Imagine we told you the story of a game where you hack things up over and over and over and over by clicking the mouse to gain items. These items allow you to go into harder areas of a dungeon and hack things up over and over again. Would you buy into it? Probably not.
Yet Diablo, since its inception, has fascinated gamers with the fundamental goals of hacking and slashing your way to a hellish beast in hopes to hack and slash him as well. It does, however, have a firm storyline which has gotten better with age and usually marvels gamers with graphic advancements set to blow the mind.
Diablo II had some nice graphics, but they were not mind blowing and earth shattering but the game continued to be fun to play. So fun, some gamers continue to play Diablo II even today, grinding out armor and weapons. What’s the fascination?
Blizzard Entertainment seems to be born on the wind of success, each title pulling more gaming headlines than the last. Diablo III has taken over gaming RSS feeds, headline news and has presented itself on social media sites like it was the second coming (perhaps, just the opposite?)
Diablo 3, graphically, and functionally, seems to highly exceed the levels it set with the last two titles. Destructible environments being one of the best additions to the franchise, along with new classes, weapons and enemies.
The core of the game, based on the gameplay footage, is fundamentally the same: beat baddies in excess and capture cool items. Blizzard has mastered the “grind” for items and the repeated quest plots in all of its title, especially World of Warcraft, but they’ve done it in an addicting manner. We know its repeatative yet we desire to continue to play. Work of genius.
How much Diablo 3 can a single person play before growing bored? For most, boredom is quite the opposite of the hack and slash experience, choosing to sit down with their Fritos and Soda and waste away the days.
Will Wright Leaves Electronic Arts
We’re already looking at the results of an Activision Vivendi union and now Electronic Arts is slowly working towards taking over Take-Two. Activision Blizzard is larger than that of EA but would the Take-Two buy-out grow EA into the number one publisher once again?
I wasn’t pissed off when the sale was made. I was mildly disturbed when Wizards of the Coast said they’d be revamping and fixing the game – by allowing things like level 20 halfling mage-slash-thief-slash-paladin-slash-monk-slash-fighters.
I became angry when 4.0 game out and they succeeded in turning it into a computer game version of D&D, and sucking the life out of the actual roleplaying. Computer RPGs are the way they are because they LACK the ability to have an intelligent GM. It’s the tail wagging the dog now.
At least GURPS is still out there.
3.0 was my first experience, so I had no ill will toward WotC. It wasn’t until Hasbro took over that I got ticked. And yeah, 4.0 is utterly pointless for pen-and-paper purposes, in my opinion.
Also, not to get needlessly nitpicky or anything, but I don’t think you could actually be a thief/paladin/monk, could you? Unless that was a 3.5 change. ‘:)
2.0 was the best. Period.