That's true about the VATS, actually. But for the most part, it was still pretty pointless. Especially since the level of detail that you could change about your face, but then in the VATS sequences, the camera was so shaky and the scenes so short, all that effort of making your character's face just how you wanted it seemed pointless in the end. Plus I hate how in the character customization screen you had to view your face through a crappy projector looking screen cause even in that part of the game they're trying to maintain that 1950's aesthetic to things.
I was certain I had my character looking a certain way according to that screen but then once I actually reached adulthood in the game and then looked at my face, I was like, "What the fuck?? Is this really how I made my character look."
At any rate, I suspect they are going to try to add more RPG elements into D3, and even if they allowed a few things such as hair color, hair length, eye color, piercings and tattoos, that could be somewhat cool I think. But I even think a thing like a tattoo should be an item you should eventually acquire and it has stat bonuses or something like that, but you could also have options on how the tattoo looked.
I was certain I had my character looking a certain way according to that screen but then once I actually reached adulthood in the game and then looked at my face, I was like, "What the fuck?? Is this really how I made my character look."
Oblivion wasn't a problem for me. The way I made my char's face look was pretty much how it ended up looking in the game. It would've been nice even if the 360 had a screen capture function so you could share with other players how your character looked. It's just that it's a lot of effort to put into for something that only you will see, and only if you rotate the external camera.
To me it's not even how a character is customizable, but there should be a big WHY is the character customizable. And if a game developer can't adequately answer that question, then for the most part they shouldn't even try to implement such a feature in the game.
"Today a young man on acid realized that all matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration. That we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively. There is no such thing as death, life is only a dream, and we are the imagination of ourselves. Here's Tom with the weather."
I wasn't really expecting them to make this feature. But it is kind of interesting to discuss. I do like the original faces of the characters anyway. The female Wizard is hot. You heard me!
Also, i'm kinda confused as to what looks have to do with RPing, except if you're referring to (virtual) LARPING.
Do you really see no value for customization of characters in roleplaying? Isn't customization a prevalent facet of roleplaying? I've always felt that customization added a dynamic that gave the character's creator a bond with the character that a static character lacks. If this game could not be played online I would be less averse to static characters for you wouldn't see crowds of my clones in game. Having this set in an online stage cries for the ability to make yourself unique aesthetically. Games such as Metal Gear Solid where you play as a single hero that you know as the single protagonist would, of course, be terrible if you could customize him, but Diablo 3 does not fall in this category.
Yes it is true that in an action RPG (especially one that employs these game mechanics) you do not see the fine details up close. Perhaps "customizable faces" is too narrow of an aspect for what I wish was in the game. The bottom line is making a character unique in the face of hundreds of thousands of other characters that look exactly the same.
Other possible customizations that I have thought of are:
Stances
Hair
Tattoos/Scars/Visible Decals
Skin Color
Voice (this is asking far too much as it would require alternate voice actors for the plot sequences but it is an idea nontheless)
I particularly liked the idea of customizable stances because a town of Barbarians won't look like synchronized breathing.
Anyways, these are just passing fancies rather than passionate cravings. With a next-gen game one always wants everything. I know we won't get everything, but I at least want to know that the ideas are out there, you know?
Good call, but not WoW style where you can choose between like a few different faces, it should be "create a player" style where you can choose weight, height, facial bone structure, skin tone etc. etc. MORE CUSTOMIZATION MAKES FOR BETTER GAME PLAY.
Do you really see no value for customization of characters in roleplaying? Isn't customization a prevalent facet of roleplaying? I've always felt that customization added a dynamic that gave the character's creator a bond with the character that a static character lacks. If this game could not be played online I would be less averse to static characters for you wouldn't see crowds of my clones in game. Having this set in an online stage cries for the ability to make yourself unique aesthetically. Games such as Metal Gear Solid where you play as a single hero that you know as the single protagonist would, of course, be terrible if you could customize him, but Diablo 3 does not fall in this category.
You're wrong. In diablo you don't creat your own character. Their personality and background are fixed by the linear story line and the expositive dialogs. So the appearence also must be fixed.
