and where they're from, and what does it mean to then piecemeal that out to any one who just happens to throw a couple runes in to an item.
It worked better in Diablo (1) I think. Conceptually it was a bit easier to digest just because of the basic pen and paper underpinnings, and the heroes were far more generic. It was also far less obtrusive.
In Diablo II though, for me anyway, it always undermined the uniqueness of playing a specific class, and also what it meant to be that character. Aside from everything else it caused.
Ouch.
No DX10
Overhyped, poor-performing and completely unnecessary, DirectX 10, a technological advancement originally hailed as the bringer of Next-Generation Graphics has since been trumped by ingenuity and clever, engine-based innovation in games like Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare.
Newly minted titles like Warhammer Online: Age of Reckoning have even dropped their support for DirectX 10 in light of the problems and performance issues it delivers. With only high-end games like Crysis and World in Conflict featuring it in its full form, DX10 has very little to showcase.
A number of complete failures like Hellgate: London and Age of Conan to which poor performance and unnecessary lengths of QA were wasted upon can be owed entirely to their implementation of DX10, it would not surprise me if Blizzard decided not to opt in for its use, either:
We haven't announced any final support for DirectX versions/system requirements. I'll say that right now we're not using any DirectX10 features, but we potentially could.
It seems unlikely that DX10 will ever make it in, especially since they plan to release Diablo III on the Mac as well as the PC.
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Inventory System Discussed - hellforge
Bashiok has posted a response to the suggestion that a weight system be implemented in Diablo III:
A weight system is simply a different approach to inventory restrictions, and it's actually fairly similar to a grid based system except that weight systems are generally augmented by a character stat instead of being item based upgrades.
The main issue with these systems as they relate to Diablo III is they add an additional value to items. That secondary value works to complicate and thus slow down the inventory management of a player, drawing their attention away from the action, which is of course the main focus for us with Diablo III.
I've played a few RPGs with weight systems, and they're among my favorite games of all time, but it's a case of choosing which systems works best for each game.
Reading his response, it seems unlikely that they will be implementing weight, as these would add an additional value to items, which bogs down inventory management almost as much as the 'tetris inventory'.
As those of you who have played Diablo and its sequel know, players could carry as much equipment as they wanted so long as it fit into the inventory slots. In previous games, each item took up a certain amount of slots: armors took 6 slots, swords took 3 slots, and scrolls took a single slot.
In contrast, in World of Warcraft, players are simply limited by the number of equipment slots they have, which can be increased by buying larger bags. Each item would take up a single slot, some of which are stackable. Certainly, World of Warcraft's inventory management is much more streamlined and much less of a hassle to deal with.
In addition, Bashiok also revealed some other aspects of the game with regards to character development:
Well there’s still the depth and complexity of item/stat utilization, building out your character, exploration, increased emphasis on story and lore, etc. but aside from those sort of obvious points, no I’m not worried. There are some big things we haven’t revealed yet.
That said, Blizzard still hasn't announced how the new system will be, but I wouldn't be surprised if they used World of Warcraft's system, perhaps with a few interface tweaks that allow for simpler management of equipment, as some player-created mods for World of Warcraft offer.
How would you like for the inventory to be handled?
A weight system is simply a different approach to inventory restrictions, and it's actually fairly similar to a grid based system except that weight systems are generally augmented by a character stat instead of being item based upgrades.
The main issue with these systems as they relate to Diablo III is they add an additional value to items. That secondary value works to complicate and thus slow down the inventory management of a player, drawing their attention away from the action, which is of course the main focus for us with Diablo III.
I've played a few RPGs with weight systems, and they're among my favorite games of all time, but it's a case of choosing which systems works best for each game.
Reading his response, it seems unlikely that they will be implementing weight, as these would add an additional value to items, which bogs down inventory management almost as much as the 'tetris inventory'.
As those of you who have played Diablo and its sequel know, players could carry as much equipment as they wanted so long as it fit into the inventory slots. In previous games, each item took up a certain amount of slots: armors took 6 slots, swords took 3 slots, and scrolls took a single slot.
In contrast, in World of Warcraft, players are simply limited by the number of equipment slots they have, which can be increased by buying larger bags. Each item would take up a single slot, some of which are stackable. Certainly, World of Warcraft's inventory management is much more streamlined and much less of a hassle to deal with.
In addition, Bashiok also revealed some other aspects of the game with regards to character development:
Well there’s still the depth and complexity of item/stat utilization, building out your character, exploration, increased emphasis on story and lore, etc. but aside from those sort of obvious points, no I’m not worried. There are some big things we haven’t revealed yet.
That said, Blizzard still hasn't announced how the new system will be, but I wouldn't be surprised if they used World of Warcraft's system, perhaps with a few interface tweaks that allow for simpler management of equipment, as some player-created mods for World of Warcraft offer.
How would you like for the inventory to be handled?
Bashiok on Item Drops and Maphack - hellforge
Bashiok has once again posted on the official Diablo 3 boards, this time regarding item drops and pressing alt, as well as a pretty funny response to a Maphack question:
Shoe: I dont know if its already been talked about, it looks like in the video they changed it but they should make a option in the menu's so the item names appear without holding alt
Bashiok: The way it works now is that when an item drops the name shows for about 5 seconds and then they fade out and disappear. Pressing Alt shows all dropped item names for again about 5 seconds and then the names fade out and disappear.
I actually didn't like it at first, I liked the on/off state of pressing or not pressing Alt, but with the names showing immediately after drop and having a sort of "grace period" after just tapping Alt, it's really grown on me and is a lot more intuitive. It's a lot easier to see what just dropped quickly and decide if you care, and it isn't necessary to constantly hold down Alt while scavenging after a large fight.
I still want to see -nopickup return but I haven't really asked anyone what the possibility of that is. I don't think it would work well with the current system, so options may have to be a possibility.
Rus[Hackteam]VV: this is demand for maphack include in diablo 3. your "fan" may say that this is unfair demand, but allow me explain: is steroid cheat? steroid make game of american baseball easier, but is not cheat. therefore, hack is not cheat. this is why hack should be in diablo 3. if you do not give into demands russia hackteam at nikolai bulganin internet cafe in moscow will boycot all future product. is this understood? i hope is so. russia hackteam is most popular e-sport fight club in russia and have major sway over computer gamer fan.
Bashiok: Oh good I was hoping you would come back, the idea seemed underutilized a month or two ago. I lold.
Shoe: I dont know if its already been talked about, it looks like in the video they changed it but they should make a option in the menu's so the item names appear without holding alt
Bashiok: The way it works now is that when an item drops the name shows for about 5 seconds and then they fade out and disappear. Pressing Alt shows all dropped item names for again about 5 seconds and then the names fade out and disappear.
I actually didn't like it at first, I liked the on/off state of pressing or not pressing Alt, but with the names showing immediately after drop and having a sort of "grace period" after just tapping Alt, it's really grown on me and is a lot more intuitive. It's a lot easier to see what just dropped quickly and decide if you care, and it isn't necessary to constantly hold down Alt while scavenging after a large fight.
I still want to see -nopickup return but I haven't really asked anyone what the possibility of that is. I don't think it would work well with the current system, so options may have to be a possibility.
Rus[Hackteam]VV: this is demand for maphack include in diablo 3. your "fan" may say that this is unfair demand, but allow me explain: is steroid cheat? steroid make game of american baseball easier, but is not cheat. therefore, hack is not cheat. this is why hack should be in diablo 3. if you do not give into demands russia hackteam at nikolai bulganin internet cafe in moscow will boycot all future product. is this understood? i hope is so. russia hackteam is most popular e-sport fight club in russia and have major sway over computer gamer fan.
Bashiok: Oh good I was hoping you would come back, the idea seemed underutilized a month or two ago. I lold.
Thursday, September 18, 2008
AbleGamers Interviews the Diablo III Team (Part One) - Ablegamers
AbleGamers' Steve Spohn, with Mark Barlet as his lackey, got the chance to chat with Jay Wilson, Lead Designer, and Leonard Boyarsky, Lead World Designer on the Diablo III development team. They tool time out of their busy afternoon to chat with us here at AbleGamers
Steve Spohn, AbleGamers: Thank you both for your time, as you know, AbleGamers is a community site for Disabled Gamers, and we are happy to have a chance to speak to you about Diablo III. I know our time is limited, so let's get to it.
The experience system, synergies such as that in Diablo II with they be continuing and Diablo III?
Jay Wilson, Blizzard Entertainment: What we haven't announced anything about her skill system, yet... we will in the coming months, until we do, I won't be revealing any details about that. The one thing I will say is that what synergies... the goal really was to make... to improve a flaw with Diablo II skill system. And obviously, the kind of skill system that we're going to create we're going to look at all the flaws in the previous system and correct them. So that's always really say about that now.
This interview is a transposition of a live interview AbleGamers had with the folks at Blizzard. So it may be a little odd to read
Steve, AbleGamers: With the characters that were announced in the invitational being the barbarian and the witch doctor... the expansion of Diablo II at seven characters. Was there any reason that two of the characters, well actually three, were left out, and can you comment on which five will be in the game?
Jay, Blizzard: We're not trying to match the number of characters that Diablo II and the expansion had, in some way as we look at that as, "that's no fair! That's two game for the content that you asking us to match, as supposed to one." We're really trying to think what we would feel would be the right number of starting archetypes for the player and in the long run we will have five classes for Diablo III. I'm sure we will expand that with expansions down the road, but were really trying to focus on making those classes each kind of a unique and good experience for Diablo III. For example, the barbarian, we brought him back because he was a class that we really thought we could improve, but other classes... the other classes that were done really well and Diablo II, we looked at it and said "well, all I would really do is repeat that class." We don't think we could make such a significant improvement that it provides new gameplay or new experience. So in those cases, we haven't focused on really have heavily and bringing them back. That being said, once we get the original game out, and we start looking at expansions, we might think about different ideas like bringing back old characters that were really popular. But in the initial game are really focused on bringing new experiences to everyone.
Mark Barlet, AbleGamers: So necromancer yes or no?
Jay, Blizzard: In the core game, I would say what the witch doctor there that the necromancer is highly unlikely, but it is definitely one of those classes that will be looked at when, I don't see a way we can make that class significant way better. We know he's really popular; he's my favorite classroom Diablo II. So it's not like a snub on necro lovers. It's that we really want the classes to stand on their own and not just a rehash of the previous game. That being said, if the outcry is so great after we released the game will probably consider bringing back some old classes in an expansion.
Steve, AbleGamers: From what I'm getting so far. Generally speaking, Diablo III will be an entirely new concept in game. So you guys are not trying to pull any ideas from Diablo II, you will not be building on anything other than the world of Tristam
Jay, Blizzard: I wouldn't say and we would pull anything from Diablo two. It's just only look in different areas. We make decisions based on what from that area we want to bring back. For example, the items for Islam is not going to be the exact same as Diablo there are some changes, but the core of it is basically the same, or using the basically the same item generation mechanics backend systems, drop rates, data and information because that system work really really well. In the case of classes, we chose to try to create new classes, because he wanted to provide new gameplay in the area. So we really tried to handle this on a case-by-case basis we not trying to... we definitely don't want to rehash Diablo II, but we don't want to throw it away either.
Leonard, Blizzard: When you bring up the Tristram, it's kind of the same thing from the lore side, we didn't want to rehash things that were done really well... were not discounting anything, we want to continue the story. We want to bring it to its conclusion in a way. We want to explore all the things that were brought up previously. But one of the reasons I think we all just loved Tristram from D1, and it just felt like could get enough of it in D2. I don't know, it just felt right... It was one of those things is... we didn't... it came up after we has already started on the story, it came up as an idea, and it felt like a good thing to do. It's kind of like the barbarian, we didn't set out to say, "we have to have the barbarian in this game," it wasn't some kind of mandate that we had to have the barbarian or Tristram or this or that from the old game. As were developing this and were trying to capture the flavor that we want, the mood that we want, to telling the story that we want, we want to use this world we want to use this license, and that's quite possible. So these things come up and we say, "wow." We're fired up just like everybody else, we say, "Wow wouldn't it be so cool if Tristram looks like right now"or, "what happens with this place is?" That's kind of how were approaching everything in the game.
