And despite Tin Crystallization Catalyst increasing a lot your damage(not doubling it), it cuts your casts/rest by half.
As for D3 is the most disappointment of my life. But honestly, damage inflation started to D2 - LOD. IMO Diablo 2 should had diminishing returns after skill level >=20 and with +skill level gear.
Sacred 2 if i remember correctly had diminishing returns in skill level(not sure, played long time ago)
But yes, D3 picks the WORST tropes of modern mmos that i usually hate.
- Every skill, even monk punches linked towards gear
- no skill progression
- Everyone an clone wearing different carnival clothing that determines who they are
- A lot of handholding
- Forced rotations
- Numbers that means nothing(not only attributes, damage numbers are more inflated than zimbabwe currency)
(...)
I'm in the "badness of D3 is greatly exaggerated" camp. Grim Dawn is better though. Don't think the Warhammer game looks Warhammery enough to please Warhammer fans. Don't like not-isometric ARPGs.
I'm in the "badness of D3 is greatly exaggerated" camp. Grim Dawn is better though. Don't think the Warhammer game looks Warhammery enough to please Warhammer fans. Don't like not-isometric ARPGs.
I think that D3 is just the WORST aRPG on the market. Is the game with the worst mechanics, worst build diversity, insane damage inflation, worst immersion, worst story(butterfly Vs decard), worst end game(just do rifts over and over), worst initial game, worst character progression, worst art-style, etc
Honestly i din't liked Torchlight Frontiers. Looks much more like an "gear playing game" than a aRPG...
Have you played it? Have you played Torchlight 1 and 2? It's about the same drop rate as the first two. It's definitely an aRPG. Even my roommates comment on how much it is like Diablo, not that it is really a matter of debate since the series is a well known aRPG series. It is an MMO technically, but so far the drop rates aren't any different from other aRPGs I've played and are far better than MMOs typically are.
That could change of course. But the devs don't seem to want to make it like your typical grindy MMO based on the stuff they've said on livestreams and on my personal experience so far.
Honestly i din't liked Torchlight Frontiers. Looks much more like an "gear playing game" than a aRPG...
Have you played it? Have you played Torchlight 1 and 2? It's about the same drop rate as the first two. It's definitely an aRPG. Even my roommates comment on how much it is like Diablo, not that it is really a matter of debate since the series is a well known aRPG series. It is an MMO technically, but so far the drop rates aren't any different from other aRPGs I've played and are far better than MMOs typically are.
That could change of course. But the devs don't seem to want to make it like your typical grindy MMO based on the stuff they've said on livestreams and on my personal experience so far.
I watched an video. Looks like an gear playing. I call gear playing, this games where your char is nothing and his "DNA" is on his gear. I honestly think that the "wowfication" is ruining aRPG's as it ruined mmos. Mechanics like cooldown, attributes linked to gear, ultra long and repetitive fights that are only time consuming, and lack of choices and consequences is something that i hate on wow and on most action """"rpgs""""
action role playing game for me is something like Dark Souls. My pyromaniac pyromancer on DkS 2
Armor works like armor, offering protection, not determining how much muscle mass my character has, stats are what measure my character capabilites instead of being tied to gear, if i kill an NPC, it has consequences, etc. Why aRPG's are copying this generic mmo mechanics?
I watched an video. Looks like an gear playing. I call gear playing, this games where your char is nothing and his "DNA" is on his gear. I honestly think that the "wowfication" is ruining aRPG's as it ruined mmos. Mechanics like cooldown, attributes linked to gear, ultra long and repetitive fights that are only time consuming, and lack of choices and consequences is something that i hate on wow and on most action """"rpgs""""
action role playing game for me is something like Dark Souls. My pyromaniac pyromancer on DkS 2
Armor works like armor, offering protection, not determining how much muscle mass my character has, stats are what measure my character capabilites instead of being tied to gear, if i kill an NPC, it has consequences, etc. Why aRPG's are copying this generic mmo mechanics?
I see where you are coming from because at first I was thrown off by the lack of stat points. Update 6 which just released made the skills a much more meaningful part of your build than they were before. They matter more than your gear, but gear is definitely a factor.
But I don't think the lack of stat points (attributes in your Dark Souls character) and more focus on gear means it isn't an aRPG. That is very far from a defining factor of aRPG. If I compared it to Torchlight II, I feel it is far more balanced than having, say, a Focus loaded Ember Mage who can blast through everything like it is nothing. I don't see the lack of stats meaning that armor determines how much muscle mass your character has. I think the change has improved the Torchlight series by keeping builds more about the skill trees and gear instead of absurd stat numbers like you can see in MMOs like DDO (and like Torchlight II had).