In other words, if my wiz have the same personality and the same background of yours, why should they look different?
Because of multiplayer? Then they should put cosmetic items in the game, like hair dye, hair cuts and tattos. But different weight, voice, face etc.. Really this stuff does not fit diablo.
In diablo you don't creat your own character. Their personality and background are fixed by the linear story line and the expositive dialogs. So the appearence also must be fixed.
So I suppose you think that all people should look the same that maintain similar backgrounds and have the same personality? This logic is utterly flawed. We already have certain choices so the storyline is not linearly static. Not to memntion, the alternatives to facial customizations I have enumerated don't even have to change the character in the storyline at all such as their stance, etc.
We have 10 potential heroes to carry out the storyline. The fact that you can choose your gender shows that the storyline is not perfectly linear.
In other words, if my wiz have the same personality and the same background of yours, why should they look different?
The same reason why every dumb-blonde located in the Valley in California look different.
Please don't just spout some "you're wrong" rubbish unless you take the time to read my entire post.
i only want customizable faces if there's a LOT of options.
i hate games that give you 6 or 10 or 12 faces and you don't really like any of them.. then not only do you identify with your character less, but you may run across a lot of people with the same face.. and it just ends up backfiring for me.
for some reason it doesn't bother me to run across a sea of the same faces if there's no customization allowed.. yet if there is face customization and i run across people with my face i get weirdly territorial and upset. lol..?
just slightly.. but it's like a threat to your character's identity?
(maybe it's just me?)
honestly i think i'd rather not be able to see my face (like in d2 the features were just barely intelligible so that you could imagine your character looked any way almost)
either that or just tons and tons of options that look very different.
edit: (btw they might make different faces cost more? or was that idea dropped? i remember they said they were toying with the idea of superficial things costing more.. like hairstyles? or am i making it up)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
they'll never see me coming.. life is a sequence of tragedies, inconsistent only by fleeting, elusive moments of pleasure,
serving only to ensure absolute vulnerability to the pain of their inevitable absence.
Wrong, according to Blizzard and any other gaming site. It is an action RPG, as I said.
"[I]Diablo[/I] is a [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_fantasy"]dark fantasy[/URL]-themed [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_role-playing_game"]action role-playing game[/URL] [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_developer"]developed[/URL] by [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blizzard_North"]Blizzard North[/URL] and released by [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blizzard_Entertainment"]Blizzard Entertainment[/URL] on January 2, 1997"
[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diablo_(video_game)]Source
If I wasn't so lazy I would quote the sources of IGN, Gamespot, etc. etc. etc. The gaming community consensus is "action-rpg" genre. Perhaps you like to define it as something completely different on your own. Unfortunately that does absolutely nothing to me when I'm basing my opinions off of a generally accepted concept.
Secondly customization of what can only be seen as pure aesthetics doesn't have anything to do with roleplaying. (except LARPING)
First of all - wrong, Second of all, do you even know what LARPING is? It's Live Action Role Playing. This type of role playing is something that you do IN REAL LIFE.
"A live action role-playing game (LARP) is a form of role-playing game where the participants physically act out their characters' actions"
[URL="http://www.google.com/url?sa=X&start=0&oi=define&q=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larping&usg=AFQjCNGm8AryF_IzmyoqRFwbtlbEjRU12A"]Source[/URL]
Here is a general explanation of role-playing:
"Many [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Role-playing_game#Varieties"]varieties[/URL] of game exist, but most follow the pattern established by [I]Dungeons & Dragons[/I]. Participants usually conduct the game as a small social gathering. A GM purchases or prepares a set of rules and a fictional setting in which players can act out the roles of their characters. This setting includes challenges for the player characters to overcome through play, such as traps to be avoided or adversaries to be fought. The full details of the setting are kept secret, but some broad details of the game world are usually given to the players.
The players then [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Character_creation"]create characters[/URL] whose roles they will play in the game. As well as fleshing out the character's fictional background, they assign numerical [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistic_%28role-playing_games%29"]statistics[/URL] to the character; these will be used later to determine the outcome of events in the game. Together, these notes tell the player about their character and their his or her place in the game world.[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Role-playing_game#cite_note-whatisnarrative-1"][2][/URL]"
[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Role-playing_game"]Source[/URL]
I maintain firm justification in my suggestions. I feel that I have NOT read too far into this. I also find it odd that you see me "reading too far into something" that I clearly claimed to be passing fancies.