Steve, AbleGamers: Now right there, you did say the words conclusion. Are you saying Diablo III is the end? Is this a trilogy?
Leonard, Blizzard: No!, I never said, "conclusion..." I qualified with that something some quickly worded phrase but I don't quite remember. You know, we felt like the there was a lot of Diablo... to the extent of Diablo II ended on a cliffhanger. So we wanted to answer those questions and put that portion of the story to the bed. That doesn't mean we're going to end the series there were not continue on telling the story. It just feels like a left people hanging, does that make sense?
Steve, AbleGamers: gotcha...
Jay, Blizzard: I would deftly not say that Diablo III is the end of the Diablo universe by any stretch of the imagination. We really look at building our universe is not stopping them, but I do think there is a storyline that continues from Diablo to Diablo II. That... that storyline yeah we're going to look to pull all the strings together and have a nice trilogy like conclusion. But that's not the end of the Diablo universe it's just that particular... that particular storyline
Leonard, Blizzard: Will drop some new story threads I'm sure we won't close off, but exactly what Jay is saying, there are certain things that we feel... were not the string people long for another five games to get you the answers to certain things that happened. We feel we want some closure on some of the stories, and some of these details, and people just want to know what happens. We'll move on from there, see what the world takes us.
Mark, AbleGamers: if I can add a little bit about the hardware requirements you guys are spec'ing the game for, what I've heard so far, you're not trying to create a nether Diablo II, "now with better graphics." That said, there was a concern brought up by a member of the site about the DirectX 10 and Windows Vista versus Windows XP, do you guys plan on putting a DirectX 9 and a DirectX 10 of this game?
Jay, Blizzard: Currently we have no plans for specific DirectX 10 support. Right now are running a DirectX 9, and we run on a pretty broad range of systems, really fast. Overall, across-the-board Blizzard's goal is that all of our games support a broad range of systems. We don't jump up the system specs in any grand way. We have no intentions of being a high-end game, and certainly no intentions of being an exclusive DirectX 10 game at this time...
We don't exactly know what the system specs are yet, but we'll try to keep them pretty low. We make a lot of decisions about what we do and do not put into our graphics, in order to keep the game running fast. One of the reasons why we talk a lot about art style, and how we focus a lot on art style, stylization of art over... when we do that it allows us to have a good looking game about falling back on technology, our technology does not have to carry us when we have such great art in the game.
Mark, AbleGamers: so you are saying no to my Commodore 64?
All: Yah...
Steve, AbleGamers: as long as we're talking about hardware and videogame technology in the press release, it talks about Havoc and other engines that were going to be used for the new Diablo, so that the environment can be destroyed. I can understand why you went that way, since all the new games, you can destroy the environment to make it seem more real. One of the points that stuck out in bold on the press release was that the world will be randomly generated. Are we talking about random generated, like Diablo II, where it's the basically the same thing but one item is flipped to a different corner, or are we talking completely random generation; caves, trees, mobs, everything but the boss?
Jay, Blizzard: The first thing I'm not sure with Diablo II... there was quite a large amount of randomness, a lot of the dungeons were, we felt complete... we had large areas that were completely randomized, random monsters, random distribution of items, random champions and rares. So I think the amount of randomness in Diablo II was pretty reasonable, all things considered, and that's pretty much what we're targeting, a similar amount of randomness. We've made some decisions, and some changes on the random side with the exterior were actually focusing on a less random world, primarily to allow the artists to, one, build more organic environments, you can't really build organic... kind of cool looking environments, with lots of vistas, and cool things like bridges, and stuff like that when you have a ton of randomness in the environment. The two just don't go together. You also can't build a world that feels very real, because nothing is ever in the same place twice. That being said, we focused on new systems like our adventure system which allows us to basically cut large chunks out of the terrain and swap them out with different encounters so different type of monsters... one time he might go in there might be a big camp of monsters and a boss, and the next time there might be an abandoned house, next time it may be a caravan, and next time it could be just a piece of terrain with monsters randomly distributed on it. But all of our monster placement, all of our items everything like that is random. Our actual dungeon layouts are randomized, which is roughly to the same scale as Diablo II.
Steve Spohn, AbleGamers: Thank you both for your time, as you know, AbleGamers is a community site for Disabled Gamers, and we are happy to have a chance to speak to you about Diablo III. I know our time is limited, so let's get to it.
The experience system, synergies such as that in Diablo II with they be continuing and Diablo III?
Jay Wilson, Blizzard Entertainment: What we haven't announced anything about her skill system, yet... we will in the coming months, until we do, I won't be revealing any details about that. The one thing I will say is that what synergies... the goal really was to make... to improve a flaw with Diablo II skill system. And obviously, the kind of skill system that we're going to create we're going to look at all the flaws in the previous system and correct them. So that's always really say about that now.
This interview is a transposition of a live interview AbleGamers had with the folks at Blizzard. So it may be a little odd to read
Steve, AbleGamers: With the characters that were announced in the invitational being the barbarian and the witch doctor... the expansion of Diablo II at seven characters. Was there any reason that two of the characters, well actually three, were left out, and can you comment on which five will be in the game?
Jay, Blizzard: We're not trying to match the number of characters that Diablo II and the expansion had, in some way as we look at that as, "that's no fair! That's two game for the content that you asking us to match, as supposed to one." We're really trying to think what we would feel would be the right number of starting archetypes for the player and in the long run we will have five classes for Diablo III. I'm sure we will expand that with expansions down the road, but were really trying to focus on making those classes each kind of a unique and good experience for Diablo III. For example, the barbarian, we brought him back because he was a class that we really thought we could improve, but other classes... the other classes that were done really well and Diablo II, we looked at it and said "well, all I would really do is repeat that class." We don't think we could make such a significant improvement that it provides new gameplay or new experience. So in those cases, we haven't focused on really have heavily and bringing them back. That being said, once we get the original game out, and we start looking at expansions, we might think about different ideas like bringing back old characters that were really popular. But in the initial game are really focused on bringing new experiences to everyone.
Mark Barlet, AbleGamers: So necromancer yes or no?
Jay, Blizzard: In the core game, I would say what the witch doctor there that the necromancer is highly unlikely, but it is definitely one of those classes that will be looked at when, I don't see a way we can make that class significant way better. We know he's really popular; he's my favorite classroom Diablo II. So it's not like a snub on necro lovers. It's that we really want the classes to stand on their own and not just a rehash of the previous game. That being said, if the outcry is so great after we released the game will probably consider bringing back some old classes in an expansion.
Steve, AbleGamers: From what I'm getting so far. Generally speaking, Diablo III will be an entirely new concept in game. So you guys are not trying to pull any ideas from Diablo II, you will not be building on anything other than the world of Tristam
Jay, Blizzard: I wouldn't say and we would pull anything from Diablo two. It's just only look in different areas. We make decisions based on what from that area we want to bring back. For example, the items for Islam is not going to be the exact same as Diablo there are some changes, but the core of it is basically the same, or using the basically the same item generation mechanics backend systems, drop rates, data and information because that system work really really well. In the case of classes, we chose to try to create new classes, because he wanted to provide new gameplay in the area. So we really tried to handle this on a case-by-case basis we not trying to... we definitely don't want to rehash Diablo II, but we don't want to throw it away either.
Leonard, Blizzard: When you bring up the Tristram, it's kind of the same thing from the lore side, we didn't want to rehash things that were done really well... were not discounting anything, we want to continue the story. We want to bring it to its conclusion in a way. We want to explore all the things that were brought up previously. But one of the reasons I think we all just loved Tristram from D1, and it just felt like could get enough of it in D2. I don't know, it just felt right... It was one of those things is... we didn't... it came up after we has already started on the story, it came up as an idea, and it felt like a good thing to do. It's kind of like the barbarian, we didn't set out to say, "we have to have the barbarian in this game," it wasn't some kind of mandate that we had to have the barbarian or Tristram or this or that from the old game. As were developing this and were trying to capture the flavor that we want, the mood that we want, to telling the story that we want, we want to use this world we want to use this license, and that's quite possible. So these things come up and we say, "wow." We're fired up just like everybody else, we say, "Wow wouldn't it be so cool if Tristram looks like right now"or, "what happens with this place is?" That's kind of how were approaching everything in the game.
Steve, AbleGamers: Now right there, you did say the words conclusion. Are you saying Diablo III is the end? Is this a trilogy?
Leonard, Blizzard: No!
Steve, AbleGamers: gotcha...
Jay, Blizzard: I would deftly not say that Diablo III is the end of the Diablo universe by any stretch of the imagination. We really look at building our universe is not stopping them, but I do think there is a storyline that continues from Diablo to Diablo II. That... that storyline yeah we're going to look to pull all the strings together and have a nice trilogy like conclusion. But that's not the end of the Diablo universe it's just that particular... that particular storyline
Leonard, Blizzard: Will drop some new story threads I'm sure we won't close off, but exactly what Jay is saying, there are certain things that we feel... were not the string people long for another five games to get you the answers to certain things that happened. We feel we want some closure on some of the stories, and some of these details, and people just want to know what happens. We'll move on from there, see what the world takes us.
Mark, AbleGamers: if I can add a little bit about the hardware requirements you guys are spec'ing the game for, what I've heard so far, you're not trying to create a nether Diablo II, "now with better graphics." That said, there was a concern brought up by a member of the site about the DirectX 10 and Windows Vista versus Windows XP, do you guys plan on putting a DirectX 9 and a DirectX 10 of this game?
Jay, Blizzard: Currently we have no plans for specific DirectX 10 support. Right now are running a DirectX 9, and we run on a pretty broad range of systems, really fast. Overall, across-the-board Blizzard's goal is that all of our games support a broad range of systems. We don't jump up the system specs in any grand way. We have no intentions of being a high-end game, and certainly no intentions of being an exclusive DirectX 10 game at this time...
We don't exactly know what the system specs are yet, but we'll try to keep them pretty low. We make a lot of decisions about what we do and do not put into our graphics, in order to keep the game running fast. One of the reasons why we talk a lot about art style, and how we focus a lot on art style, stylization of art over... when we do that it allows us to have a good looking game about falling back on technology, our technology does not have to carry us when we have such great art in the game.
Mark, AbleGamers: so you are saying no to my Commodore 64?
All:
Steve, AbleGamers: as long as we're talking about hardware and videogame technology in the press release, it talks about Havoc and other engines that were going to be used for the new Diablo, so that the environment can be destroyed. I can understand why you went that way, since all the new games, you can destroy the environment to make it seem more real. One of the points that stuck out in bold on the press release was that the world will be randomly generated. Are we talking about random generated, like Diablo II, where it's the basically the same thing but one item is flipped to a different corner, or are we talking completely random generation; caves, trees, mobs, everything but the boss?