Dark Souls isn't the father of aRPGs. Diablo is. Torchlight is very much like Diablo, so if anything Dark Souls would be the game that isn't an aRPG (it is an aRPG, but just saying, your definition makes no sense when the genre has already been defined and not based off of Dark Souls--this isn't a matter of opinion). Action RPGs are defined by the style of real-time combat. David Brevik explains it well here when he talks about the development of Diablo:
And I think his opinion, since he is the creator of the genre, is what matters. Diablo II devs and Marvel Heroes devs (David Brevik was a huge part of that game, and it had a gear focus rather than stat point focus) are working on Torchlight Frontiers, all people who worked under him. It has way more of David Brevik's and Diablo's influence than the Dark Souls series ever will. I'd say Stat Points are more of a D&D influence that is in lots of RPGs, not just aRPGs. They aren't a requirement in RPG game design.
If you mention the Incredible 3 adventures of vanHelsing, please don't forget to mention each has a download size of above 15 GigaByte!!! I remember the day on Steam, when my monthly mobile volume could not download any part of it.
They aren't worth downloading regardless, and yes, the size of the entire package (which is the only one anyone should consider buying) is damn near 50 GB. But it's just not a good ARPG. If I was going to make a list of the ones you should play, it would go like this:
1.) Diablo
2.) Diablo II
3.) Titan Quest
4.) Grim Dawn
5.) Torchlight
6.) Torchlight II
7.) Sacred
8.) Sacred II
9.) Path of Exile
I have played nearly everything else in the genre as well, but they just aren't worth your time imo. Fate is completely super-ceded by the Torchlight series. Din's Curse is in the same category. Van Helsing seems ok until you actually start playing it. Victor Vran is too much of a gimmick. As for the supposed big boys coming down the pike, please, whatever you do, DO NOT get sucked in by Wolcen: Lords of Mayhem, which I don't believe will ever actually see the light of day. Last Epoch has promise but is at least a year away from launch and needs some SERIOUS optimization in that time period to be remotely worth considering.
As for Dark Souls, it's not what we are generally talking about here. I know when some people hear ARPG they think anything that involves real-time combat, but it (for many people) refers to a very specific type of game that can be traced directly back to the first Diablo game. Dark Souls has FAR more shared DNA with Castlevania than it does with any RPG.
(...)
I see where you are coming from because at first I was thrown off by the lack of stat points. Update 6 which just released made the skills a much more meaningful part of your build than they were before. They matter more than your gear, but gear is definitely a factor.
But I don't think the lack of stat points (attributes in your Dark Souls character) and more focus on gear means it isn't an aRPG. That is very far from a defining factor of aRPG. If I compared it to Torchlight II, I feel it is far more balanced than having, say, a Focus loaded Ember Mage who can blast through everything like it is nothing. I don't see the lack of stats meaning that armor determines how much muscle mass your character has.
The topic isn't about point & click isometric combat oriented games.
Anyway, i disagree about gear. If what determines what your char can and cannot do is the jacket that he is wearing, are you playing your character or the jacket that he is wearing? If all character attributes can be transferred to another player with few button presses on a character screen, are you really playing your character? Your strength doesn't even reflect anything about how strong your char is since is tied to gear. Imagine an barbarian leader saying to regular barbarians on his tribe
"forget training and diet, just try find an jacket that triples your muscle mass"
Stats are an way to measure what your char can and cannot do. They aren't suppose to be used just to inflate your weapon damage that dictates everything, including your minion and unarmed strength. Sekiro has more RPG than Diablo 3 and From Software never claimed it to be an aRPG.
As for Dark Souls, it's not what we are generally talking about here. I know when some people hear ARPG they think anything that involves real-time combat, but it (for many people) refers to a very specific type of game that can be traced directly back to the first Diablo game. Dark Souls has FAR more shared DNA with Castlevania than it does with any RPG.
I think that the camera perspective doesn't matter. I mean, look to Ultima, Ultima underworld is much more action focused than "normal ultima" and underworld is considered an action RPG. VtMB 1 since focus much more on story telling than on combat, is not an aRPG despite the real time combat. If you spend more than 90% of the game time on combat and the game focus more on action and reflex instead of tactic, the game is a aRPG.