Thirdly the visual representation of a character already depends on (meaningful) customization, namely their equipment. Furthering that meaningful customization could be expressed via visually representing the chosen skills/stats (Kinda like in Fable) which would be awfully complex to pull of right and not really worth it imo.
What? Really? Furthing the meaningful customaztion of equipment would be awfully complex? Adding small decals and other aesthetic differences wouldn't be difficult at all. I think I have fair reason to believe this based on the Archivist. They can whip up aesthetic differences in a jiffy. Complexity is not a problem, it is utility.
Lastly, you play set characters in a fixed story (again, this isn't an RPG, remember?), everything they do is predetermined, their being is fixed, their part in the story is already written, the only thing you as a player do is hack & slashing your way through hellspawn in style.
First, how does your parameters not make this game an RPG. I would recommend brushing up on genre classifications before claiming assumptions as fact. Second, no, there path is not predetermined in the long run. I think it is safe to say that even with the limited amount of information we have been given that we are not following a strictly linear storyline. They have already announced random quests, etc. The storyline, you can say, is on a linear path but it rests in sandbox play; thus the hero is characterized by more than the story. I don't even know how you can say that this isn'tan RPG. I can name about 15+ games off the top of my head that follow this criteria.
Is that truly the only thing? Because as I recall, the Diablo series employs mechanics beyond the bounds of hack-and slash. It leads to hack and slash ultimately, but it still shows that it is not the [I]only[/I] thing a character does. Crafting, trading... etc. They are facets themselves.
To conclude: I feel that I have fair, justified premeses for my suggestions based on this game. I feel that YOU read to [I]little[/I] into what I had to say because you obviously missed the point of my post.
I would like to direct your attention to the end of my original post:
Quote from "Nocturne »
Anyways, these are just passing fancies rather than passionate cravings. With a next-gen game one always wants [I]everything.[/I'] I know we won't get everything, but I at least want to know that the ideas are out there, you know?
So I suppose you think that all people should look the same that maintain similar backgrounds and have the same personality? This logic is utterly flawed. We already have certain choices so the storyline is not linearly static. Not to memntion, the alternatives to facial customizations I have enumerated don't even have to change the character in the storyline at all such as their stance, etc.
We have 10 potential heroes to carry out the storyline. The fact that you can choose your gender shows that the storyline is not perfectly linear.
The same reason why every dumb-blonde located in the Valley in California look different.
Please don't just spout some "you're wrong" rubbish unless you take the time to read my entire post.
No we don't have choices. The main storyline is 100% static. They have in a interview that they first intent was to make a open world, but then they took a step back and made the same linear storyline present in D1 and D2.
Also we can't choose what our characters going to say in dialogs, so his personality are also fixed
And we can choose the gender. But it's 10 different characters, but all with fixed storylines.
What i'm trying to say is that you can't creat your own wizard. What she will say, what she will do in terms of storyline and what end she will have in the story, you can't choose. The game is static and linear.
And i agreed that this can bring issues to the multiplayer. Thats why i suggested cosmetic items.
I said you're wrong because you are. In this aspect diablo are like Metal Gear, not like Oblivion, Mass Effect etc...
"Action-rpg = rpg", except that its not because the definition of an "action-rpg" is an action game based on a role playing combat system (care to explain what customizable faces got to do with combat, or with anything for that matter? I guess not, obviously) typified by a heavy emphasis on real-time slaying huge numbers of enemies. "Being to lazy to quote IGN or Gamespot" is a joke because first of all you don't (and thus fail to quote jack-shit which would in any way counter-argue my points) and second of all "IGN and Gamespot etc, etc, etc," means nothing to me.
Lastly, many regard Diablo as being its own little genre, clones of it being referred to as "Diablo-clones" and the definition of it is even less defined then that of action-rpg seeing that character and story interaction is kept to a bare minimum, and its namely pretty much only slashing enemies.
The first thing I'd like to mention is that THIS GAME'S GENRE IS EVOLVING. Both yours and my definitions of anything regarding this game hold only a small platform to base assumptions from. If you don't like my suggestions you can stuff it. Your argument is lacking completely because you limit yourself to genre while I'm understanding the fact that this game is stepping into uncharted territory where it is good to suggest things to add to the game's play.
Action RPG's vary greatly in gameplay, many of which maintain the ability to customize your character. By maintaining an extremely narrow view much is lost in the grand scheme of video games. This game already employs RPG elements that extend the bounds of the said ARPG genre - as I have enumerated in previous posts. Games are not limited to the constraints of any single genre, and it seems that your views are limited because of this. I feel you are being antagonistic to an almost comical degree. If you want to use your own criteria of the game's genre that's perfectly okay. I just suggest you stop now because you're fighting a losing battle. This battle will never be won because we will never see eye to eye.
Everywhere on the internet people call Diablo an RPG. People all over [I]this[/I] forum call Diablo an RPG. Albeit it is an action RPG. If you'd like me to go through the search function and quote all of my sources feel free to ask - or better yet - do your own searching before you continue your own unfounded drivel.
Diablo I and II had minimal story interaction and it has been clearly stated that this will not be the case in Diablo III. The storyline will be much more prevalent which sets the game more firmly in RPG territory.
Thats why i included the word "virtual" in brackets in my post preceding the one you quoted, but i guess you missed that. Also, you don't have to tell me what LARPing is, tell it to the millions of gamers thinking that playing pretend in Morrowind or Oblivion is in fact cRPGing instead of (virtual, did you see what i did there?) LARPing.
Don't refer to something that has absolutely nothing to do with the debate. If you knew what it was I have no idea why you used that as a premise to your argument. Instead of putting something in brackets that has some ambiguous meaning I'd recommend saying what you mean directly. Not only will your arguments sound more solid, but it will give me something concrete to disagree with.
You tried to tell me a fancy story why customizable faces got anything to do with roleplaying.
Fancy? So reasoned concrete arguments are fancy now. Get used to it from me.
Learn2read, i said furthering meaningful customization past equipment, (ie skills/stats, like in Fable) would be awfully complex/time consuming/whatever when compared to the benefits it could have (which are next to nothing).
Excuse me? Leave juvenile bleating out of this. If you want to start devolving to battle.net talk I'd impress upon you to stop responding. I don't even know how this even has anything to do with [I]facial [/I]customization, let alone other suggestions that I mentioned. This is an aside that I feel pays little significance to the subject at hand.
I don't think so, thanks for the misplaced suggestion though.
If you insist on remaining ignorant to generally accepted concepts I, once again, recommend that you stop arguing. You will get nowhere with me because I will continue arguing on firm information. If we cannot come to an agreement on terms we will never come to an agreement on anything else.
I can almost guarantee you that the storylne will be as linear as *add in something extremely linear*, which is fine btw. The limited amount of information suggest some sidequests similar to those of D1.
And. So. What. Their ultimate destination is set upon a path that leads them all to the same places. How does this have any baring whatsoever on customization. I see people arguing that this fact somehow makes the hero static in all ways and should thus should't be allowed to change. Bull. Our heroes will not be getting the same gear, will not be making the same movements, we will generally not all be making the same decisions as other players. Simple aesthetic customizations have an equal place as diversified loot in viability for this game's genre.
You aren't changing the character. You aren't changing the background. You aren't changing the personality. Period. You can drop the "but it's a linear storyline" argument now.
No it isn't, it rests on DUNGEON CRAWL play, similar to ROGUE. Learn games please.
Dungeon Crawling is a main path of the linear quests. A sandbox implies that the character has choices amongst the dungeons. They can decide to farm areas before progressing, they can decide to trade before progressing, etc. The fact that the player has multiple options before progressing the main storyline suggests that there is [I]sandbox[/I] type gameplay, albeit a limited one. This incorporates dungeon crawling. Perhaps you are referring to sandbox gameplay where a character can choose one of multiple quest avenues. This is not what I'm referring to.