Jay, Blizzard: The first thing I'm not sure with Diablo II... there was quite a large amount of randomness, a lot of the dungeons were, we felt complete... we had large areas that were completely randomized, random monsters, random distribution of items, random champions and rares. So I think the amount of randomness in Diablo II was pretty reasonable, all things considered, and that's pretty much what we're targeting, a similar amount of randomness. We've made some decisions, and some changes on the random side with the exterior were actually focusing on a less random world, primarily to allow the artists to, one, build more organic environments, you can't really build organic... kind of cool looking environments, with lots of vistas, and cool things like bridges, and stuff like that when you have a ton of randomness in the environment. The two just don't go together. You also can't build a world that feels very real, because nothing is ever in the same place twice. That being said, we focused on new systems like our adventure system which allows us to basically cut large chunks out of the terrain and swap them out with different encounters so different type of monsters... one time he might go in there might be a big camp of monsters and a boss, and the next time there might be an abandoned house, next time it may be a caravan, and next time it could be just a piece of terrain with monsters randomly distributed on it. But all of our monster placement, all of our items everything like that is random. Our actual dungeon layouts are randomized, which is roughly to the same scale as Diablo II.
Diablo 3 Taking Some Notes From the Mythos Books? - Hellforge
Just a short post today, on an update from Bashiok, who talks of no locked chests for the game anymore, as well as the super rare chests.
While obviously Mythos did not come up with the concept, and Diablo 2 did have the Golden Chests too, the title is more alluding to the fact of how it worked in Mythos. In Mythos, the bottom floor of every dungeon had a super chest, which needed a key, and the key could drop from any monster in the dungeon. So it made exploring dungeons really worth it. While it might have sounded like a painful task, it actually made it more fun, as the reward in the end made it feel like you weren't just wasting your time going through a dungeon.
The whole concept of having a reward for actually mopving around a dungeon and exploring it all seems like a good idea in my books!
Here is the quote:
Bashiok: There have been a few discussions about chests, what they meant in the previous game, and what they'll mean in Diablo III. Currently there are no locked chests, and it's not something we're looking to reintroduce for now. We have discussed varying chest quality and types, adding randomness not only to the appearance of a chest but also the value of items it may drop or possibly specifically what types of items it's guaranteed to drop. Mix it up a bit and make finding a chest exciting, but make finding a special chest something even rarer and more exciting. It could certainly make exploring the entire floor of a dungeon more compelling before moving on.
While obviously Mythos did not come up with the concept, and Diablo 2 did have the Golden Chests too, the title is more alluding to the fact of how it worked in Mythos. In Mythos, the bottom floor of every dungeon had a super chest, which needed a key, and the key could drop from any monster in the dungeon. So it made exploring dungeons really worth it. While it might have sounded like a painful task, it actually made it more fun, as the reward in the end made it feel like you weren't just wasting your time going through a dungeon.
The whole concept of having a reward for actually mopving around a dungeon and exploring it all seems like a good idea in my books!
Here is the quote:
Bashiok: There have been a few discussions about chests, what they meant in the previous game, and what they'll mean in Diablo III. Currently there are no locked chests, and it's not something we're looking to reintroduce for now. We have discussed varying chest quality and types, adding randomness not only to the appearance of a chest but also the value of items it may drop or possibly specifically what types of items it's guaranteed to drop. Mix it up a bit and make finding a chest exciting, but make finding a special chest something even rarer and more exciting. It could certainly make exploring the entire floor of a dungeon more compelling before moving on.
The Horror of the Diablo Series - Hellforge
The Diablo series has become a legend, played by young and old gamers alike. But where did the series start, and where is it headed?
It may be that only a few of us faithfully remember the very first Diablo game. It truly was a terrifying experience. Perhaps it was the fact that the games only style of play was ‘hardcore’ (the death penalty of dieing is…. Death!). Perhaps it was the gruesome way in which your character died, all possessions being tossed to the ground as your hero let out his final scream, heard only by the demons surrounding him. Perhaps it was the torn human carcasses lying about, the hacked soldier that triggered the most fearful quest of all, the rooms filled with blood, the near-naked succubae or the human bodies impaled on poles. Or maybe it was the plain fact that Diablo I was just simply designed to be more gruesome and terrifying than Diablo II. Let’s look at the design decisions between each game to better understand the evolution of Diablo and what we can expect of Diablo III.
To begin lets look at where the current two games took place. Diablo 1 took place in a church (which is creepy as it is) that was filled with demons and zombies. Players continuously travelled downwards into the fiery abyss of Hell. Truthfully, the hero did not know what lay before him, and every few levels the hero would let out utterances like “It’s getting hot down here.” There were no set skills or abilities that the hero began with, the hero had to find these in the form of books or scrolls within the church. The only way to level these skills was to find more books. Additionally the hero never knew what quests lay before him. There were a number of random quests, each having a varying difficulty with very different rewards.
Some quests provided a reward that was well worth the battle to obtain. While other quests, like the infamous Butcher quest; triggered by a hacked soldier’s pleas for vengeance, left players questioning whether or not they should restart the game. The butcher battle alone was petrifying and I’m sure every player’s first encounter with the butcher has become photographed in their minds. The hero sees a room full of naked men and women hacked to pieces stuck on poles and against the wall. Upon opening the door, a giant freaky demon answers with “Ahhh fresh meat!” and then chases you, unrelenting, until you either glitch him or die during your process of kiting. Very few players were strong enough to face the butcher that early in the game. From the butcher onwards the game kept getting darker and the storyline began to unfold. I’d hate to spoil anything, but the storyline involves a young boy having a gem shoved into his skull by a crazed man in the form of a sacrifice, leading to the birth of Diablo.
Now let’s compare Diablo 1 to Diablo II. Players are presented with many different towns and cities rather than just one. They are given a variety of locations to travel to from dark jungles to monasteries to hell itself. Sounds like an improvement already doesn’t it? However, these areas were essentially unmemorable. With the exception of the Durance of Hate of course, which was most like the lower levels of the church in Diablo 1. Not only were these areas relatively blah, they were also wide open. With exception to a few dungeons like the maggot lair and the dark passageway/cave/pit/den of evil the areas had no sense of that claustrophobic feeling Diablo 1 constantly provided. Additionally players always knew what would happen next. Instead of being told to explore the church, they’re told ‘Andarial is in the monastery go kill her’ or ‘Diablo is found in the Chaos Sanctuary at the end of the River of Flame’. Players never experience that ‘oh no what’s going to be waiting for me up ahead.’ To be fair though, there is one situation in which players don’t know what to expect. And that’s the act 2 end boss, Duriel. You’re never told about a giant slug with giant claws waiting for you in a tiny little ‘arena.’ You’re just told Tal Rasha should be on the other side of the entranceway. To me that is one of the only moments that provided the same horrific excitement as Diablo 1.
Also the storyline just doesn’t have that same ‘freaky vibe’ to it. Instead of an innocent having a gem shoved in his head, we have a wanderer spreading evil who eventually becomes Diablo. The story line just isn’t…. as evil, for lack of a better term. Although good in its own right, I would label the Diablo II storyline more of an action/adventure style story rather than the Horror story of Diablo 1.
Additionally, hero’s come with a set of abilities and skills that the player must pick from. This gives the players the ability to create their hero as they see fit. There is no longer that feeling of great joy upon finding a library, hoping that you find another book of mana shield. Every level the player can choose to increase the skill level of one of their hero’s abilities. Unless the player made some terrible mistakes, it was no longer possible to have a well-played hero become useless due to a lack of books found as in Diablo 1.
Essentially, Diablo II was watered down compared to Diablo I in terms of gore/horror. It was a better game for sure, providing more opportunities in character planning and allowing for large variances in tileset and mood. However, in my opinion, the magic of Diablo was the sheer horror the player could feel while playing. Hardcore mode in Diablo II brings some of that back, but it’s still not the same. I for one miss the rooms full of blood and impaled bodies. I think we can all agree Diablo II was made for the masses, it was given a mature rating, but it really didn’t earn it.
I think we can expect the same for Diablo III. The storyline may be full of twists and turns, but I wouldn’t expect any horrific events. Think of a story more like Indiana Jones instead of The Shining. I think the days of sacrificing young princes are over. We’ll have our blood and exploding demon bodies, but don’t expect to find rooms full of naked hacked human corpses. In my opinion we should be expecting an adventure game rather than a Horror RPG; it is the logical direction the Diablo series is taking. With the current rating systems I imagine Diablo III would likely be banned with even one horrific moment. Hell, Hilary Clinton will probably try to ban it anyways, even with all the rainbows.
It may be that only a few of us faithfully remember the very first Diablo game. It truly was a terrifying experience. Perhaps it was the fact that the games only style of play was ‘hardcore’ (the death penalty of dieing is…. Death!). Perhaps it was the gruesome way in which your character died, all possessions being tossed to the ground as your hero let out his final scream, heard only by the demons surrounding him. Perhaps it was the torn human carcasses lying about, the hacked soldier that triggered the most fearful quest of all, the rooms filled with blood, the near-naked succubae or the human bodies impaled on poles. Or maybe it was the plain fact that Diablo I was just simply designed to be more gruesome and terrifying than Diablo II. Let’s look at the design decisions between each game to better understand the evolution of Diablo and what we can expect of Diablo III.
To begin lets look at where the current two games took place. Diablo 1 took place in a church (which is creepy as it is) that was filled with demons and zombies. Players continuously travelled downwards into the fiery abyss of Hell. Truthfully, the hero did not know what lay before him, and every few levels the hero would let out utterances like “It’s getting hot down here.” There were no set skills or abilities that the hero began with, the hero had to find these in the form of books or scrolls within the church. The only way to level these skills was to find more books. Additionally the hero never knew what quests lay before him. There were a number of random quests, each having a varying difficulty with very different rewards.
Some quests provided a reward that was well worth the battle to obtain. While other quests, like the infamous Butcher quest; triggered by a hacked soldier’s pleas for vengeance, left players questioning whether or not they should restart the game. The butcher battle alone was petrifying and I’m sure every player’s first encounter with the butcher has become photographed in their minds. The hero sees a room full of naked men and women hacked to pieces stuck on poles and against the wall. Upon opening the door, a giant freaky demon answers with “Ahhh fresh meat!” and then chases you, unrelenting, until you either glitch him or die during your process of kiting. Very few players were strong enough to face the butcher that early in the game. From the butcher onwards the game kept getting darker and the storyline began to unfold. I’d hate to spoil anything, but the storyline involves a young boy having a gem shoved into his skull by a crazed man in the form of a sacrifice, leading to the birth of Diablo.
Now let’s compare Diablo 1 to Diablo II. Players are presented with many different towns and cities rather than just one. They are given a variety of locations to travel to from dark jungles to monasteries to hell itself. Sounds like an improvement already doesn’t it? However, these areas were essentially unmemorable. With the exception of the Durance of Hate of course, which was most like the lower levels of the church in Diablo 1. Not only were these areas relatively blah, they were also wide open. With exception to a few dungeons like the maggot lair and the dark passageway/cave/pit/den of evil the areas had no sense of that claustrophobic feeling Diablo 1 constantly provided. Additionally players always knew what would happen next. Instead of being told to explore the church, they’re told ‘Andarial is in the monastery go kill her’ or ‘Diablo is found in the Chaos Sanctuary at the end of the River of Flame’. Players never experience that ‘oh no what’s going to be waiting for me up ahead.’ To be fair though, there is one situation in which players don’t know what to expect. And that’s the act 2 end boss, Duriel. You’re never told about a giant slug with giant claws waiting for you in a tiny little ‘arena.’ You’re just told Tal Rasha should be on the other side of the entranceway. To me that is one of the only moments that provided the same horrific excitement as Diablo 1.
Also the storyline just doesn’t have that same ‘freaky vibe’ to it. Instead of an innocent having a gem shoved in his head, we have a wanderer spreading evil who eventually becomes Diablo. The story line just isn’t…. as evil, for lack of a better term. Although good in its own right, I would label the Diablo II storyline more of an action/adventure style story rather than the Horror story of Diablo 1.
Additionally, hero’s come with a set of abilities and skills that the player must pick from. This gives the players the ability to create their hero as they see fit. There is no longer that feeling of great joy upon finding a library, hoping that you find another book of mana shield. Every level the player can choose to increase the skill level of one of their hero’s abilities. Unless the player made some terrible mistakes, it was no longer possible to have a well-played hero become useless due to a lack of books found as in Diablo 1.
