Diablo 3 Sequel Theory

[LordOfMars]

A lot has been written by fans regarding what they would like to see in a sequel to Diablo II. Many of the ideas posted here have been mentioned before here, and at other fan forums, in various iterations and varying specifics. Most of these ideas are good ones, and are very workable; what remains to be done is to put together a cohesive vision of what a truly great sequel to the Diablo series can be.

I am working on a Diablo III design document, as an intellectual exercise in game design, not because I think Blizzard will necessarily do anything like I envision, but because it’s fun, it’s something to do, and because we can always dream.

But for the moment, I wanted to consider some of the aspects which would go into such a design.

What kind of game should Diablo III be?

I see many options for the basic nature of a sequel. I can distill these into a few major categories:

1) Make Diablo III. This would mean making a single player / bnet multiplayer game in the same vein as the first two. Make it bigger and better, with prettier graphics, more character classes, more items, more acts and quests, etc… Updated technology and bigger scope, but same basic premise and design modality. This would probably satisfy the fans who liked Diablo 2 the way it was, but might earn the ire of fans who were looking forward to expanded gameplay and new features.

2) Make Diablo III a pure MMORPG. i.e. Traditional MMORPG fare. World of WarCraft style game set in the Diablo universe / World of Sanctuary. Since Blizz is doing WoW, and there are so many other standard MMORPG’s, this doesn’t seem like much of an option. Traditional Diablo gameplay would be gone, and only the backstory and some visual / storyline elements would remain. Bad option for an overcrowded genre.

3) Make Diablo III a hybrid Action / MMORPG. This is where I see the Diablo gameline going. This is where it would have the most success, I feel. Basically, take the gameplay of Diablo II, vastly expand the character classes, skills, items, quests, NPC’s, story elements, etc., and place it in a huge, persistant world. This is what I am going to focus my ‘design document’ exercise on.

4) Make Diablo III some other type of game. This would include ideas people have posted for a Diablo RTS or first person (morrowind-style) game. This might please some of the Diablo fans looking to play in the Diablo universe, but looking for a very different experience. It could be a really good game, but would be likely to alienate the core fanbase of the Diablo series and attract a new fanbase based on the type of game (RTS or FP). I strongly discount this option as a primary sequel, though it could be an option for spin-offs…


I believe option 3 is the best way to satisfy the existing fanbase, attract new players, and provide the income necessary to properly support the game (stopping hacks and exploits, adding content incrementally over time, having an evolving, dynamic world). As a MMORPG, ‘Diablo Online’ would have to charge a subscription fee in order to make the venture profitable for Blizzard. I know a lot of Diablo players have said ‘I won’t pay one red cent for online play!’ but I don’t really believe this is true for the majority of gamers.

Judging from the number of subscribers that games like Everquest have, and the number World of Warcraft is likely to have, it seems clear that gamers are willing to pay a minimal monthly fee for a well supported game. Think of Diablo II; all Blizzard gets is the initial game purchase money, they have to pay to support the servers, and the updating of the game, from residual profits. Surely, game sales have steadily dropped since the game’s release four years ago. No wonder they take so long to come out with patches and fixes.

Now, I'm not rich, and I'm also not eager to have to pay more money, but a minimal fee of $5-$10 a month ($6.95 maybe?) would provide the income needed to have support staff available in-game, and have a continuing team of developers to patch the game and add new content over time. The game wouldn’t get old as fast with new areas opening up, new quests and items being added, new skills, a new character class every now and then, etc.

I also have some ideas on new ways to handle a subscription service and character accounts, which I will detail in my proposed ‘design document’. Suffice it to say that there are fairer, more attractive ways than the normal ‘you are charged every month whether you play or not, and if you stop paying or run out of $, your account and hard earned characters get deleted’.

---

Regardless, the biggest point in my mind is that the core gameplay of the Diablo series has to remain intact. The developers need to:

1) Keep the core gameplay aspects which worked right, and that players liked. This includes the plethora of items, random magical and rare properties, extremely rare uber-items, quests, bosses, active every-click-matters combat (unlike most MMORPG’s), 3rd person isometric perspective, character customization through skill selection, etc.

2) Fix the things that didn’t work so well. This includes hacks and exploits. Spamming bots in the chat lobby. Linear gameplay. Repetitive gameplay. Limited number of players in a game. Rushing characters through levels and quests. Character visual sameness. PVP victimization. Character ‘popping’. Lite storyline. Boss running (for item drops). Etc.

3) Add features to the game which have worked well in other games. 3D graphics (a-la Dungeon Siege, WarCraft III, Sacred, etc.) Huge world (Ultima Online). And many others.

4) Innovate with new features and solutions to gameplay to make all these disparate elements work well together. Blizzard needs to continue to push the envelope and move the genre forward.


Look forward to my design document for more details.

[PsYcHoKiLLa]

I like idea 4

[LordOfMars]

Thought you might. ;-) I think there's room for Diablo Spinoff games, so long as there's a main sequel as well. There's WarCraft III and now World of WarCraft. There's StarCraft Ghost and rumors of a StarCraft II in the works. If they make a Diablo III or Diablo Online, I think there would be room for a Diablo RTS or Diablo first-person game... but I wouldn't want that to be the ONLY continuation of the Diablo universe...

[LordOfMars]

For example they made that 'Heroes of Everquest' game or whatever it was called, and now they are coming out with Everquest II pretty soon...

[Weeeman02]

Just read your ideas... i like idea 3.

I think idea 4 would flop.

Buy Heroes of EQ sometime, play it for an hour, what a flop :P
Only reason it had ANY sales, was that they were offering spots in beta for II just for buying the game.

A diablo rts or something....I think it'd be a waste of time for whoever did it, and played it :P

Idea 3 For the win

[ZeldaMaster78]

i think idea 3 would be the best......or at least be the best for me

[LordOfMars]

Originally posted by Weeeman02
I think idea 4 would flop.

Buy Heroes of EQ sometime, play it for an hour, what a flop :P
Only reason it had ANY sales, was that they were offering spots in beta for II just for buying the game.

A diablo rts or something....I think it'd be a waste of time for whoever did it, and played it :P

As I was saying, I think it could only be good as a secondary spinoff game... in addition to a straight sequel. Not instead of.

And it could work if they did it RIGHT. Heroes of Everquest sucked because... well, it sucked. They didn't make it right.

[Guest]

I dislike the route your taking, hell, I'd drop d2 right now if it meant payig for it monthly.

[james_in_time]

i see d3 being like the change from d1 to d2. broader variety of chars skillz items and quests

[LordOfMars]

Originally posted by Sword Tip
I dislike the route your taking, hell, I'd drop d2 right now if it meant payig for it monthly.

I'm sure some people would do that; not buy it if they had to pay monthly. Some would say that and then buy it anyways, when it became obvious how good the game was. Others wouldn't care.

No one likes to pay more... I sure don't. But if it gave the game better support, more regular patching for balance and hack prevention, and additional content added over time... then I think it would be worth it. Just my opinion.

[LordOfMars]

Originally posted by james_in_time
i see d3 being like the change from d1 to d2. broader variety of chars skillz items and quests

Certainly, that sounds good to me. But I would include deeper storyline, more versatile multiplayer, bigger world, etc... all things which D2 improved over D1...

Please, try not to doauble post, as in post twice . Instead use the edit button.

-Swordtip

Whoops, didn't mean to double post.

[McGorilla]

idont like the mmorpg idea at all...