I'm not going to suggest that you learn to do anything because apparently any suggestion is lost upon your thick skull.
Those all have just a single purpose "deal with items or upgrade the player's combat abilities or issue them with combat-centric quests". Its completely combat related which obviously doesn't make it qualify as a roleplaying game, i mean, duh.
Wow, you have tunnel vision. Seriously, don't narrow in on one aspect of a game before you start spouting out statements that claim to define, or anything else for that matter. The fact that it's combat related is just as much of a qualifying factor for a roleplaying game as it does for just about any other genre. You must place the combat in the context of the game to be able to firmly justify your observations.
Anyways, I grow tired of responding to half-thought-out answers that are getting nowhere. If you insist upon replying I'll just answer with a few words to sum up my thoughts. I truly think this is a pointless argument because we're already set upon our own ideas - we are at an impasse and I'm perfectly okay with leaving it as such.
Congratulations on creating possibly the most pointless argument on suggestions that I thought would be cool additions to an evolving genre. Bravo.
Let me redirect you again - and I will keep reposting this until you realize how absurd it is to keep responding:
Quote from "Nocturne »
Anyways, these are just passing fancies rather than passionate cravings. With a next-gen game one always wants [I]everything.[/I'] I know we won't get everything, but I at least want to know that the ideas are out there, you know?
To me a RPG has always just been a game where you play the role of a specific character, either made by you, or just made for the game.
Quote from "Doppelganger" »
Lastly, you play set characters in a fixed story (again, this isn't an RPG, remember?), everything they do is predetermined, their being is fixed, their part in the story is already written, the only thing you as a player do is hack & slashing your way through hellspawn in style.
A lot of the most famous RPG's you play a premade character, it doesn't make them any less RPG. Final Fantasy, Chrono Trigger, Chrono Cross, etc etc. You PLAY the ROLE of the characters. That being said, almost all games have a RPG element. That's not really what we should be focusing on though.
The question was simply, would you like to see more customizable faces. It'd make you feel like you had some sort of hand in the creation of your character, thus helping you feel possibly closer in a RP aspect. It's easier to get engrossed in something when you helped design it.
Really who cares what it classifies as, RPG, Hacknslash, Dungeoncrawl, whatever.
If you want customization, say you want customization, if you don't want it, then just say you dont. Don't say it's impossible just because it's not a RPG.
To me a RPG has always just been a game where you play the role of a specific character, either made by you, or just made for the game.
A lot of the most famous RPG's you play a premade character, it doesn't make them any less RPG. Final Fantasy, Chrono Trigger, Chrono Cross, etc etc. You PLAY the ROLE of the characters. That being said, almost all games have a RPG element. That's not really what we should be focusing on though.
The question was simply, would you like to see more customizable faces. It'd make you feel like you had some sort of hand in the creation of your character, thus helping you feel possibly closer in a RP aspect. It's easier to get engrossed in something when you helped design it.
Really who cares what it classifies as, RPG, Hacknslash, Dungeoncrawl, whatever.
If you want customization, say you want customization, if you don't want it, then just say you dont. Don't say it's impossible just because it's not a RPG.
Its funny you talk abot faces... the other day i was in act two with one of my zons... and i put a helm on her and looked at her and then i actually stoped and was like LOL her head looks like a peperoni pizza LOL!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Always respect the purity of battle. For only in the heart of combat are all pretenses of nobility and quality stripped away, replaced by survival and death."
Once you get armor on, you wont be able to see your face or hair or anything. Some guy said choosing the colors and looks of your armor, I think thats a good idea. Like if you want and item but it only comes in a certain type of armor, like fpm or ap or something, you could choose to change it into an item type that looks cooler, but with all the same def, req's etc.
Interesting they had this option in Neverwinter Nights... with Create armor skill... Guild wars has an armor dye option which is pretty cool cuz you can dye your armor which is pretty realistic and you can actually mix dyes! to create off colors
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Always respect the purity of battle. For only in the heart of combat are all pretenses of nobility and quality stripped away, replaced by survival and death."