About DkS being more comparable to Castlevania, i disagree. An playtrough with an spearman and with an paladin will be completely different experiences. On castlevania, you have an protagonist and can't decide anything about him.
If the title was talking about point & click, isometric aRPG, then i agree that DkS doesn't belong here. Or if From Software changes the camera perspective to isometric and change the loot, the game will be an aRPG?
An old notice
Diablo 4 is in development, and it started as a Souls-like "Diablo IV is in active development at Blizzard, but began life as a Souls-like game – a plan that was eventually scrapped, according to an extensive investigation published today." https://www.pcgamesn.com/diablo-4/diablo-4-development-souls-like
@SorcererV1ct0r You have some fair points, although I don't recall aRPG ever being considered a subgenre before Diablo came out. So the wikipedia page may have games that fit the aRPG description, but nobody was talking about "the new aRPG, Secret of Mana" nor do they really talk about it that way now. And with my arguments I don't mean to say that aRPGs are defined by Diablo clones or isometric action RPGs. What I do mean is I don't see game design choices about how your character is built defining an aRPG. Lots of RPGs of all types build your character in different ways--some are stat heavy, some are gear heavy, and some are skill heavy. Most combine those. But if you choose to exclude one of them that doesn't make it any less an RPG.
You have some fair points, although I don't recall aRPG ever being considered a subgenre before Diablo came out. So the wikipedia page may have games that fit the aRPG description, but nobody was talking about "the new aRPG, Secret of Mana" nor do they really talk about it that way now. And with my arguments I don't mean to say that aRPGs are defined by Diablo clones or isometric action RPGs. What I do mean is I don't see game design choices about how your character is built defining an aRPG. Lots of RPGs of all types build your character in different ways--some are stat heavy, some are gear heavy, and some are skill heavy. Most combine those. But if you choose to exclude one of them that doesn't make it any less an RPG.
I don't think so.
There are an huge difference between simplify the RPG on an game than remove it.
Look to ArmA 3, imagine if the next game makes the ballistics less realistic and the game becomes like BF 1/5. Then will be simplify an game. But remove all guns will make the game into an "non FPS game", same with diablo. Diablo 1 is much simpler than M&M VII for eg, but Diablo 3 has less RPG elements than BF 1. I an not kidding.
On D3, you don't play a char(not sure about torchlight frontiers).
You char is no different than any other guy with the same class. Sure, they can wear different cloths(that looks like an Carnival suit), but your char is exactly like all others. I don't know why most modern aRPG's(isometric or not) are ""evolving"" into clothing games with less RPG elements than most shooters/survival games and more similar to a barbie dressing game, than to an rpg...
I tried Last Epoch, is a good game, but the low performance and gender locked classes kinda killed the game for me. Maybe will worth my time and money on final release.
On D3, you don't play a char(not sure about torchlight frontiers).
You char is no different than any other guy with the same class. Sure, they can wear different cloths(that looks like an Carnival suit), but your char is exactly like all others. I don't know why most modern aRPG's(isometric or not) are ""evolving"" into clothing games with less RPG elements than most shooters/survival games and more similar to a barbie dressing game, than to an rpg...
My builds are different from other players. I have seen some meta builds, but this update was a new system, so obviously some are going to realize where classes are out of balance and exploit the OP stuff. Based on what I'm seeing there will be a good variety except when, of course, people share their builds. But that happens with all aRPGs.
On D3, you don't play a char(not sure about torchlight frontiers).
You char is no different than any other guy with the same class. Sure, they can wear different cloths(that looks like an Carnival suit), but your char is exactly like all others. I don't know why most modern aRPG's(isometric or not) are ""evolving"" into clothing games with less RPG elements than most shooters/survival games and more similar to a barbie dressing game, than to an rpg...
My builds are different from other players. I have seen some meta builds, but this update was a new system, so obviously some are going to realize where classes are out of balance and exploit the OP stuff. Based on what I'm seeing there will be a good variety except when, of course, people share their builds. But that happens with all aRPGs.
Your """build""" can be lost in a trade window. Your can "customize" your character like you can on CoD. In fact, Battlefield 5 actually has more rpg elements than d3. At least on bf 1, you don't see over 99% of population on level cap.
About power gaming, this is a plague IMO. When i played P:K, i created an Silver Dragon Disciple and took exactly ZERO fire magic spells, doesn't matter if the rule allows it and i will face trolls and undeads. Use fire despite having such bloodline makes no sense. On Dark Souls 2, i was playing as a pyromancer, due my INT/FHT, i could easily switch to HEX to pass in parts where enemies are too resistent to fire, but be weak against demons is a downside that makes sense for an pyromancer, so i din't did that. I din't did things taht makes no sense, only to make the game easier. This is not fun. I like create consistent characters.
Honestly, i think the character seletion is pretty dull. Why not having a Grail Knight from Bretonnia, a Ogre mercenary and a Lizardman from Lustria as playable characters?
Pretty much the reason as to why I won't purchase Chaosbane. I simply am not interested in the Empire or the "Law" factions. Now, if it were all about the Under-Empire with playable Skavens on the other hand...
Pretty much the reason as to why I won't purchase Chaosbane. I simply am not interested in the Empire or the "Law" factions. Now, if it were all about the Under-Empire with playable Skavens on the other hand...
I would love a game where you play as the Greenskins.
On D3, you don't play a char(not sure about torchlight frontiers).
You char is no different than any other guy with the same class. Sure, they can wear different cloths(that looks like an Carnival suit), but your char is exactly like all others. I don't know why most modern aRPG's(isometric or not) are ""evolving"" into clothing games with less RPG elements than most shooters/survival games and more similar to a barbie dressing game, than to an rpg...
My builds are different from other players. I have seen some meta builds, but this update was a new system, so obviously some are going to realize where classes are out of balance and exploit the OP stuff. Based on what I'm seeing there will be a good variety except when, of course, people share their builds. But that happens with all aRPGs.
Your """build""" can be lost in a trade window. Your can "customize" your character like you can on CoD. In fact, Battlefield 5 actually has more rpg elements than d3. At least on bf 1, you don't see over 99% of population on level cap.
About power gaming, this is a plague IMO. When i played P:K, i created an Silver Dragon Disciple and took exactly ZERO fire magic spells, doesn't matter if the rule allows it and i will face trolls and undeads. Use fire despite having such bloodline makes no sense. On Dark Souls 2, i was playing as a pyromancer, due my INT/FHT, i could easily switch to HEX to pass in parts where enemies are too resistent to fire, but be weak against demons is a downside that makes sense for an pyromancer, so i din't did that. I din't did things taht makes no sense, only to make the game easier. This is not fun. I like create consistent characters.
While the video's mildly amusing, that's exactly not the way to deal with power gamers. You always have things that are more powerful than them to throw at them. But the real way to stop the power gaming, is to throw situations they can't just brute force their way through. Fuddle them with puzzles, make them fail perception checks and investigation checks, force the character to do research or figure things out that require mental stat rolls. Put them in a vampire court, surrounded by much older vampires, and let them fail all their social rolls, and piss off the whole city. Show them how useless they are when they only focus on combat situations.
On D3, you don't play a char(not sure about torchlight frontiers).
You char is no different than any other guy with the same class. Sure, they can wear different cloths(that looks like an Carnival suit), but your char is exactly like all others. I don't know why most modern aRPG's(isometric or not) are ""evolving"" into clothing games with less RPG elements than most shooters/survival games and more similar to a barbie dressing game, than to an rpg...
My builds are different from other players. I have seen some meta builds, but this update was a new system, so obviously some are going to realize where classes are out of balance and exploit the OP stuff. Based on what I'm seeing there will be a good variety except when, of course, people share their builds. But that happens with all aRPGs.
Your """build""" can be lost in a trade window. Your can "customize" your character like you can on CoD. In fact, Battlefield 5 actually has more rpg elements than d3. At least on bf 1, you don't see over 99% of population on level cap.
About power gaming, this is a plague IMO. When i played P:K, i created an Silver Dragon Disciple and took exactly ZERO fire magic spells, doesn't matter if the rule allows it and i will face trolls and undeads. Use fire despite having such bloodline makes no sense. On Dark Souls 2, i was playing as a pyromancer, due my INT/FHT, i could easily switch to HEX to pass in parts where enemies are too resistent to fire, but be weak against demons is a downside that makes sense for an pyromancer, so i din't did that. I din't did things taht makes no sense, only to make the game easier. This is not fun. I like create consistent characters.
While the video's mildly amusing, that's exactly not the way to deal with power gamers. You always have things that are more powerful than them to throw at them. But the real way to stop the power gaming, is to throw situations they can't just brute force their way through. Fuddle them with puzzles, make them fail perception checks and investigation checks, force the character to do research or figure things out that require mental stat rolls. Put them in a vampire court, surrounded by much older vampires, and let them fail all their social rolls, and piss off the whole city. Show them how useless they are when they only focus on combat situations.
This series is pretty hilarious. I loved the how not to nosferatu
But about power gaming, he tried to trow strong enemies, even an werewolf on the video. My problem with most isometric """""aRPGs"""" is that a lot of then(D3, TL Frontier, Van helsing arpg) have too much "action" and too little"rpg", less than most action/adventure games and people are being too used to this type of games and is affecting other games. You can see on P:K critiques, dumb thing like "i can't use an sword against an swarm, this is not fair, the game is not balanced" while on the first RPG of my life( M&M VII ), on the "tutorial" island, one quest requires you to pick an item inside an dragon cave. You don't fight the dragon. You use protection from fire, not to not die, but to not be erradicated(aka dead and lose the corpse, so ressurection is much more hard), pick the item and RUN. An ultra action focused game on 90s teaches you that you should't fight everything with an HP bar. And on tutorial island, there are a lot of traps that can OHK my low HP characters like my elf sorcerer.
To be fair, Diablo, until D2 maintained a lot of good RPG elements, your fire golem heals from fire, instead of D3 where you can poison an skeleton to the death(how?) and gear despite ridiculously OP, mainly end game runewords, is not your character DNA.
How an sorcerer become better at trowing an spell?
D1 - Reading tomes
D2 - Investing skill points
D3 - Finding an bigger and sharper axe.
In this point, third person/first person action RPG's are much better than isometric ones. Dark Souls has in depth character building. Skyrim despite being dumbed down, not all Dragonborns are clones wearing different clothing.
I think this might be of some interest to some here. The original Torchlight will be free on the Epic Games store July 11-18th: https://www.epicgames.com/store/en-US/
Comments
Your mag adj with logan catalyst and 45 INT is 234, with 50 int is 236 and with 70 INT is 242 ( https://darksouls.wiki.fextralife.com/Int-Faith+Catalyst+Magic+Adjustment+Values ), so there are diminishing returns after certain points
And despite Tin Crystallization Catalyst increasing a lot your damage(not doubling it), it cuts your casts/rest by half.
As for D3 is the most disappointment of my life. But honestly, damage inflation started to D2 - LOD. IMO Diablo 2 should had diminishing returns after skill level >=20 and with +skill level gear.
Sacred 2 if i remember correctly had diminishing returns in skill level(not sure, played long time ago)
But yes, D3 picks the WORST tropes of modern mmos that i usually hate.
- Every skill, even monk punches linked towards gear
- no skill progression
- Everyone an clone wearing different carnival clothing that determines who they are
- A lot of handholding
- Forced rotations
- Numbers that means nothing(not only attributes, damage numbers are more inflated than zimbabwe currency)
(...)
I think that D3 is just the WORST aRPG on the market. Is the game with the worst mechanics, worst build diversity, insane damage inflation, worst immersion, worst story(butterfly Vs decard), worst end game(just do rifts over and over), worst initial game, worst character progression, worst art-style, etc
For isometric aRPG, one that will launch the beta soon is last epoch ( source https://store.steampowered.com/app/899770/Last_Epoch/ )
here is an old pre alfa video showing necromancer
Titan Quest just got another expansion, Atlantis: https://forums.beamdog.com/discussion/66848/titan-quest-received-a-new-expansion/p3
Have you played it? Have you played Torchlight 1 and 2? It's about the same drop rate as the first two. It's definitely an aRPG. Even my roommates comment on how much it is like Diablo, not that it is really a matter of debate since the series is a well known aRPG series. It is an MMO technically, but so far the drop rates aren't any different from other aRPGs I've played and are far better than MMOs typically are.
That could change of course. But the devs don't seem to want to make it like your typical grindy MMO based on the stuff they've said on livestreams and on my personal experience so far.
I watched an video. Looks like an gear playing. I call gear playing, this games where your char is nothing and his "DNA" is on his gear. I honestly think that the "wowfication" is ruining aRPG's as it ruined mmos. Mechanics like cooldown, attributes linked to gear, ultra long and repetitive fights that are only time consuming, and lack of choices and consequences is something that i hate on wow and on most action """"rpgs""""
action role playing game for me is something like Dark Souls. My pyromaniac pyromancer on DkS 2
Armor works like armor, offering protection, not determining how much muscle mass my character has, stats are what measure my character capabilites instead of being tied to gear, if i kill an NPC, it has consequences, etc. Why aRPG's are copying this generic mmo mechanics?
