bit-gamer.net

Fallout 3 producer disappointed by Diablo 3

Fallout 3 producer disappointed by Diablo 3

Is Diablo 3 just more of the same? Some industry professionals certainly it's looking that way.

Blizzard's recent announcement of Diablo 3 has had a lot of fans excited, but it seems that there's still some people in the world who have managed to maintain their cynicism and disappointment at the series, among them Ashley Cheng, the production director at Bethesda.

Cheng, who currently works as a producer for Fallout 3, has said that he is a little dismayed at the first footage of the game, which follows what he calls a conservative design structure.

"I must say I am disappointed that Blizzard has stayed on the conservative side in terms of design with their updates to Diablo and Starcraft."

Cheng goes on to assert himself as a fan of the series nonetheless though, saying that he loves the destructible environments and is an admirer of Blizzard's past work.

He then comments that he knows Blizzard is currently working on a new MMO game, which he secretly hopes to be World of Starcraft. The comments tie in closely with comments from Rob Pardo that Blizzard is currently working on a new and unannounced game.

So, now the question goes out to you - what do you think of Diablo 3 judging by the first footage? Is it possible to have too much of a good thing? Let us know what you think in the forums.

25 Comments

Discuss in the forums Reply
Cthippo 3rd July 2008, 09:31 Quote
From what I've heard in the other thread, this is not a bad thing. Most people seem to be of the opinion that if it ain't broke, don't fix it. polish it a little, maybe tweak a couple tings here and there, but don't start messing with the moving parts.

The Bethesda person's comments seem to be aimed at visuals and we've seen how the focus on graphics over gameplay has worked out (Doom 3, Crysis, etc)
bowman 3rd July 2008, 09:55 Quote
Oh christ he is not one to talk. Not about being conservative, but about being disappointed. I've seen some _honest_ previews of Fallout 3 and it seems to me like they have a thing or two to learn about not breaking old franchises.

I love what Blizzard has done with Diablo 3. It's essentially the same old game, but with a new snazzy engine, and a bit of a touchup and polish to a mirror shine to gameplay elements that weren't already perfect in the old one. We know what we're getting now. It's not like GTA IV where they slip us cinematic style trailers that hype up the game, yet we didn't know until release that in fact, they had cut out half of the elements they introduced in the previous one.

Can't say the same about Fallout 3. They're not being very forthcoming. I don't have high anticipations for Fallout 3 any more after reading previews from honest journalists who actually played the old games.
CardJoe 3rd July 2008, 10:00 Quote
*I* played the old games. Hell, I STILL play the old games and have played them again and again and again with multiple types of characters, paths and mods. Fallout 2 would definitely feature in my top five games. I'm not saying that there aren't concerns about Fallout 3 of course, but I like what I've seen of it thus far.
bowman 3rd July 2008, 10:08 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by CardJoe
*I* played the old games. Hell, I STILL play the old games and have played them again and again and again with multiple types of characters, paths and mods. Fallout 2 would definitely feature in my top five games. I'm not saying that there aren't concerns about Fallout 3 of course, but I like what I've seen of it thus far.

Okay, you're not alone in that, but I'm just saying it's not unanimous.:)

I'll still buy it anyway, just keeping my expectations down so I won't get disappointed.
CardJoe 3rd July 2008, 10:13 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by bowman
Quote:
Originally Posted by CardJoe
*I* played the old games. Hell, I STILL play the old games and have played them again and again and again with multiple types of characters, paths and mods. Fallout 2 would definitely feature in my top five games. I'm not saying that there aren't concerns about Fallout 3 of course, but I like what I've seen of it thus far.

Okay, you're not alone in that, but I'm just saying it's not unanimous.:)

I'll still buy it anyway, just keeping my expectations down so I won't get disappointed.

Ah, nuts. Now I really want to go play Fallout 2 again now...
Cthippo 3rd July 2008, 10:19 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by bowman
I love what Blizzard has done with Diablo 3. It's essentially the same old game, but with a new snazzy engine, and a bit of a touchup and polish to a mirror shine to gameplay elements that weren't already perfect in the old one. We know what we're getting now. It's not like GTA IV where they slip us cinematic style trailers that hype up the game, yet we didn't know until release that in fact, they had cut out half of the elements they introduced in the previous one.

The danger in this is that the devil is often in the details. Remember the move from CS1.6 to CS:S? The changes to the maps were pretty small, yet had massive effects on gameplay. Granted, the dynamic of CS was very much tied to it's maps, but still, sometimes small changes can throw big wrenches in the machine.

Despite my aversion to hype, I hope D3 does well (even though I have no real interest in it) just because it might push other devs to emphasize gameplay over graphics once again.
Paradigm Shifter 3rd July 2008, 11:03 Quote
While I was never falling over myself with enthusiasm for either Diablo or Fallout (that was, at the time, reserved for Baldur's Gate and Final Fantasy) I hope both of these games do well, whether they take the 'conservative' route or not - after all, I'd rather they took the 'if it ain't broke don't fix it' mentality than ripped out 95% of the guts and replaced them with 'new' ideas that failed. Even if they don't hold completely to the 'ideals' of the earlier games, I'll still likely buy both - provided they don't have some draconian copy protection system on them.
toyomatt84 3rd July 2008, 13:20 Quote
Diablo 3 is a cult game, much the same with Fallout. Some people admire the past playstyles, and others prefer change over consistency. I, for one, am more than happy with the playstyle available on Diablo 1, 2, and LoD. I didn't want a serious change (like First person camera angles, or an MMO changeover). I was more than pleased with how the game was already laid out. In fact, that's what made me stay with the game so long. Sacred offered a similar experience, and I enjoyed that game thoroughly as well.