Essentially, Diablo II was watered down compared to Diablo I in terms of gore/horror. It was a better game for sure, providing more opportunities in character planning and allowing for large variances in tileset and mood. However, in my opinion, the magic of Diablo was the sheer horror the player could feel while playing. Hardcore mode in Diablo II brings some of that back, but it’s still not the same. I for one miss the rooms full of blood and impaled bodies. I think we can all agree Diablo II was made for the masses, it was given a mature rating, but it really didn’t earn it.
I think we can expect the same for Diablo III. The storyline may be full of twists and turns, but I wouldn’t expect any horrific events. Think of a story more like Indiana Jones instead of The Shining. I think the days of sacrificing young princes are over. We’ll have our blood and exploding demon bodies, but don’t expect to find rooms full of naked hacked human corpses. In my opinion we should be expecting an adventure game rather than a Horror RPG; it is the logical direction the Diablo series is taking. With the current rating systems I imagine Diablo III would likely be banned with even one horrific moment. Hell, Hilary Clinton will probably try to ban it anyways, even with all the rainbows.
Thursday, September 11, 2008
Only Barbarian Returns in Diablo 3 - incgamers
Blizzard has stated at Leipzig that the Barbarian class in Diablo 3 is the only original class to return to the new title.
Despite rumours and comments made by Blizzard in previous interviews and at the WWI in Paris, Jay Wilson, the game's Lead Designer, has stated that no other class from the original game will make a return. However Jay has said that other classes may return but not in the game's initial release.
Talking to Kotaku, Jay added that the Necromancer will definitely not being making a return at any point saying that the Necromancer was "simply a victim of his own success".
More news on future classes will hopefully appear at BlizzCon in October.
Despite rumours and comments made by Blizzard in previous interviews and at the WWI in Paris, Jay Wilson, the game's Lead Designer, has stated that no other class from the original game will make a return. However Jay has said that other classes may return but not in the game's initial release.
Talking to Kotaku, Jay added that the Necromancer will definitely not being making a return at any point saying that the Necromancer was "simply a victim of his own success".
More news on future classes will hopefully appear at BlizzCon in October.
Diablo III Inforview - incgamers
DIII community manager “Bashiok” of Blizzard Entertainment was on hand at PAX to talk to us about the upcoming title. Much to my surprise, the Diablo III CM dished on quite a bit. I've elected to outline some of the things we spoke about, rather than transcribe the whole thing, as you wouldn’t find that too interesting. So here were the main talking points:
Speaking of classes:
The barbarian is the only class from prior games that is going into DIII. Definitively, without question, none of the others will be in the game. None.
Bashiok says: “We might look at including one or two of the old classes to in the expansion, but that's too far off to think about right now.”
I'd like to point out something intrinsic to the above statement: Blizz is already thinking about the DIII expansion. Bashiok was completely open about that.
Speaking on art:
Bashiok stated, with some amusement, that the controversial art style of the next Diablo game wasn't going to change. Blizzard is actually very happy with the new, brighter art style of Diablo III.
“It's not changing at all,” he said definitively.
When asked about concerns among fanboys that DIII wouldn't be as grim as DI and DII, he indicated that the game was still very dark and grim in its overall feel.
“The tone is a lot darker. There are more grotesque creatures, and insane blood splatter.”
On character customisation at creation: “That's undecided right now. We're leaning toward handling it like with did with the prior Diablos, but might add some customization at some point. Really, though, we're leaning towards characters becoming individualized with their gear and talent specs.”
What about infinitely upgradeable epic weapons? Hellgate did something similar, and LOTRO is adding it in the Mines of Moria expansion. Will DIII do something similar?
“No. There will be loot drops you can customise, like in the prior versions. But you'll still be hunting for better gear throughout the game.”
Bashiok talked a bit about Battle.Net 2.0, which is soon to be released by Blizzard.
“Not much has been officially said about the new Battle.Net, so I can't say a lot. But I can say that you'll be able to find your friends, and get grouped up, very easily. Very. And you'll be able to get matched up with other people at your level to group with online.”
Interstingly, Bashiok stated that the game would be much more of an online experience than we'd previously thought.
“It's going to have strong online support, and the online game will be very solid. However, we're focused on the single player experience at the moment, and perfecting that is our goal.”
Bashiok reiterated, upon questioning, that Diablo III isn't going to be an MMO. He made clear that the “action RPG concept” is the direction they are taking the game.
“The focus is still on the 'action game' aspects of it, not the role playing aspects.”
He gave us an example, which he indicated isn't commonly known: “We're iterating a lot on the health orb system. The way it looks right now, orbs will just drop. It may end up a lot more like a 'health up' from a platformer, and not like the way it worked in Diablo II. You step into one, and you heal yourself.”
He also added that the health orbs may also aid people in your group, possibly according to need and range: “We're also looking at a system where you step into it, and you'll heal a party member.” He indicated that none of this, of course, is confirmed, and much testing and implementation has yet to be done.
We asked Bashiok for something exclusive. He dished: “Well, health and mana leach may not come back. There's balance issues, and they may not make it into Diablo III”.
Last, but not least, was an interesting, amusing little moment. I asked Bashiok about Diablo III being playable at BlizzCon next month. I honestly expected a very firm, very direct, “No way. It's nowhere near ready.” or something similar. Instead, when I asked the question, there was a palpable pause, then he said, “I can't say anything about that.” I pressed, and there was a lot of eye-rolling and face-making. “You really have to watch the BlizzCon site for any breaking information though. I can't say any more.”
Let me be really clear: Bashiok definitely did not say, or confirm, anything about DIII at BlizzCon. But it was the way he handled it – a light-hearted, I'm-not-saying-jack vibe – that almost had me laughing. It left open the possibility that maybe, just maybe, you'll get your paws on this one next month, friends.
Keep checking back; virtually the entire IncGamers network, including the Diii.net staff, is heading off to BlizzCon next month, and we'll keep you up to date on all the latest developments for Diablo III and all the Blizzard titles. For now, Ciao!
Speaking of classes:
The barbarian is the only class from prior games that is going into DIII. Definitively, without question, none of the others will be in the game. None.
Bashiok says: “We might look at including one or two of the old classes to in the expansion, but that's too far off to think about right now.”
I'd like to point out something intrinsic to the above statement: Blizz is already thinking about the DIII expansion. Bashiok was completely open about that.
Speaking on art:
Bashiok stated, with some amusement, that the controversial art style of the next Diablo game wasn't going to change. Blizzard is actually very happy with the new, brighter art style of Diablo III.
“It's not changing at all,” he said definitively.
When asked about concerns among fanboys that DIII wouldn't be as grim as DI and DII, he indicated that the game was still very dark and grim in its overall feel.
“The tone is a lot darker. There are more grotesque creatures, and insane blood splatter.”
On character customisation at creation: “That's undecided right now. We're leaning toward handling it like with did with the prior Diablos, but might add some customization at some point. Really, though, we're leaning towards characters becoming individualized with their gear and talent specs.”
What about infinitely upgradeable epic weapons? Hellgate did something similar, and LOTRO is adding it in the Mines of Moria expansion. Will DIII do something similar?
“No. There will be loot drops you can customise, like in the prior versions. But you'll still be hunting for better gear throughout the game.”
Bashiok talked a bit about Battle.Net 2.0, which is soon to be released by Blizzard.
“Not much has been officially said about the new Battle.Net, so I can't say a lot. But I can say that you'll be able to find your friends, and get grouped up, very easily. Very. And you'll be able to get matched up with other people at your level to group with online.”
Interstingly, Bashiok stated that the game would be much more of an online experience than we'd previously thought.
“It's going to have strong online support, and the online game will be very solid. However, we're focused on the single player experience at the moment, and perfecting that is our goal.”
Bashiok reiterated, upon questioning, that Diablo III isn't going to be an MMO. He made clear that the “action RPG concept” is the direction they are taking the game.
“The focus is still on the 'action game' aspects of it, not the role playing aspects.”
He gave us an example, which he indicated isn't commonly known: “We're iterating a lot on the health orb system. The way it looks right now, orbs will just drop. It may end up a lot more like a 'health up' from a platformer, and not like the way it worked in Diablo II. You step into one, and you heal yourself.”
He also added that the health orbs may also aid people in your group, possibly according to need and range: “We're also looking at a system where you step into it, and you'll heal a party member.” He indicated that none of this, of course, is confirmed, and much testing and implementation has yet to be done.
We asked Bashiok for something exclusive. He dished: “Well, health and mana leach may not come back. There's balance issues, and they may not make it into Diablo III”.
Last, but not least, was an interesting, amusing little moment. I asked Bashiok about Diablo III being playable at BlizzCon next month. I honestly expected a very firm, very direct, “No way. It's nowhere near ready.” or something similar. Instead, when I asked the question, there was a palpable pause, then he said, “I can't say anything about that.” I pressed, and there was a lot of eye-rolling and face-making. “You really have to watch the BlizzCon site for any breaking information though. I can't say any more.”
Let me be really clear: Bashiok definitely did not say, or confirm, anything about DIII at BlizzCon. But it was the way he handled it – a light-hearted, I'm-not-saying-jack vibe – that almost had me laughing. It left open the possibility that maybe, just maybe, you'll get your paws on this one next month, friends.
Keep checking back; virtually the entire IncGamers network, including the Diii.net staff, is heading off to BlizzCon next month, and we'll keep you up to date on all the latest developments for Diablo III and all the Blizzard titles. For now, Ciao!
Thursday, September 4, 2008
Jay Wilson on Orbs, Factions, Classes, LAN and Fees - hellforge
4Gamer's Diablo 3 section of the website has been updated with a proper English translation of an interview we posted a while back which we used the Google Translator for. Telias has just informed me that he translated the version himself on the website, so here is some snippets!
Diablo Source: Will there be some kind of faction system like in World of Warcraft?
Jay Wilson: We played arround with that idea and I think you'll probably see something like that, but not exactly like in World of Warcraft. World of Warcraft has a lot of systems to progress past experience and the faction system is one. We don't really need that, we would not want a system for reasons like that, we want it more for role playing reasons, like we want you to be able to make a choice that affects the world in some way or we want you to feel that you are part of the world so we might add something like that to give you that context or to give you more background about the world. We probably wouldn't do it as a grinding type of system, but we will probably do something like that. We have nothing specifically on the rocks, there are a lot of systems like that that are kind of on the drawing board.
Diablo Source: Is it possible to play the game without an internet connection and is a LAN mode planed?
Jay Wilson: Right now, we do plan to allow people to play offline. We actually changed the front end of the menu a little bit. We want to encourage the people to go onto Battle.net and one of the things that happened in Diablo 2 was you start the game, the first option is single player, so you click it. You play through normal difficulty and beat the game and go "Oh, I want to play with my friends now." except you couldn't because if you went to Battle.net you couldn't take that character onto Battle.net and there is now way for us to allow that because we cannot guaranty the security of offline characters. So there is still a separation between offline characters and Battle.net. We do want to let players know ahead of time if they are playing offline that's going to happen so we do a lot more for players to want them to play in Battle.net, just play in Battle.net, it's better for you. You play with other players and if you just want single play you can close you game of an play by yourself, that's fine. If do choose to play offline we let you know that you won't be able to play offline. We have any plans for supporting LAN play, right now we are focusing all on Battle.net because we feel that's where you not only get the benefit to easily connect to other players but also the blizzard community and all the support we are doing for that, so right now we don't have any specific plans for LAN play.
Diablo Source: So there will be no fees for the game or for Battle.net?