I see where you are coming from because at first I was thrown off by the lack of stat points. Update 6 which just released made the skills a much more meaningful part of your build than they were before. They matter more than your gear, but gear is definitely a factor.
But I don't think the lack of stat points (attributes in your Dark Souls character) and more focus on gear means it isn't an aRPG. That is very far from a defining factor of aRPG. If I compared it to Torchlight II, I feel it is far more balanced than having, say, a Focus loaded Ember Mage who can blast through everything like it is nothing. I don't see the lack of stats meaning that armor determines how much muscle mass your character has. I think the change has improved the Torchlight series by keeping builds more about the skill trees and gear instead of absurd stat numbers like you can see in MMOs like DDO (and like Torchlight II had).
Dark Souls isn't the father of aRPGs. Diablo is. Torchlight is very much like Diablo, so if anything Dark Souls would be the game that isn't an aRPG (it is an aRPG, but just saying, your definition makes no sense when the genre has already been defined and not based off of Dark Souls--this isn't a matter of opinion). Action RPGs are defined by the style of real-time combat. David Brevik explains it well here when he talks about the development of Diablo:
And I think his opinion, since he is the creator of the genre, is what matters. Diablo II devs and Marvel Heroes devs (David Brevik was a huge part of that game, and it had a gear focus rather than stat point focus) are working on Torchlight Frontiers, all people who worked under him. It has way more of David Brevik's and Diablo's influence than the Dark Souls series ever will. I'd say Stat Points are more of a D&D influence that is in lots of RPGs, not just aRPGs. They aren't a requirement in RPG game design.
They aren't worth downloading regardless, and yes, the size of the entire package (which is the only one anyone should consider buying) is damn near 50 GB. But it's just not a good ARPG. If I was going to make a list of the ones you should play, it would go like this:
1.) Diablo
2.) Diablo II
3.) Titan Quest
4.) Grim Dawn
5.) Torchlight
6.) Torchlight II
7.) Sacred
8.) Sacred II
9.) Path of Exile
I have played nearly everything else in the genre as well, but they just aren't worth your time imo. Fate is completely super-ceded by the Torchlight series. Din's Curse is in the same category. Van Helsing seems ok until you actually start playing it. Victor Vran is too much of a gimmick. As for the supposed big boys coming down the pike, please, whatever you do, DO NOT get sucked in by Wolcen: Lords of Mayhem, which I don't believe will ever actually see the light of day. Last Epoch has promise but is at least a year away from launch and needs some SERIOUS optimization in that time period to be remotely worth considering.
As for Dark Souls, it's not what we are generally talking about here. I know when some people hear ARPG they think anything that involves real-time combat, but it (for many people) refers to a very specific type of game that can be traced directly back to the first Diablo game. Dark Souls has FAR more shared DNA with Castlevania than it does with any RPG.
Diablo is not the father of aRPG, is what popularized aRPG. Real time combat and enfasis on combat exist since 80s https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_role-playing_game
The topic isn't about point & click isometric combat oriented games.
Anyway, i disagree about gear. If what determines what your char can and cannot do is the jacket that he is wearing, are you playing your character or the jacket that he is wearing? If all character attributes can be transferred to another player with few button presses on a character screen, are you really playing your character? Your strength doesn't even reflect anything about how strong your char is since is tied to gear. Imagine an barbarian leader saying to regular barbarians on his tribe
"forget training and diet, just try find an jacket that triples your muscle mass"
Stats are an way to measure what your char can and cannot do. They aren't suppose to be used just to inflate your weapon damage that dictates everything, including your minion and unarmed strength. Sekiro has more RPG than Diablo 3 and From Software never claimed it to be an aRPG.
I think that the camera perspective doesn't matter. I mean, look to Ultima, Ultima underworld is much more action focused than "normal ultima" and underworld is considered an action RPG. VtMB 1 since focus much more on story telling than on combat, is not an aRPG despite the real time combat. If you spend more than 90% of the game time on combat and the game focus more on action and reflex instead of tactic, the game is a aRPG.
About DkS being more comparable to Castlevania, i disagree. An playtrough with an spearman and with an paladin will be completely different experiences. On castlevania, you have an protagonist and can't decide anything about him.
