> > Should be pretty cheap. Though I still don't get what people see in the game. It's just a MUD with fancy graphics...
>
> I think I can see where you're coming from. On the surface, Diablo appears little more than a simple hack 'n slash with some pretty pixels. You can play it once, to the end, with a Warrior and "beat the game" (i.e. kill Diablo), perhaps gaining a few of the poor Quests along the way. Then you can shelf it back into its box and forget about it, like all the other games.
>
> However -- Diablo's strength lies not in simply completing the game, but in its background immersiveness, its replayability, and its multiplayer feature. Mastery of the 3 different character types requires VERY different playing styles. Learning to play a Sorceror at first is quite challenging compared to doing the Warrior. Eventually a Sorceror can become such a terror that some folks play using only *cursed* items for themselves, and give all the "good stuff" they find to other players. This behavior underscores one of the joys of this game: Diablo is a *cooperative* multigame. It's great when you play a private, password-protected game with friends you can trust. It remains a haven of welcome respite, away from the rabid over-competiveness of other multis like Starcraft and Quake.

Yeah, but both SC and Quake are FUN. My problem with Diablo is that it gets so old so quick (like any MUD). You claim it is very complex, but I've played MUDs that were nearly as complicated. Still doesn't mean that they're any good. I also don't like Diablo's interface. Too much of the fighting involves jamming that mouse button. Maybe I've never played it enough to get into all these strategic aspects you speak of, but my basic theory is that if a game isn't fun for the first couple hours, why bother continue playing it on the off-chance it might pick up?

>
> Diablo has an internal complexity that makes it a game programmer's game program. It's probably the most intensively analyzed (reverse engineered, etc.) game in history.

Don't you mean hacked? It's not like most of the people messing with Diablo were doing it for reasons other than to cheat.

> What makes it so special is its Randomized capacity, where everything in the dungeon is new at each level and in every game. The dungeon map layouts are random. The inventory items themselves, i.e. weapon and armor attributes, are random; many of them (like the gold unique items dropped in the dungeon) have special powers, and they can be exceedingly rare and hard to find.

I don't get why this is inherently good. So the game is random. I'd rather have well designed levels than ones that were randomly rolled.

> Monster selection and the very large variety of them makes the matches very challenging... After 2½ years, it still has the ability to make me jump with particularly lethal combos of various attackers...

My experience with Diablo monsters is usually just click like crazy to kill them. From what I've seen of people that are good, it seems to be the norm. I think online RPGs will inherently have the problem of growing stale until we are able to have a game that allows a lot more interaction with the environment and NPCs. Nothing can adequately simulate the experience of pen and paper RPGs, and while this is fine for single player games that you'll only play through once, with a multiplayer game it gets old too fast. When the emphasis is on killing things rather than on interacting with characters and a story, I'd rather play something where the action is top notch.

>
> Bottom line: while it has its flaws, Diablo is an exceedingly well-designed game. It is inherently made for a cooperative environment, and it has infinite replayability. Most of all, it still carries the capacity to surprise -- an attribute that I value above all else in any worthwhile entertainment.
>
> Wolfspirit

Well, I think you over-state the co-operative nature of the game. If you have to play it with people you know, it's not that good of a tool. The big draw of online games is to just log on and start playing people anytime you want to. And Diablo is SUPPOSED to be a co-op game, though it is usually anything but with tons of PKs and people by themselves just running around randomly (note that this is the same problem I have with Tribes). Anyway, I think co-op online games have a way to go. We're getting there, but still not nearly as good as they will be.

Oh, BTW, I'm rather looking forward to Diablo II. I got to see it at this year's E3 (though I didn't get to play it -- like every other PC game there it was mobbed) and it looked very smooth. Was talking with one of the Blizzard developers and they're very big on eliminating the ability to cheat (something which greatly dampened my Diablo experience) which should be great. Of course, since it's Blizzard the game probably won't make 2002... :P

Stephen