Jay Wilson: I can't go that far and say there are going to be no fees whatsoever. It's out goal to make this primarily a box product and have that be our financial model. The problem is every marked is very different. The box marked doesn't work in Asia at all. If we come up with a financial model we have to do it for every region and announce it simultaneously, so it's very difficult to say what our financial model is going to be. All I can say is our goal is not to make it a subscription based game or not want it to be a box product game, but can I say that we'll have no subscription fees for anything at all? I wouldn't say that yet but that's not really out goal, that's not what we are trying to shoot. We don't think that's going to be a primary financial model for us.
You can see the rest of the interview at the link below.
Thanks Telias!
Original Link: http://diablo3.4players.de/games_convention_interview_with_jay_wilson.php
Diablo Source: Will there be some kind of faction system like in World of Warcraft?
Jay Wilson: We played arround with that idea and I think you'll probably see something like that, but not exactly like in World of Warcraft. World of Warcraft has a lot of systems to progress past experience and the faction system is one. We don't really need that, we would not want a system for reasons like that, we want it more for role playing reasons, like we want you to be able to make a choice that affects the world in some way or we want you to feel that you are part of the world so we might add something like that to give you that context or to give you more background about the world. We probably wouldn't do it as a grinding type of system, but we will probably do something like that. We have nothing specifically on the rocks, there are a lot of systems like that that are kind of on the drawing board.
Diablo Source: Is it possible to play the game without an internet connection and is a LAN mode planed?
Jay Wilson: Right now, we do plan to allow people to play offline. We actually changed the front end of the menu a little bit. We want to encourage the people to go onto Battle.net and one of the things that happened in Diablo 2 was you start the game, the first option is single player, so you click it. You play through normal difficulty and beat the game and go "Oh, I want to play with my friends now." except you couldn't because if you went to Battle.net you couldn't take that character onto Battle.net and there is now way for us to allow that because we cannot guaranty the security of offline characters. So there is still a separation between offline characters and Battle.net. We do want to let players know ahead of time if they are playing offline that's going to happen so we do a lot more for players to want them to play in Battle.net, just play in Battle.net, it's better for you. You play with other players and if you just want single play you can close you game of an play by yourself, that's fine. If do choose to play offline we let you know that you won't be able to play offline. We have any plans for supporting LAN play, right now we are focusing all on Battle.net because we feel that's where you not only get the benefit to easily connect to other players but also the blizzard community and all the support we are doing for that, so right now we don't have any specific plans for LAN play.
Diablo Source: So there will be no fees for the game or for Battle.net?
Jay Wilson: I can't go that far and say there are going to be no fees whatsoever. It's out goal to make this primarily a box product and have that be our financial model. The problem is every marked is very different. The box marked doesn't work in Asia at all. If we come up with a financial model we have to do it for every region and announce it simultaneously, so it's very difficult to say what our financial model is going to be. All I can say is our goal is not to make it a subscription based game or not want it to be a box product game, but can I say that we'll have no subscription fees for anything at all? I wouldn't say that yet but that's not really out goal, that's not what we are trying to shoot. We don't think that's going to be a primary financial model for us.
You can see the rest of the interview at the link below.
Thanks Telias!
Original Link: http://diablo3.4players.de/games_convention_interview_with_jay_wilson.php
Jay Wilson Talks PVP, Art and How Whining Amounts To Nothing - hellforge
GameReactor has a new interview from GC2008 with Diablo III's lead designer, Jay Wilson which consists of a 9 minute video.
The first bit is all about Blizzard's core development strategy, and how they want the game to feel. Part of that is the new potion system with the orbs, which make it more challenging. Continuing on, the interview also touches base on the game's co-op functionality, with things like individual loot.
Jay specifically says it's good game design to enable everyone to have fun, not just a small minority at the expense of others. However, Jay states that Blizzard has plans to add a lot of dedicated PVP later, for players who just want to smack the crap out of each other.
The interview then goes into the subject of the game's art direction. Everyone's favorite subject, as you may well have heard of given the uproar it's managed to create in the past couple of months. Jay states that Blizzard actually expected a more negative reaction, because strugled through the same feelings the players have, but now they are so used to it they will definately not change it. (Ha!)
It's nothing that we don't already know about, but anything out of Blizzard isn't a bad thing.
I think that what this implies is that Blizzard has got a long way to go with the development of the game. Sure, the story and setting may well be as complete as they've stated, but they've still got their work cut out of them. Not to mention the iterations each phase of the game is going to go through.
Check out the interview at GameReactor.
The first bit is all about Blizzard's core development strategy, and how they want the game to feel. Part of that is the new potion system with the orbs, which make it more challenging. Continuing on, the interview also touches base on the game's co-op functionality, with things like individual loot.
Jay specifically says it's good game design to enable everyone to have fun, not just a small minority at the expense of others. However, Jay states that Blizzard has plans to add a lot of dedicated PVP later, for players who just want to smack the crap out of each other.
The interview then goes into the subject of the game's art direction. Everyone's favorite subject, as you may well have heard of given the uproar it's managed to create in the past couple of months. Jay states that Blizzard actually expected a more negative reaction, because strugled through the same feelings the players have, but now they are so used to it they will definately not change it. (Ha!)
It's nothing that we don't already know about, but anything out of Blizzard isn't a bad thing.
I think that what this implies is that Blizzard has got a long way to go with the development of the game. Sure, the story and setting may well be as complete as they've stated, but they've still got their work cut out of them. Not to mention the iterations each phase of the game is going to go through.
Check out the interview at GameReactor.
Diablo 3 - Hints at Relase Date + Jay Wilson GC Interview - hellforge
4Players.de conducted an interview with Diablo 3's Lead Developer, Jay Wilson, at this years Games Convention. They have kindly translated the interview into English on their website, and with Telias' permission here is the article from their website.
During the Games Convention 2008 in Leipzig we’ve got the possibility to talk to Jay Wilson, the Lead Designer of Diablo III. He told us how boss fights could be realised with the new health orb-system and what he thinks about difficulty, challenges, tactics, runes...
4Players: You want to stop the potion spamming with the new health orbs. But how do you want to realise long boss fights?
Jay Wilson: Essentially when we are designing a boss, health recovery is built in the design. We could drop health orbs at some percentages of the creature's overall life and that's what we do with rares and champions, actually. So those guys (a sort of mini-bosses) get a chance to drop health orbs, when you're fighting them. In a bigger boss fight, which is more structured, we could provide some small creatures for health.
We've considered out a fight, where we use the wells like in Diablo 2 that bubble up over times. So you might have multiple of those. Then you have to run over and hit them for health and for a certain amount of time you can't use them and then they come back. So there are a lot of different ways how to do this. And really, the idea is that, when we are a designing a boss, we should figure out how health recovery could be an interesting mechanic for this boss.
Jay then goes on to talk about the other features such as runes, PVP and the random system in more detail which can be seen at 4gamer's site.
Link: http://www.4players.de/4players.php/dispbericht/PC-CDROM/Special/7040/60013/0/Diablo_3.html
The other bit of news comes from a mainly SC2 interview at Total Video Games. The bits of importance to Diablo fans follow.
TVG: There's no plan to even pave the way for a StarCraft RTS on the console by resurrecting StarCraft Ghost for instance?
Pearce: No, we've got our hands full with StarCraft II, Diablo III, and Wrath of the LIch King - Ghost isn't even on the radar.
TVG: A lot of people were rumouring that Diablo III could hit in 2011 or 2012...
Colayco: Personally I hope that it's sooner.
Link: http://www.totalvideogames.com/articles/StarCraft_II_QA_13701.htm
During the Games Convention 2008 in Leipzig we’ve got the possibility to talk to Jay Wilson, the Lead Designer of Diablo III. He told us how boss fights could be realised with the new health orb-system and what he thinks about difficulty, challenges, tactics, runes...
4Players: You want to stop the potion spamming with the new health orbs. But how do you want to realise long boss fights?
Jay Wilson: Essentially when we are designing a boss, health recovery is built in the design. We could drop health orbs at some percentages of the creature's overall life and that's what we do with rares and champions, actually. So those guys (a sort of mini-bosses) get a chance to drop health orbs, when you're fighting them. In a bigger boss fight, which is more structured, we could provide some small creatures for health.
We've considered out a fight, where we use the wells like in Diablo 2 that bubble up over times. So you might have multiple of those. Then you have to run over and hit them for health and for a certain amount of time you can't use them and then they come back. So there are a lot of different ways how to do this. And really, the idea is that, when we are a designing a boss, we should figure out how health recovery could be an interesting mechanic for this boss.
Jay then goes on to talk about the other features such as runes, PVP and the random system in more detail which can be seen at 4gamer's site.
Link: http://www.4players.de/4players.php/dispbericht/PC-CDROM/Special/7040/60013/0/Diablo_3.html
The other bit of news comes from a mainly SC2 interview at Total Video Games. The bits of importance to Diablo fans follow.
TVG: There's no plan to even pave the way for a StarCraft RTS on the console by resurrecting StarCraft Ghost for instance?
Pearce: No, we've got our hands full with StarCraft II, Diablo III, and Wrath of the LIch King - Ghost isn't even on the radar.
TVG: A lot of people were rumouring that Diablo III could hit in 2011 or 2012...
Colayco: Personally I hope that it's sooner.
Link: http://www.totalvideogames.com/articles/StarCraft_II_QA_13701.htm
Thursday, August 28, 2008
BlogMore entries by this author | FriendAdd to Friends | InboxSend Message Blizzard: Diablo III Planned For Mature Rating - hellforge
As we reported a few days ago, Diablo III's Lead Designer Jay Wilson stated in his interview with inDiablo that they were not targeting to be an 18+ rated game, with regards to the USK rating system in Germany.
Understandably, this caused a certain amount of confusion, as many assumed he was referring to the "M" rating in the United States, of which Diablo and its sequel Diablo 2 were rated.
Blizzard's community manager Bashiok made the following post to clarify the matter:
Jay was referring to the German USK rating of 18+. Which is a rating specific to Germany and games sold there.
In the US we have the ESRB, and other countries may have their own rating advisories and labels. For our ESRB rating and US release we have been and still are planning for a "M" for Mature rating.
As noted, Bashiok explicitly states that Blizzard is planning for Diablo III for an "M" or Mature rating in the ESRB, a rating which more or less guarantees the inclusion of blood, gratituous violence and the kinds of content that Diablo players look forward to seeing.
To frame matters into perspective, Grand Theft Auto IV, Gears of War and God of War 2 are all M rated titles.
Understandably, this caused a certain amount of confusion, as many assumed he was referring to the "M" rating in the United States, of which Diablo and its sequel Diablo 2 were rated.
Blizzard's community manager Bashiok made the following post to clarify the matter:
Jay was referring to the German USK rating of 18+. Which is a rating specific to Germany and games sold there.
In the US we have the ESRB, and other countries may have their own rating advisories and labels. For our ESRB rating and US release we have been and still are planning for a "M" for Mature rating.
As noted, Bashiok explicitly states that Blizzard is planning for Diablo III for an "M" or Mature rating in the ESRB, a rating which more or less guarantees the inclusion of blood, gratituous violence and the kinds of content that Diablo players look forward to seeing.
To frame matters into perspective, Grand Theft Auto IV, Gears of War and God of War 2 are all M rated titles.
No LAN Confirmed for Diablo 3 + Other News
Another article by diablo3.4Gamers.de has popped up today.
The interview is in German, but a Google Translation of it is available with a link below. The interview deals with the usual questions, but also adds additional information about Battle Net 2, the item drop system, the possible pay options and no more Lan option. (I personally think not having Lan is good as it's not really needed, but the option to have it would always be nice...)
Diablo Source: If there are two characters with different class and there are two objects, then automatically go to the player with the class, these items use?