I was certain I had my character looking a certain way according to that screen but then once I actually reached adulthood in the game and then looked at my face, I was like, "What the fuck?? Is this really how I made my character look."
At any rate, I suspect they are going to try to add more RPG elements into D3, and even if they allowed a few things such as hair color, hair length, eye color, piercings and tattoos, that could be somewhat cool I think. But I even think a thing like a tattoo should be an item you should eventually acquire and it has stat bonuses or something like that, but you could also have options on how the tattoo looked.
Siaynoq's Playthroughs
To me it's not even how a character is customizable, but there should be a big WHY is the character customizable. And if a game developer can't adequately answer that question, then for the most part they shouldn't even try to implement such a feature in the game.
Siaynoq's Playthroughs
Siaynoq's Playthroughs
Do you really see no value for customization of characters in roleplaying? Isn't customization a prevalent facet of roleplaying? I've always felt that customization added a dynamic that gave the character's creator a bond with the character that a static character lacks. If this game could not be played online I would be less averse to static characters for you wouldn't see crowds of my clones in game. Having this set in an online stage cries for the ability to make yourself unique aesthetically. Games such as Metal Gear Solid where you play as a single hero that you know as the single protagonist would, of course, be terrible if you could customize him, but Diablo 3 does not fall in this category.
Yes it is true that in an action RPG (especially one that employs these game mechanics) you do not see the fine details up close. Perhaps "customizable faces" is too narrow of an aspect for what I wish was in the game. The bottom line is making a character unique in the face of hundreds of thousands of other characters that look exactly the same.
Other possible customizations that I have thought of are:
Anyways, these are just passing fancies rather than passionate cravings. With a next-gen game one always wants everything. I know we won't get everything, but I at least want to know that the ideas are out there, you know?
You're wrong. In diablo you don't creat your own character. Their personality and background are fixed by the linear story line and the expositive dialogs. So the appearence also must be fixed.
In other words, if my wiz have the same personality and the same background of yours, why should they look different?
Because of multiplayer? Then they should put cosmetic items in the game, like hair dye, hair cuts and tattos. But different weight, voice, face etc.. Really this stuff does not fit diablo.
I am?
So I suppose you think that all people should look the same that maintain similar backgrounds and have the same personality? This logic is utterly flawed. We already have certain choices so the storyline is not linearly static. Not to memntion, the alternatives to facial customizations I have enumerated don't even have to change the character in the storyline at all such as their stance, etc.
We have 10 potential heroes to carry out the storyline. The fact that you can choose your gender shows that the storyline is not perfectly linear.
The same reason why every dumb-blonde located in the Valley in California look different.
Please don't just spout some "you're wrong" rubbish unless you take the time to read my entire post.
i hate games that give you 6 or 10 or 12 faces and you don't really like any of them.. then not only do you identify with your character less, but you may run across a lot of people with the same face.. and it just ends up backfiring for me.
for some reason it doesn't bother me to run across a sea of the same faces if there's no customization allowed.. yet if there is face customization and i run across people with my face i get weirdly territorial and upset. lol..?
just slightly.. but it's like a threat to your character's identity?
(maybe it's just me?)
honestly i think i'd rather not be able to see my face (like in d2 the features were just barely intelligible so that you could imagine your character looked any way almost)
either that or just tons and tons of options that look very different.
edit: (btw they might make different faces cost more? or was that idea dropped? i remember they said they were toying with the idea of superficial things costing more.. like hairstyles? or am i making it up)
they'll never see me coming..
life is a sequence of tragedies, inconsistent only by fleeting, elusive moments of pleasure,
serving only to ensure absolute vulnerability to the pain of their inevitable absence.
I am?
If I wasn't so lazy I would quote the sources of IGN, Gamespot, etc. etc. etc. The gaming community consensus is "action-rpg" genre. Perhaps you like to define it as something completely different on your own. Unfortunately that does absolutely nothing to me when I'm basing my opinions off of a generally accepted concept.
First of all - wrong, Second of all, do you even know what LARPING is? It's Live Action Role Playing. This type of role playing is something that you do IN REAL LIFE.
