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.
Thursday, August 28, 2008
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)