Cheng just sounds like someone who prefers to see change and huge progress in new releases of an existing title, which is fine... but why ruin something that's already highly successful?
Lepermessiah 3rd July 2008, 13:39 Quote
bethesda continue to show how arrogant and stupid they really are. WOW, imagine if all devs amde dumbed down games with the intelligence of a snail like bethesda? Give me a break, blizzard know what they are doing. You don't see Diablo fans worried about D3 like Fallout fans are worried how beth will butcher a once great franchise.
Lepermessiah 3rd July 2008, 13:41 Quote
Umm, the original OP, crysis actually did well, and has great graphics and gameplay, why do people spread this BS about crysis all the time. A game can have good graphics and gameplay, imagine that. Crysis is as good as any shooter released in 07, and has perhaps the mosy dynamic gameplay and real world realism of any shooter ever.
DXR_13KE 3rd July 2008, 15:49 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lepermessiah
Umm, the original OP, crysis actually did well, and has great graphics and gameplay, why do people spread this BS about crysis all the time. A game can have good graphics and gameplay, imagine that. Crysis is as good as any shooter released in 07, and has perhaps the mosy dynamic gameplay and real world realism of any shooter ever.

.... and the most generic storyline ever.

also notice that you can edit your original post instead of double posting.

world of starcraft...... hmmmm
MrMonroe 3rd July 2008, 16:04 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cthippo
From what I've heard in the other thread, this is not a bad thing. Most people seem to be of the opinion that if it ain't broke, shove out a reskinned version and call it a new game

Fixed that for you.
Bladestorm 3rd July 2008, 17:12 Quote
Blizzard has never done "original" nor have they ever done "revolutionary" - what they do is "Polished" and they tend to do that better than anyone else in the industry, save maybe valve.
Lepermessiah 3rd July 2008, 17:17 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by DXR_13KE
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lepermessiah
Umm, the original OP, crysis actually did well, and has great graphics and gameplay, why do people spread this BS about crysis all the time. A game can have good graphics and gameplay, imagine that. Crysis is as good as any shooter released in 07, and has perhaps the mosy dynamic gameplay and real world realism of any shooter ever.

.... and the most generic storyline ever.

also notice that you can edit your original post instead of double posting.

world of starcraft...... hmmmm

The story is crysis was as good as COD4, Halo, Gears (Now that was bad story telling) and most every other shooter, except Valve games and Bioshock, get real. No one plays FPS games for stories, that is what RPG's are for.
DXR_13KE 3rd July 2008, 17:26 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lepermessiah
No one plays FPS games for stories

i do ;) i want to be immersed in the story and environment.
dyzophoria 3rd July 2008, 17:34 Quote
i think there's only one reason why there is no world of starcraft (yet), it will definitely have an effect on the world of warcraft at the moment imho.
Lepermessiah 3rd July 2008, 19:12 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by DXR_13KE
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lepermessiah
No one plays FPS games for stories

i do ;) i want to be immersed in the story and environment.

In that case, there are about 2-3 shooters that you would like, because virtually no shooters have good stories.
UncertainGod 3rd July 2008, 19:59 Quote
I think what he meant to say is "oh noez, another company is bringing back a legendary rpg series but keeping it the way people want it instead of my twisted vision of FO3 because I never played the old ones."
Cthippo 4th July 2008, 06:35 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by DXR_13KE
i do ;) i want to be immersed in the story and environment.

Same here. That's why I love HL2, Stalker, and am looking forward to Bioshock (as soon as I finsish Stalker). All are story driven, predominantly single player FPS games. It may be a nieche market, but it is a market nonetheless and one which I am glad to see is still being pretty well served.
PhenomRed 4th July 2008, 07:24 Quote
i actually like COD4s story, sure it may be generic, but i was planning on doing a level and then quitting, but keept playing and clocked it in 2 days cause the story kept drawing me in. i kept wanting to know wat happened next
DXR_13KE 4th July 2008, 22:12 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lepermessiah
In that case, there are about 2-3 shooters that you would like, because virtually no shooters have good stories.

i think it is a little bit more.... even if the story is generic, if it pulls you in then it is good, especially when it kicks you in the nuts at some point.... remembers me a game called GORE.... interesting game, fightclub type ending.
metarinka 5th July 2008, 18:31 Quote
I just watn to know if they kept the same who ever clicks first gets the loot style in d3. That by far was a terrible system that rewards those with low latency and fast fingers.

I have high hopes for space siege as well, dungeon siege was a series who took a dungeon crawler and tried to minimize the annoying parts
Ninja_182 10th July 2008, 13:45 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by metarinka
I just watn to know if they kept the same who ever clicks first gets the loot style in d3. That by far was a terrible system that rewards those with low latency and fast fingers.

I was quite a fan of the idea. Certainly you will lose out on quite a large ammount of things but it makes looting quite a frantic process. I did enjoy trying to beat other players to a boss drop and that was on a useless connection. Sucked to be a ranged class mind.

Theres quite a petition going (34k when I signed it) to bring back the "light radius" and have everything outside it in dark areas dark. If they implimented that again (and it cant be hard) the game would get a lot less criticism.
crazybob 10th July 2008, 14:28 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by metarinka
I just watn to know if they kept the same who ever clicks first gets the loot style in d3. That by far was a terrible system that rewards those with low latency and fast fingers.
Nope. I don't recall where I read it so I can't cite sources, but I've heard that in 3 you'll only even see loot reserved for you.
Ninja_182 10th July 2008, 15:29 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazybob
Nope. I don't recall where I read it so I can't cite sources, but I've heard that in 3 you'll only even see loot reserved for you.

I suppose if three players are playing and the kill is made, the system drops three of each item chosen and each player only sees one item. That would work well, that way the drop mechanics remain the same as they used to be.
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums