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?
Thursday, September 25, 2008
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
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)