If the title was talking about point & click, isometric aRPG, then i agree that DkS doesn't belong here. Or if From Software changes the camera perspective to isometric and change the loot, the game will be an aRPG?
An old notice
Diablo 4 is in development, and it started as a Souls-like
"Diablo IV is in active development at Blizzard, but began life as a Souls-like game – a plan that was eventually scrapped, according to an extensive investigation published today."
https://www.pcgamesn.com/diablo-4/diablo-4-development-souls-like
When Diablo: Immortal was announced for only mobile platforms, the devs of Chaosbane were quick to mock them for it.
I don't think so.
There are an huge difference between simplify the RPG on an game than remove it.
Look to ArmA 3, imagine if the next game makes the ballistics less realistic and the game becomes like BF 1/5. Then will be simplify an game. But remove all guns will make the game into an "non FPS game", same with diablo. Diablo 1 is much simpler than M&M VII for eg, but Diablo 3 has less RPG elements than BF 1. I an not kidding.
On D3, you don't play a char(not sure about torchlight frontiers).
You char is no different than any other guy with the same class. Sure, they can wear different cloths(that looks like an Carnival suit), but your char is exactly like all others. I don't know why most modern aRPG's(isometric or not) are ""evolving"" into clothing games with less RPG elements than most shooters/survival games and more similar to a barbie dressing game, than to an rpg...
My builds are different from other players. I have seen some meta builds, but this update was a new system, so obviously some are going to realize where classes are out of balance and exploit the OP stuff. Based on what I'm seeing there will be a good variety except when, of course, people share their builds. But that happens with all aRPGs.
Your """build""" can be lost in a trade window. Your can "customize" your character like you can on CoD. In fact, Battlefield 5 actually has more rpg elements than d3. At least on bf 1, you don't see over 99% of population on level cap.
About power gaming, this is a plague IMO. When i played P:K, i created an Silver Dragon Disciple and took exactly ZERO fire magic spells, doesn't matter if the rule allows it and i will face trolls and undeads. Use fire despite having such bloodline makes no sense. On Dark Souls 2, i was playing as a pyromancer, due my INT/FHT, i could easily switch to HEX to pass in parts where enemies are too resistent to fire, but be weak against demons is a downside that makes sense for an pyromancer, so i din't did that. I din't did things taht makes no sense, only to make the game easier. This is not fun. I like create consistent characters.
This video is hilarious and show how power gaming ruins games.
I would love a game where you play as the Greenskins.
While the video's mildly amusing, that's exactly not the way to deal with power gamers. You always have things that are more powerful than them to throw at them. But the real way to stop the power gaming, is to throw situations they can't just brute force their way through. Fuddle them with puzzles, make them fail perception checks and investigation checks, force the character to do research or figure things out that require mental stat rolls. Put them in a vampire court, surrounded by much older vampires, and let them fail all their social rolls, and piss off the whole city. Show them how useless they are when they only focus on combat situations.
This series is pretty hilarious. I loved the how not to nosferatu
But about power gaming, he tried to trow strong enemies, even an werewolf on the video. My problem with most isometric """""aRPGs"""" is that a lot of then(D3, TL Frontier, Van helsing arpg) have too much "action" and too little"rpg", less than most action/adventure games and people are being too used to this type of games and is affecting other games. You can see on P:K critiques, dumb thing like "i can't use an sword against an swarm, this is not fair, the game is not balanced" while on the first RPG of my life( M&M VII ), on the "tutorial" island, one quest requires you to pick an item inside an dragon cave. You don't fight the dragon. You use protection from fire, not to not die, but to not be erradicated(aka dead and lose the corpse, so ressurection is much more hard), pick the item and RUN. An ultra action focused game on 90s teaches you that you should't fight everything with an HP bar. And on tutorial island, there are a lot of traps that can OHK my low HP characters like my elf sorcerer.
To be fair, Diablo, until D2 maintained a lot of good RPG elements, your fire golem heals from fire, instead of D3 where you can poison an skeleton to the death(how?) and gear despite ridiculously OP, mainly end game runewords, is not your character DNA.
How an sorcerer become better at trowing an spell?
D1 - Reading tomes
D2 - Investing skill points
D3 - Finding an bigger and sharper axe.
In this point, third person/first person action RPG's are much better than isometric ones. Dark Souls has in depth character building. Skyrim despite being dumbed down, not all Dragonborns are clones wearing different clothing.