Jay Wilson: No, everyone gets its objects.We have the opportunity to class to make sure if we generate objects, and sometimes we do too, but ehre as a quest reward or special bosses. The first time you kill a boss, we will probably look to the class and the player something, he can use, or him with a higher probability of something that he can use, but in most situations it is possible that a player gets objects, the other for the good, but both goods and get together receive more items.
Diablo Source: Can I see what the other gets?
Jay Wilson: no. Das ist auch beabsichtigt, denn das ist der Grund für Streit. It is also intended, because this is the reason for dispute.When players see what everyone else will, then irritated them that if they do not, then they are not even true. This goes back to a story from World of Warcraft.There is the possibility of other players to inspect and it is a message, so if I would inspect Register would you get a message with "Jay inspected you."As a result, many players wanted that this feature of the Inspizierens rausgenommen, because they liked it. Es fühlte sich einfach komisch an, diese Nachricht zu kriegen, das man von jemand anderem inspiziert wurde.It felt strange, to get this message, which is inspected by someone else. But instead of simply inspecting to remove remote just the message. Superficially, of course, sounds very negative, because someone receives an item that you need yourself, but it is an interested but only if you really can know.In most cases this is beneficial, because for most players is that, if their backpacks filled, not in the city return, because that would prefer to come forward if they play with other, but their items simply throw on the floor if they do not want more.But once they do that, once an object touches the ground, he vogelfrei and for all. Was also passiert ist, die anderen Mitspieler fangen an, sich um diesen Spieler zu tummeln, um zu sehen, was er fallen lässt, heben etwas auf und merken dabei, dass sie ja auch Gegenstände in ihrem Rucksack haben, die sich nicht brauchen, und lassen diese ebenfalls fallen, was dazu führt, dass wieder mehr zusammen gespielt wird, und darauf legen wir großen Wert. So what happened, the other players are beginning to lose to these players cavort to see what he can fall, pick something up and note the fact that they are also objects in their backpack, which do not need, and this can also fall, which means that once again we will play together, and that we attach great value. Wie bei jedem System gibt es auch hier negative Aspekte, aber wir sind der Meinung, das der Nutzen so groß ist, dass es die negativen Aspekte mit Leichtigkeit überwiegt. As with any system, there are negative aspects, but we are of the opinion that the benefit is so high that the negative aspects outweigh with ease.
Diablo Source: Will there be an open Battle.net mode and a mode Lan?
Jay Wilson: Currently we plan to allow players, even offline. What we have done, however, the menu a little change. We want to encourage players in Battle.net to play. In Diablo 2 was the first option single player, you click it, playing the game in normal difficulty, and thinks: "Hey, I would now prefer to play with my friends.", But could not, because if you look at the Battle . net connected, one could not take the character.We could not allow that, because we were the safety of characters not guarantee offline. There is still a separation between single player and Battle.net characters. We want all to know that it is better to play Battle.net. You can play with other players and if they want it they can close off their game alone games. If you decide it should, offline to play, then we will also be the player know that he is not in a position to be the character to play online. We currently have no intentions to LAN games, we focus fully on the Battle.net, where we not only have the ability to quickly contact with other players record, but also to Blizzard community and thus also to support , As in the community.
Diablo Source: Will there be new features in Battle.net? Since StarCraft 2 talking Blizzard of new features in Battle.net, but it will never detailed information announced.
Jay Wilson: This is a notice and the Battle.net is the guys from Battle.net deserve. I will not steal their glory. We're working on a new version of Battle.net, and there is a major revision in the areas such as Battle.net works.The goal is simply the best online experience that is nowhere else you can find in games. If you are in a Blizzard game, we want to happen, which is a part of the Blizzard community. We want that one finds his friends quickly and easily communicate with them and with them can play, and we focus on it, but I can not be specific, they are then Ballte.net guys with their big announcement.
Diablo Source: So no (monthly) fees for the Battle.net or the game?
Jay Wilson: I can not as far out of the window and refuse to say that there will be no charges. Our goal is box the product and also according to our financial model.The problem is that we are a multinational company, and the individual markets are very different.The Box Model works in Asia, for example, not at all.If we publish a financial model then we must simultaneously for each region and therefore it is difficult to say how the final financial model will look like.What I can say is that it is our goal, a game box model and not subscription based, but I can not say that we are no fees for whatever will have.It is not our goal and I do not think it is a primary financial model for us.
Enjoy
The interview is in German, but a Google Translation of it is available with a link below. The interview deals with the usual questions, but also adds additional information about Battle Net 2, the item drop system, the possible pay options and no more Lan option. (I personally think not having Lan is good as it's not really needed, but the option to have it would always be nice...)
Diablo Source: If there are two characters with different class and there are two objects, then automatically go to the player with the class, these items use?
Jay Wilson: No, everyone gets its objects.We have the opportunity to class to make sure if we generate objects, and sometimes we do too, but ehre as a quest reward or special bosses. The first time you kill a boss, we will probably look to the class and the player something, he can use, or him with a higher probability of something that he can use, but in most situations it is possible that a player gets objects, the other for the good, but both goods and get together receive more items.
Diablo Source: Can I see what the other gets?
Jay Wilson: no. Das ist auch beabsichtigt, denn das ist der Grund für Streit. It is also intended, because this is the reason for dispute.When players see what everyone else will, then irritated them that if they do not, then they are not even true. This goes back to a story from World of Warcraft.There is the possibility of other players to inspect and it is a message, so if I would inspect Register would you get a message with "Jay inspected you."As a result, many players wanted that this feature of the Inspizierens rausgenommen, because they liked it. Es fühlte sich einfach komisch an, diese Nachricht zu kriegen, das man von jemand anderem inspiziert wurde.It felt strange, to get this message, which is inspected by someone else. But instead of simply inspecting to remove remote just the message. Superficially, of course, sounds very negative, because someone receives an item that you need yourself, but it is an interested but only if you really can know.In most cases this is beneficial, because for most players is that, if their backpacks filled, not in the city return, because that would prefer to come forward if they play with other, but their items simply throw on the floor if they do not want more.But once they do that, once an object touches the ground, he vogelfrei and for all. Was also passiert ist, die anderen Mitspieler fangen an, sich um diesen Spieler zu tummeln, um zu sehen, was er fallen lässt, heben etwas auf und merken dabei, dass sie ja auch Gegenstände in ihrem Rucksack haben, die sich nicht brauchen, und lassen diese ebenfalls fallen, was dazu führt, dass wieder mehr zusammen gespielt wird, und darauf legen wir großen Wert. So what happened, the other players are beginning to lose to these players cavort to see what he can fall, pick something up and note the fact that they are also objects in their backpack, which do not need, and this can also fall, which means that once again we will play together, and that we attach great value. Wie bei jedem System gibt es auch hier negative Aspekte, aber wir sind der Meinung, das der Nutzen so groß ist, dass es die negativen Aspekte mit Leichtigkeit überwiegt. As with any system, there are negative aspects, but we are of the opinion that the benefit is so high that the negative aspects outweigh with ease.
Diablo Source: Will there be an open Battle.net mode and a mode Lan?
Jay Wilson: Currently we plan to allow players, even offline. What we have done, however, the menu a little change. We want to encourage players in Battle.net to play. In Diablo 2 was the first option single player, you click it, playing the game in normal difficulty, and thinks: "Hey, I would now prefer to play with my friends.", But could not, because if you look at the Battle . net connected, one could not take the character.We could not allow that, because we were the safety of characters not guarantee offline. There is still a separation between single player and Battle.net characters. We want all to know that it is better to play Battle.net. You can play with other players and if they want it they can close off their game alone games. If you decide it should, offline to play, then we will also be the player know that he is not in a position to be the character to play online. We currently have no intentions to LAN games, we focus fully on the Battle.net, where we not only have the ability to quickly contact with other players record, but also to Blizzard community and thus also to support , As in the community.
Diablo Source: Will there be new features in Battle.net? Since StarCraft 2 talking Blizzard of new features in Battle.net, but it will never detailed information announced.
Jay Wilson: This is a notice and the Battle.net is the guys from Battle.net deserve. I will not steal their glory. We're working on a new version of Battle.net, and there is a major revision in the areas such as Battle.net works.The goal is simply the best online experience that is nowhere else you can find in games. If you are in a Blizzard game, we want to happen, which is a part of the Blizzard community. We want that one finds his friends quickly and easily communicate with them and with them can play, and we focus on it, but I can not be specific, they are then Ballte.net guys with their big announcement.
Diablo Source: So no (monthly) fees for the Battle.net or the game?
Jay Wilson: I can not as far out of the window and refuse to say that there will be no charges. Our goal is box the product and also according to our financial model.The problem is that we are a multinational company, and the individual markets are very different.The Box Model works in Asia, for example, not at all.If we publish a financial model then we must simultaneously for each region and therefore it is difficult to say how the final financial model will look like.What I can say is that it is our goal, a game box model and not subscription based, but I can not say that we are no fees for whatever will have.It is not our goal and I do not think it is a primary financial model for us.
Enjoy
Jay Wilson Talks Health Orbs and Tactical Combat - hellforge
4players.de caught up with Blizzard who gave them an interview relating to Diablo 3, in which they had a few questions answered by the game's lead designer Jay Wilson.
When asked how Blizzard planned to reconcile the elimination of 'potion spam' with the new inclusion of health bubbles with tough boss fights, Jay answered, "Essentially when we are designing a boss, health recovery is built in the design. We could drop health orbs at some percentages of the creature's overall life and that's what we do with rares and champions, actually. So those guys (a sort of mini-bosses) get a chance to drop health orbs, when you're fighting them. In a bigger boss fight, which is more structured, we could provide some small creatures for health.
We've considered out a fight, where we use the wells like in Diablo 2 that bubble up over times. So you might have multiple of those. Then you have to run over and hit them for health and for a certain amount of time you can't use them and then they come back. So there are a lot of different ways how to do this. And really, the idea is that, when we are a designing a boss, we should figure out how health recovery could be an interesting mechanic for this boss."
Would there be skills that allowed players to regain and regenerate their health during combat? Jay responded, "Yes, there are some ways for the characters. One example is the barbarian skill Bloodthirst - but we didn't decide if we keep this skill or kick it in the final version. It is like a temporary boost/buff for yourself to recover health by killing enemies. So there are other ways to recover and we didn't remove the potions. They are a lot less effective and you can't use them very often. They should be used in emergency situations."
"For me there is a big difference between difficulty and challenge. Challenge is compelling, like challenge is basically the illusion of difficulty. When you feel a game is really challenging, then the game is exciting. Difficulty is where the game is hard and frustrating. So difficulty we try to avoid and challenge we totally want to embrace. And one of the problems I think Diablo 2 had, it would feel difficult and easy but almost never challenging. You had almost infinite resources and health. So as a designer our only option in this case to actually challenge you is to crush you with damage. Anything less then just crushing you (like one-shotting you) with damage is not gonna challenge or scary you, cause you could instantly recover your health. So what we are trying to do is, essentially create a game, where it is a challenge to just surviving and in which we don't have to make the monsters crush you again. We could actually reduce the damage they do quite a bit. Because essentially entering a fight with them is something you have to do and you have to do it with limited health and that makes the game more exiting and more challenging. And we are really trying to make it not difficult," he continued.
When inquired as to whether the fights the player would require tactics and consist of more than potion spam and simply clicking on enemies to death, Jay responded with a resounding, "Yes! That's exactly what we want to do and the health system fits into that. A good example: Shield skeletons that block you from the archers in the back. In Diablo 2 they wouldn't be very threatening, well, except in one case, when the archers do a ridiculously high amount of damage. We could actually make the archers do very little damage, but because you know, that you don't getting the fast health back (potions) and suddenly those guys are attacking you, it makes the archers threatening. And so it's really purges the player to get through the shield scouts quickly. And there are a few ways you could do this. With the Barbarian you could leap pass them and get directly to the archers or you could stun the shield guys, cause them to drop the shield, in which case they are much weaker and power right through. "
Further questions and answers pertaining to the game's randomly generated content and PvP modes can be found at 4players.de.