"A live action role-playing game (LARP) is a form of role-playing game where the participants physically act out their characters' actions"
[URL="http://www.google.com/url?sa=X&start=0&oi=define&q=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larping&usg=AFQjCNGm8AryF_IzmyoqRFwbtlbEjRU12A"]Source[/URL]
Here is a general explanation of role-playing:
"Many [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Role-playing_game#Varieties"]varieties[/URL] of game exist, but most follow the pattern established by [I]Dungeons & Dragons[/I]. Participants usually conduct the game as a small social gathering. A GM purchases or prepares a set of rules and a fictional setting in which players can act out the roles of their characters. This setting includes challenges for the player characters to overcome through play, such as traps to be avoided or adversaries to be fought. The full details of the setting are kept secret, but some broad details of the game world are usually given to the players.
The players then [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Character_creation"]create characters[/URL] whose roles they will play in the game. As well as fleshing out the character's fictional background, they assign numerical [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistic_%28role-playing_games%29"]statistics[/URL] to the character; these will be used later to determine the outcome of events in the game. Together, these notes tell the player about their character and their his or her place in the game world.[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Role-playing_game#cite_note-whatisnarrative-1"][2][/URL]"
[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Role-playing_game"]Source[/URL]
I maintain firm justification in my suggestions. I feel that I have NOT read too far into this. I also find it odd that you see me "reading too far into something" that I clearly claimed to be passing fancies.
What? Really? Furthing the meaningful customaztion of equipment would be awfully complex? Adding small decals and other aesthetic differences wouldn't be difficult at all. I think I have fair reason to believe this based on the Archivist. They can whip up aesthetic differences in a jiffy. Complexity is not a problem, it is utility.
First, how does your parameters not make this game an RPG. I would recommend brushing up on genre classifications before claiming assumptions as fact. Second, no, there path is not predetermined in the long run. I think it is safe to say that even with the limited amount of information we have been given that we are not following a strictly linear storyline. They have already announced random quests, etc. The storyline, you can say, is on a linear path but it rests in sandbox play; thus the hero is characterized by more than the story. I don't even know how you can say that this isn'tan RPG. I can name about 15+ games off the top of my head that follow this criteria.
Is that truly the only thing? Because as I recall, the Diablo series employs mechanics beyond the bounds of hack-and slash. It leads to hack and slash ultimately, but it still shows that it is not the [I]only[/I] thing a character does. Crafting, trading... etc. They are facets themselves.
To conclude: I feel that I have fair, justified premeses for my suggestions based on this game. I feel that YOU read to [I]little[/I] into what I had to say because you obviously missed the point of my post.
I would like to direct your attention to the end of my original post:
you don't take - Wayne Gretzky"
- Michael Scott
No we don't have choices. The main storyline is 100% static. They have in a interview that they first intent was to make a open world, but then they took a step back and made the same linear storyline present in D1 and D2.
Also we can't choose what our characters going to say in dialogs, so his personality are also fixed
And we can choose the gender. But it's 10 different characters, but all with fixed storylines.
What i'm trying to say is that you can't creat your own wizard. What she will say, what she will do in terms of storyline and what end she will have in the story, you can't choose. The game is static and linear.
And i agreed that this can bring issues to the multiplayer. Thats why i suggested cosmetic items.
I said you're wrong because you are. In this aspect diablo are like Metal Gear, not like Oblivion, Mass Effect etc...
The first thing I'd like to mention is that THIS GAME'S GENRE IS EVOLVING. Both yours and my definitions of anything regarding this game hold only a small platform to base assumptions from. If you don't like my suggestions you can stuff it. Your argument is lacking completely because you limit yourself to genre while I'm understanding the fact that this game is stepping into uncharted territory where it is good to suggest things to add to the game's play.
Action RPG's vary greatly in gameplay, many of which maintain the ability to customize your character. By maintaining an extremely narrow view much is lost in the grand scheme of video games. This game already employs RPG elements that extend the bounds of the said ARPG genre - as I have enumerated in previous posts. Games are not limited to the constraints of any single genre, and it seems that your views are limited because of this. I feel you are being antagonistic to an almost comical degree. If you want to use your own criteria of the game's genre that's perfectly okay. I just suggest you stop now because you're fighting a losing battle. This battle will never be won because we will never see eye to eye.
