Diablo RPG Kickstarter signup is live

[darjr]

Almost 2300 followers.

 

[Aldarc]

Given that it's apparently impossible to truly kill Diablo, I'm hoping Lilith returns in an upcoming expansion or sequel and we get more of her story. She certainly seemed like a great frenemy to the people of Sanctuary and it seems like a waste to just have her be a big speedbump on the way to the Prime Evils (again).

One thing that I would be curious about is whether that also applies to Angels. Given the Eternal Conflict, I would assume that angels were killed and resurrected fairly commonly. While we have seen Diablo come back time and time again, we haven't seen any of the angels come back yet. That's my question going forward because the questions is whether angels like Malthael and Inarius would potentially come back and if so, whether they would come back as they were in the beginning or as previously when they died.

 

[cbwjm]

One thing that I would be curious about is whether that also applies to Angels. Given the Eternal Conflict, I would assume that angels were killed and resurrected fairly commonly. While we have seen Diablo come back time and time again, we haven't seen any of the angels come back yet. That's my question going forward because the questions is whether angels like Malthael and Inarius would potentially come back and if so, whether they would come back as they were in the beginning or as previously when they died.

That was part of the plot from d3 from memory, diablo invades heaven and tries to corrupt whatever they have that allows them to be reborn.

What they return as is an interesting question, would Maltheal see his time as the angel of death as a path to wisdom and return to his position as the archangel of wisdom, realising it was a mistake.

 

[Aldarc]

That was part of the plot from d3 from memory, diablo invades heaven and tries to corrupt whatever they have that allows them to be reborn.

What they return as is an interesting question, would Maltheal see his time as the angel of death as a path to wisdom and return to his position as the archangel of wisdom, realising it was a mistake.

It's the Crystal Arch, which is the spine of Anu, the first being of creation who later split themselves between their good/light quality (Anu) and their evil/dark side (Tathamet). Skipping a bit... From Anu (part 2) came Angels. From Tathamet came Demons.

 

[cbwjm]

It's the Crystal Arch, which is the spine of Anu, the first being of creation who later split themselves between their good/light quality (Anu) and their evil/dark side (Tathamet). Skipping a bit... From Anu (part 2) came Angels. From Tathamet came Demons.

That's cool, and it might explain why nephalim can become more powerful than angels and demons, they might be a truer reflection of the first being of creation.

 

[Aldarc]

That's cool, and it might explain why nephalim can become more powerful than angels and demons, they might be a truer reflection of the first being of creation.

Likely true.

For the record, the Worldstone was also the Eye of Anu.

 

[Micah Sweet]

One thing that I would be curious about is whether that also applies to Angels. Given the Eternal Conflict, I would assume that angels were killed and resurrected fairly commonly. While we have seen Diablo come back time and time again, we haven't seen any of the angels come back yet. That's my question going forward because the questions is whether angels like Malthael and Inarius would potentially come back and if so, whether they would come back as they were in the beginning or as previously when they died.

I've never really bought into Diablo's return in D3. His destruction in D2 was pretty final. Maybe I misunderstood the lore?

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Maybe I misunderstood the lore?

With respect, yeah. You even misunderstood the animation on-screen.

Diablo isn't destroyed in D2 - he can't be destroyed (or not by known methods) - he's a Prime Evil. They pretty much definitionally cannot be destroyed. They can be contained within soulstones. And that's precisely what happens to him in D2 - it's even in the animation as he's killed, he's pulled into the soulstone embedded in his forehead.

You can see his death animation on this page if you scroll down: Diablo (Diablo II)

His return in D3 is a mess not so much because of that but because of the terrible way it's handled plot/writing-wise.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Loved Diablo 1 and 2. Especially 1 for is D&D-ness.

D3 was really lacking IMO. To often I had been told "Just beat it 3-4 times (or whatever) then it gets really good!"

Original release D3 was just not a very good game on any level except maybe second-to-second gameplay (which isn't quite enough for an ARPG, I would argue).

Later D3, after the expansion and huge loot changes was a pretty great game but the designers focused their effort pretty much entirely on the "endgame" mode of play and Adventure mode. I've never heard anyone say "beat the game 3-4 times then it gets good" (because it's not true), but that seems like a translation of "the game is built around endgame" (which is true). D3 is hugely more entertaining as a game-game (rather than just a play-once story or w/e - it's a pretty bad story) if you play Adventure mode and just level up fast and then do Greater Rifts etc.

Then you have an actually solid ARPG, and that is how undoubtedly most of the hours logged on D3 were spent, so I think the devs were correct to focus on that.

Ultimately no Diablo game has a particularly great story - ARPGs in general aren't typically designed as play-once story experiences in the way some CRPGs and a lot of action RPGs (i.e. Witcher 3 etc.) are.

 

[DarkCrisis]

Original release D3 was just not a very good game on any level except maybe second-to-second gameplay (which isn't quite enough for an ARPG, I would argue).

Later D3, after the expansion and huge loot changes was a pretty great game but the designers focused their effort pretty much entirely on the "endgame" mode of play and Adventure mode. I've never heard anyone say "beat the game 3-4 times then it gets good" (because it's not true), but that seems like a translation of "the game is built around endgame" (which is true). D3 is hugely more entertaining as a game-game (rather than just a play-once story or w/e - it's a pretty bad story) if you play Adventure mode and just level up fast and then do Greater Rifts etc.

Then you have an actually solid ARPG, and that is how undoubtedly most of the hours logged on D3 were spent, so I think the devs were correct to focus on that.

Ultimately no Diablo game has a particularly great story - ARPGs in general aren't typically designed as play-once story experiences in the way some CRPGs and a lot of action RPGs (i.e. Witcher 3 etc.) are.

Basically the game was far too easy and to unlock the actual challenging difficulties you had to beat it once or twice or whatever. Which by then I’d already seen the game. Why would I want to beat it again and again?

“Once you unlock this this and this it really becomes fun” isn’t a selling point for me. It should be fun right out of the gate.

See also games that have like long tutorials that “get fun after 4 hours”. Like no thanks.