When asked how Blizzard planned to reconcile the elimination of 'potion spam' with the new inclusion of health bubbles with tough boss fights, Jay answered, "Essentially when we are designing a boss, health recovery is built in the design. We could drop health orbs at some percentages of the creature's overall life and that's what we do with rares and champions, actually. So those guys (a sort of mini-bosses) get a chance to drop health orbs, when you're fighting them. In a bigger boss fight, which is more structured, we could provide some small creatures for health.
We've considered out a fight, where we use the wells like in Diablo 2 that bubble up over times. So you might have multiple of those. Then you have to run over and hit them for health and for a certain amount of time you can't use them and then they come back. So there are a lot of different ways how to do this. And really, the idea is that, when we are a designing a boss, we should figure out how health recovery could be an interesting mechanic for this boss."
Would there be skills that allowed players to regain and regenerate their health during combat? Jay responded, "Yes, there are some ways for the characters. One example is the barbarian skill Bloodthirst - but we didn't decide if we keep this skill or kick it in the final version. It is like a temporary boost/buff for yourself to recover health by killing enemies. So there are other ways to recover and we didn't remove the potions. They are a lot less effective and you can't use them very often. They should be used in emergency situations."
"For me there is a big difference between difficulty and challenge. Challenge is compelling, like challenge is basically the illusion of difficulty. When you feel a game is really challenging, then the game is exciting. Difficulty is where the game is hard and frustrating. So difficulty we try to avoid and challenge we totally want to embrace. And one of the problems I think Diablo 2 had, it would feel difficult and easy but almost never challenging. You had almost infinite resources and health. So as a designer our only option in this case to actually challenge you is to crush you with damage. Anything less then just crushing you (like one-shotting you) with damage is not gonna challenge or scary you, cause you could instantly recover your health. So what we are trying to do is, essentially create a game, where it is a challenge to just surviving and in which we don't have to make the monsters crush you again. We could actually reduce the damage they do quite a bit. Because essentially entering a fight with them is something you have to do and you have to do it with limited health and that makes the game more exiting and more challenging. And we are really trying to make it not difficult," he continued.
When inquired as to whether the fights the player would require tactics and consist of more than potion spam and simply clicking on enemies to death, Jay responded with a resounding, "Yes! That's exactly what we want to do and the health system fits into that. A good example: Shield skeletons that block you from the archers in the back. In Diablo 2 they wouldn't be very threatening, well, except in one case, when the archers do a ridiculously high amount of damage. We could actually make the archers do very little damage, but because you know, that you don't getting the fast health back (potions) and suddenly those guys are attacking you, it makes the archers threatening. And so it's really purges the player to get through the shield scouts quickly. And there are a few ways you could do this. With the Barbarian you could leap pass them and get directly to the archers or you could stun the shield guys, cause them to drop the shield, in which case they are much weaker and power right through. "
Further questions and answers pertaining to the game's randomly generated content and PvP modes can be found at 4players.de.
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
Jay Wilson Describes How Game Will Appeal To ‘Diablo’ Fans And Broad Audience - blizzardguru.com
MTV Blog has once again scored an interview with Jay Wilson, this time on the appeal of the game to a wide audience.
According to lead “Diablo III” designer Jay Wilson, the team has to appease an “extremely broad audience” as well as hardcore fans.
Keeping the game approachable is key for Wilson. “It’s one of the reasons why we made some of the choices we made, like when we pulled out the potion system,” he said. “When we wanted to add a hot bar we knew we had to pull the potion stuff out. Every time we add something, we have to pull something out to keep the game very simple and straightforward to play.”
“One of the things that happened in ‘Diablo II’,” Wilson continued, “was the player was faster than most of the monsters and had pretty much infinite health because they would just pop as many potions as they wanted. So when you have a player who has more mobility, more health and endless power, essentially the only thing you can really do to challenge [the players] is to kill them… by just spiking the difficulty.”
But in “Diablo III,” players will have to pick up health orbs after they’ve killed enemies, which will restore their health upon contact. Wilson saw on the forums that people were worried that this might make the game “ridiculously hard.” He said that fans shouldn’t worry.
“That’s only if we tuned it like ‘Diablo II,’” he said. “When the player has similar downsides, it means we can make a lot more interesting monsters. We don’t have to kill you to challenge you. We can make a monster that affects your mobility, we can make a monster that has different kinds of attacks that are dangerous to you and that you actually have to avoid. And so it makes the combat a lot more interesting.”
[...]
“A lot of the choices we make are styled towards knowing the long term,” he said. “I think that hardcore players, long-term, will find a game that has lot more depth for them but we distinctly made the choice that in the first stage of difficulty, the game’s really easy. So it’s easy to get through, it’s fun to play and you can kind of spam with one skill. But as you get further and further into the game, you start having to go, ‘Okay now I’ve really got to use this ground stomp thing to stun some monsters and get some distance from them to recover.’ That’s something that we focus on more later in the game.”
According to lead “Diablo III” designer Jay Wilson, the team has to appease an “extremely broad audience” as well as hardcore fans.
Keeping the game approachable is key for Wilson. “It’s one of the reasons why we made some of the choices we made, like when we pulled out the potion system,” he said. “When we wanted to add a hot bar we knew we had to pull the potion stuff out. Every time we add something, we have to pull something out to keep the game very simple and straightforward to play.”
“One of the things that happened in ‘Diablo II’,” Wilson continued, “was the player was faster than most of the monsters and had pretty much infinite health because they would just pop as many potions as they wanted. So when you have a player who has more mobility, more health and endless power, essentially the only thing you can really do to challenge [the players] is to kill them… by just spiking the difficulty.”
But in “Diablo III,” players will have to pick up health orbs after they’ve killed enemies, which will restore their health upon contact. Wilson saw on the forums that people were worried that this might make the game “ridiculously hard.” He said that fans shouldn’t worry.
“That’s only if we tuned it like ‘Diablo II,’” he said. “When the player has similar downsides, it means we can make a lot more interesting monsters. We don’t have to kill you to challenge you. We can make a monster that affects your mobility, we can make a monster that has different kinds of attacks that are dangerous to you and that you actually have to avoid. And so it makes the combat a lot more interesting.”
[...]
“A lot of the choices we make are styled towards knowing the long term,” he said. “I think that hardcore players, long-term, will find a game that has lot more depth for them but we distinctly made the choice that in the first stage of difficulty, the game’s really easy. So it’s easy to get through, it’s fun to play and you can kind of spam with one skill. But as you get further and further into the game, you start having to go, ‘Okay now I’ve really got to use this ground stomp thing to stun some monsters and get some distance from them to recover.’ That’s something that we focus on more later in the game.”
Thursday, August 14, 2008
‘Diablo III’ Rounds Out Trilogy, But Not The End Of ‘Diablo’ - blizzardguru.com
MTV Blog has yet another interview with Jay Wilson, this time to do with way that Diablo 3 will summarise the story arc of the games.
The plot behind “Diablo III” was developed with Blizzard’s VP of creative development Chris Metzen, who crafted the tales for the first two games. In the first “Diablo,” the player quests to kill the Lord of Terror.
Then in “Diablo II” and its expansion, the player is an adventurer set off to discover what happened to the warrior from the first title, who became corrupted, and fight the Prime Evils, other Hell-spawned superpowers unleashed by Diablo.
Wilson also told me that in addition to fan-favorite Deckard Cain, “Diablo III” will feature other characters from “Diablo” lore.
“We also tried to focus a little more on bringing characters back, and not just from ‘Diablo II’ but from ‘Diablo I,’” he said. “We feel like a lot of the focus is on ‘Diablo II’ but ‘Diablo I’ started it all and has a lot of really good stuff on the gameplay side and on the character side. So people can expect to see characters from ‘Diablo I,’ more characters from ‘Diablo II,’ and characters from some of the books. We’re definitely going to bring a few of them in.”
And while “Diablo III” ends the trilogy, fans needn’t worry — it’s not the final curtain for “Diablo.” “We’re not saying this is the end of the ‘Diablo’ universe, but we are trying to bring this storyline to a close,” Wilson said. “It’s not just ‘Diablo III’ — we’ve got plans beyond.”
The plot behind “Diablo III” was developed with Blizzard’s VP of creative development Chris Metzen, who crafted the tales for the first two games. In the first “Diablo,” the player quests to kill the Lord of Terror.
Then in “Diablo II” and its expansion, the player is an adventurer set off to discover what happened to the warrior from the first title, who became corrupted, and fight the Prime Evils, other Hell-spawned superpowers unleashed by Diablo.
Wilson also told me that in addition to fan-favorite Deckard Cain, “Diablo III” will feature other characters from “Diablo” lore.
“We also tried to focus a little more on bringing characters back, and not just from ‘Diablo II’ but from ‘Diablo I,’” he said. “We feel like a lot of the focus is on ‘Diablo II’ but ‘Diablo I’ started it all and has a lot of really good stuff on the gameplay side and on the character side. So people can expect to see characters from ‘Diablo I,’ more characters from ‘Diablo II,’ and characters from some of the books. We’re definitely going to bring a few of them in.”
And while “Diablo III” ends the trilogy, fans needn’t worry — it’s not the final curtain for “Diablo.” “We’re not saying this is the end of the ‘Diablo’ universe, but we are trying to bring this storyline to a close,” Wilson said. “It’s not just ‘Diablo III’ — we’ve got plans beyond.”
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
Jay Wilson on Gender Issues - blizzardguru.com
The MTV Blog has another interview up with Jay Wilson, where they deal with the gender issues in Diablo 3, including the reason for it’s introduction and any differences between the genders of classes.
“These [characters] are not people; they are so far above the normal civilians because that’s the tone of the game,” Wilson explained. “We really wanted the classes to be archetypal, and we wanted them to stand out from the world as a stark contrast.”
Wilson also told me that in making these unique archetypes, that meant having to create custom models. Add different genders to that, and it’s not cheap. “It’s pretty expensive for us art-wise because of the way we do our classes and the way we do a lot of the weaponry we create,” he said. “And essentially doing [different genders] adds a lot of model artwork. ‘World of Warcraft‘ was very smart about how they chose their class models and their NPCs, because they were very efficient with the number of models that they made. We were not.”
Despite the cost, the company is moving forward with gender choices for the character classes. For Wilson, it wasn’t even an option anyway. “For me it was always a no-brainer to have gender choice,” he said, having both male and female characters in “World of Warcraft.” “There’s so much interest as to guys who plays girls or girls who play guys. Sometimes it’s assumed that people play their own gender, but a lot of the times people don’t. It’s obviously a really important choice that we want people to be able to make on their own.”
I also asked Wilson if there was any thought given to having different abilities between genders. “No, we give specific timing on animation and abilities so that they’re exactly the same,” he said, when I referred to the recent “Age of Conan” gender debacle. “The problem with doing the differences between genders is that one or the other will be perceived to be better. Whether that’s true or not, we still may be perceived as having some kind of gender bias, probably in favor of men.”
“These [characters] are not people; they are so far above the normal civilians because that’s the tone of the game,” Wilson explained. “We really wanted the classes to be archetypal, and we wanted them to stand out from the world as a stark contrast.”
Wilson also told me that in making these unique archetypes, that meant having to create custom models. Add different genders to that, and it’s not cheap. “It’s pretty expensive for us art-wise because of the way we do our classes and the way we do a lot of the weaponry we create,” he said. “And essentially doing [different genders] adds a lot of model artwork. ‘World of Warcraft‘ was very smart about how they chose their class models and their NPCs, because they were very efficient with the number of models that they made. We were not.”