Everywhere on the internet people call Diablo an RPG. People all over [I]this[/I] forum call Diablo an RPG. Albeit it is an action RPG. If you'd like me to go through the search function and quote all of my sources feel free to ask - or better yet - do your own searching before you continue your own unfounded drivel.
Diablo I and II had minimal story interaction and it has been clearly stated that this will not be the case in Diablo III. The storyline will be much more prevalent which sets the game more firmly in RPG territory.
Don't refer to something that has absolutely nothing to do with the debate. If you knew what it was I have no idea why you used that as a premise to your argument. Instead of putting something in brackets that has some ambiguous meaning I'd recommend saying what you mean directly. Not only will your arguments sound more solid, but it will give me something concrete to disagree with.
Fancy? So reasoned concrete arguments are fancy now. Get used to it from me.
Excuse me? Leave juvenile bleating out of this. If you want to start devolving to battle.net talk I'd impress upon you to stop responding. I don't even know how this even has anything to do with [I]facial [/I]customization, let alone other suggestions that I mentioned. This is an aside that I feel pays little significance to the subject at hand.
If you insist on remaining ignorant to generally accepted concepts I, once again, recommend that you stop arguing. You will get nowhere with me because I will continue arguing on firm information. If we cannot come to an agreement on terms we will never come to an agreement on anything else.
And. So. What. Their ultimate destination is set upon a path that leads them all to the same places. How does this have any baring whatsoever on customization. I see people arguing that this fact somehow makes the hero static in all ways and should thus should't be allowed to change. Bull. Our heroes will not be getting the same gear, will not be making the same movements, we will generally not all be making the same decisions as other players. Simple aesthetic customizations have an equal place as diversified loot in viability for this game's genre.
You aren't changing the character. You aren't changing the background. You aren't changing the personality. Period. You can drop the "but it's a linear storyline" argument now.
Dungeon Crawling is a main path of the linear quests. A sandbox implies that the character has choices amongst the dungeons. They can decide to farm areas before progressing, they can decide to trade before progressing, etc. The fact that the player has multiple options before progressing the main storyline suggests that there is [I]sandbox[/I] type gameplay, albeit a limited one. This incorporates dungeon crawling. Perhaps you are referring to sandbox gameplay where a character can choose one of multiple quest avenues. This is not what I'm referring to.
I'm not going to suggest that you learn to do anything because apparently any suggestion is lost upon your thick skull.
Wow, you have tunnel vision. Seriously, don't narrow in on one aspect of a game before you start spouting out statements that claim to define, or anything else for that matter. The fact that it's combat related is just as much of a qualifying factor for a roleplaying game as it does for just about any other genre. You must place the combat in the context of the game to be able to firmly justify your observations.
Anyways, I grow tired of responding to half-thought-out answers that are getting nowhere. If you insist upon replying I'll just answer with a few words to sum up my thoughts. I truly think this is a pointless argument because we're already set upon our own ideas - we are at an impasse and I'm perfectly okay with leaving it as such.
Congratulations on creating possibly the most pointless argument on suggestions that I thought would be cool additions to an evolving genre. Bravo.
Let me redirect you again - and I will keep reposting this until you realize how absurd it is to keep responding:
A lot of the most famous RPG's you play a premade character, it doesn't make them any less RPG. Final Fantasy, Chrono Trigger, Chrono Cross, etc etc. You PLAY the ROLE of the characters. That being said, almost all games have a RPG element. That's not really what we should be focusing on though.
The question was simply, would you like to see more customizable faces. It'd make you feel like you had some sort of hand in the creation of your character, thus helping you feel possibly closer in a RP aspect. It's easier to get engrossed in something when you helped design it.
Really who cares what it classifies as, RPG, Hacknslash, Dungeoncrawl, whatever.
If you want customization, say you want customization, if you don't want it, then just say you dont. Don't say it's impossible just because it's not a RPG.
Thank you.
-Leoric of Khanduras, The Craft of War
-Leoric of Khanduras, The Craft of War
The more popular colors you know?