Despite the cost, the company is moving forward with gender choices for the character classes. For Wilson, it wasn’t even an option anyway. “For me it was always a no-brainer to have gender choice,” he said, having both male and female characters in “World of Warcraft.” “There’s so much interest as to guys who plays girls or girls who play guys. Sometimes it’s assumed that people play their own gender, but a lot of the times people don’t. It’s obviously a really important choice that we want people to be able to make on their own.”
I also asked Wilson if there was any thought given to having different abilities between genders. “No, we give specific timing on animation and abilities so that they’re exactly the same,” he said, when I referred to the recent “Age of Conan” gender debacle. “The problem with doing the differences between genders is that one or the other will be perceived to be better. Whether that’s true or not, we still may be perceived as having some kind of gender bias, probably in favor of men.”
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
Blizzard’s Bashiok Talks About The Secret Cow Level - blizzardguru.com
So, what’s the big fuss over the secret cow level in Diablo 2? Blizzard’s Bashiok comments:
Yeah, who doesn’t like fighting cows running around with halberds?
I disliked the secret cow level from a design standpoint though. It actually angered me that it existed at one point, maybe it kind of still does.
I’m not a designer, at all, but in my opinion and from a design standpoint I think the secret cow level was a failure. For a long time it was one of the most lucrative ways to level, and one of the best places to MF. For an easter egg, something fun and whimsical, to overshadow the entire rest of the game was a huge problem, and one that existed for far too long. It was a fun idea, a cool nod to the rumors that spawned it, but in execution it was just… game breaking in some ways.
Some players disagree, and dislike the changes made in 1.10 that made the Secret Cow Level less lucrative, to which Bashiok writes:
Well of course, everyone wants everything made easier for them, and that’s effectively what it was. This barrel of fish that not only acted as cheesy way to pull the slot machine lever, but almost rendered the rest of the game unnecessary.
The oversight, I believe, existed in the requirement for the current difficulty to be beaten as well as the Cow King kill. It’s easy enough to avoid the King or just have the level opened by other characters, and I can only guess that the amount of replay potential of the actual game was extremely undervalued.
Because you’re playing a game, and it should be respected that you’re playing that game. The cow level was not part of the game, it was an easter egg that made leveling and item finding far easier than the actual game. I’m inclined to almost call it cheating.
I’m really liking Bashiok. I’ve personally never been a big fan of the secret cow level in Diablo 2. Like Bashiok, I’ve always considered it to be a design failure that majorly detracted from most other parts of the game.
I wonder if there will be another cow level.. hmm...
Yeah, who doesn’t like fighting cows running around with halberds?
I disliked the secret cow level from a design standpoint though. It actually angered me that it existed at one point, maybe it kind of still does.
I’m not a designer, at all, but in my opinion and from a design standpoint I think the secret cow level was a failure. For a long time it was one of the most lucrative ways to level, and one of the best places to MF. For an easter egg, something fun and whimsical, to overshadow the entire rest of the game was a huge problem, and one that existed for far too long. It was a fun idea, a cool nod to the rumors that spawned it, but in execution it was just… game breaking in some ways.
Some players disagree, and dislike the changes made in 1.10 that made the Secret Cow Level less lucrative, to which Bashiok writes:
Well of course, everyone wants everything made easier for them, and that’s effectively what it was. This barrel of fish that not only acted as cheesy way to pull the slot machine lever, but almost rendered the rest of the game unnecessary.
The oversight, I believe, existed in the requirement for the current difficulty to be beaten as well as the Cow King kill. It’s easy enough to avoid the King or just have the level opened by other characters, and I can only guess that the amount of replay potential of the actual game was extremely undervalued.
Because you’re playing a game, and it should be respected that you’re playing that game. The cow level was not part of the game, it was an easter egg that made leveling and item finding far easier than the actual game. I’m inclined to almost call it cheating.
I’m really liking Bashiok. I’ve personally never been a big fan of the secret cow level in Diablo 2. Like Bashiok, I’ve always considered it to be a design failure that majorly detracted from most other parts of the game.
I wonder if there will be another cow level.. hmm...
Jay Wilson on Battle Net 2, Pricing and Releases - blizzardguru.com
UGO has an article up with Jay Wilson, this time detailing some details of the multiplayer aspects of the game and how they will run.
The most exciting changes we discussed related to the new and improved Battle.net. Most of what’s going to happen is still in the planning stages, but fans can in general expect to see more integration between game and community. No one will be forced to sign on to Battle.net to play Diablo III, but characters created offline will not be playable online in the interests of limiting any potential for cheating the system.
As for community features, the recently announced Achievements for Diablo III (and StarCraft II) will also tie into the redesigned Battle.net. There are additional plans to streamline item-sharing between different characters, one suggestion being to allow items to be traded or sent through whispers. Fans can also probably expect to see voice chat in Diablo III, though modders and modding tools will not be officially supported due to the game’s random nature.
Pricing for the game is still being decided, but don’t expect to pay subscription fees for access to Battle.net. Sure, there’s always the possibility that different membership tiers will be introduced later on, but nothing we heard during our chat suggested that the team has anything other than a free-to-play model in mind for Diablo III’s online play.
As for the possibility of a console port, there’s nothing new to report. Wilson recycled the comment that’s been circulating, that Diablo III would be the “easiest” of Blizzard’s games to port. But that should not be read as confirmation that the team is working on any such port; as it is, they have their hands full trying to deliver on fan expectations for the confirmed PC release.
From the sound of things, fans may as well settle in for a healthy wait. With so many design decisions still being squared away on a weekly basis, development for Diablo III is moving along nicely but the game is nowhere near finished. Blizzard will have a presence at Leipzig in two weeks, so expect a bit more news then. Perhaps even word on another of those mystery classes. For now, we remain pumped to take on the faceless hoards armed with nothing more than a party of allies, a massive loot hoard and a potent selection of spells and abilities.
Enjoy
The most exciting changes we discussed related to the new and improved Battle.net. Most of what’s going to happen is still in the planning stages, but fans can in general expect to see more integration between game and community. No one will be forced to sign on to Battle.net to play Diablo III, but characters created offline will not be playable online in the interests of limiting any potential for cheating the system.
As for community features, the recently announced Achievements for Diablo III (and StarCraft II) will also tie into the redesigned Battle.net. There are additional plans to streamline item-sharing between different characters, one suggestion being to allow items to be traded or sent through whispers. Fans can also probably expect to see voice chat in Diablo III, though modders and modding tools will not be officially supported due to the game’s random nature.
Pricing for the game is still being decided, but don’t expect to pay subscription fees for access to Battle.net. Sure, there’s always the possibility that different membership tiers will be introduced later on, but nothing we heard during our chat suggested that the team has anything other than a free-to-play model in mind for Diablo III’s online play.
As for the possibility of a console port, there’s nothing new to report. Wilson recycled the comment that’s been circulating, that Diablo III would be the “easiest” of Blizzard’s games to port. But that should not be read as confirmation that the team is working on any such port; as it is, they have their hands full trying to deliver on fan expectations for the confirmed PC release.
From the sound of things, fans may as well settle in for a healthy wait. With so many design decisions still being squared away on a weekly basis, development for Diablo III is moving along nicely but the game is nowhere near finished. Blizzard will have a presence at Leipzig in two weeks, so expect a bit more news then. Perhaps even word on another of those mystery classes. For now, we remain pumped to take on the faceless hoards armed with nothing more than a party of allies, a massive loot hoard and a potent selection of spells and abilities.
Enjoy
Confirmed: Necromancer is cut out! Hint of his Return? - blizzardguru.com
MTV Blog has another article up with Diablo 3’s lead designer, Jay Wilson (as pointed out by Adsci), which this time talks about the new classes in the game. The main thing to take out of the article is the fact that the Necromancer will not be included in the game, as the developers found him to be so good, that they had no way to update him.
They do however hint at a possibility that he will be put into the game in later expansions.
“The problem was, we looked at the class and didn’t think that we could really make him a lot better,” he explained. “We could add some new stuff to him but for the most part — curses, corpse explosion, skeleton pets — done. That’s the class. We wanted to create new gameplay, so we chose to do the Witch Doctor as a different kind of class.”
Though the Witch Doctor will have similar abilities to the Necromancer, Wilson didn’t want to “have to live by any Necromancer rules.” One of the big differences between the two classes is how damage is actually dealt.
“If [the Necromancer] dealt damage, it was through corpses laying around or through his pets,” he said. “The Witch Doctor, his pets are a little more transient. If you watch the gameplay video, you really notice his pets come and go like crazy. There’s a wall of zombies that go away fairly quickly or pets that just kind of blow up willy-nilly. That was intentional — to try and make him different than the Necromancer.”
However, for those who are really passionate about the Necromancer, there’s still hope to see the class in a “Diablo III” expansion. In fact, Wilson thought that expansions might be a great place to bring back any of the old classes not included, particularly since the team itself had passionate debates on the topic — almost as much as the game’s art direction.
[...]
Wilson added, “It’s one of those things where, unless we put like 30 classes in the game, people are going to be unhappy. But if we put 30 classes in the game, we’d hurt the game. I think that of the classes that we’ve chosen, there will be something for everyone. I’m not worried that people won’t be able to find a class that they like to play.”
Enjoy
They do however hint at a possibility that he will be put into the game in later expansions.
“The problem was, we looked at the class and didn’t think that we could really make him a lot better,” he explained. “We could add some new stuff to him but for the most part — curses, corpse explosion, skeleton pets — done. That’s the class. We wanted to create new gameplay, so we chose to do the Witch Doctor as a different kind of class.”
Though the Witch Doctor will have similar abilities to the Necromancer, Wilson didn’t want to “have to live by any Necromancer rules.” One of the big differences between the two classes is how damage is actually dealt.
“If [the Necromancer] dealt damage, it was through corpses laying around or through his pets,” he said. “The Witch Doctor, his pets are a little more transient. If you watch the gameplay video, you really notice his pets come and go like crazy. There’s a wall of zombies that go away fairly quickly or pets that just kind of blow up willy-nilly. That was intentional — to try and make him different than the Necromancer.”
However, for those who are really passionate about the Necromancer, there’s still hope to see the class in a “Diablo III” expansion. In fact, Wilson thought that expansions might be a great place to bring back any of the old classes not included, particularly since the team itself had passionate debates on the topic — almost as much as the game’s art direction.
[...]
Wilson added, “It’s one of those things where, unless we put like 30 classes in the game, people are going to be unhappy. But if we put 30 classes in the game, we’d hurt the game. I think that of the classes that we’ve chosen, there will be something for everyone. I’m not worried that people won’t be able to find a class that they like to play.”
Enjoy
Diablo III Art Director Leaves Blizzard - 1up.com
Recently, Kotaku reported that Blizzard was listing a job opening for an Art Director to "lead the Diablo 3 team." Those very vocal individuals who signed the petition to have Blizzard change their artistic style probably felt like justice was finally being served with previous art director Brian Morrisroe gone, but did his departure have anything to do with the minor controversy over Diablo?
Blizzard says not so. Their official response to the Multiplayer blog regarding the matter follows:
"Regarding Brian, he recently resigned to form a startup technology company (outside the game industry), which is why we've posted about the open position. This change won't impact the game.... We're really pleased with the look and feel that Brian helped create for Diablo 3, and the new person we bring onboard will work with the other artists on the team to maintain the art style moving forward."
Morrisroe's reason for leaving sounds pretty legit to us. Besides, would Blizzard or a Blizzard employee really let an internet petition bother them during such a critical time of development? - looking at this news there's a good chance that the game will delay.. wonder how long it's gonna take them this time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)