Diogo Ribeiro

Yup

But reportedely the Sega Master System Ultima IV was even better than the original Then again, Ultima VII was considerably more complex than Ultima IV.

Yarrr.

I agree, I enjoyed Portman's perfomance in Closer. And I found the movie to be good too. Come to think of it, that was the first movie me and my girlfriend saw together

Kaftan transcribed a portion of the text I had linked to, and which I find spells a bit of doom to the movie. Still... Remember, remember, the 5th of November.

That's an obvious minconception of the logic behind the post. The issue was not to suggest a relativistic notion should be ascribed to quality, but to suggest he cannot devise one single universal notion of quality and apply it to things which may work under different rules for which he devised his notion. In other words this isn't about telling Hades he can't say Diablo would be inferior to Icewind Dale; it's about telling him he can't hope to judge Diablo and Icewind Dale under the same rules when they are clearly different games regardless of whatever label is applied to them. I didn't suggest Hades didn't share his opinion, I suggested Hades to stop repeating the same opinion over and over again. Seeing "Diablo 2 is boring" or "Diablo 2 doesn't play like my favorite CRPG" spammed on this thread and across the boards, or the same narrow viewpoint applied to many other games and videogame companies which we have come to know as his favorite scapegoats is much more rude than asking him nicely to stop doing it. Again, there was never no intention, explicit or otherwise to suggest Hades should stop giving his opinion. In fact, if I wanted him to stop talking about the subject matter or if I did not want to discuss it I would clearly not get myself involved nor would I directly engage him in conversation. But it should be noted that one thing is to show disagreement over a given subject, while another (different) one is to constantly make negative statements towards the given subject matter and ignore the opposing side's argument in favor of even more repetition of the same negative (I should say 'naggative' since he is simultaneously negative and nagging) statements. That's your prerogative but that was not the point of discord between me and Hades, nor was it the reason why you decided to take issue on what I wrote. Neither this thread's premise, nor my posts are meant to discuss the reasons why Diablo may or may not be an RPG so I won't comment much except that I find the Diablo series clearly aren't RPGs although they use elements usually found in RPGs, and that in honesty I find your reasons for considering it to not be one to be dubious at best.

Good job not answering the main point of my post.

You already are chaotic and inconsistent in nearly everything you say, so I can't find any justification for doing otherwise. Don't put words in my mouth. I didn't said it was narrow minded to have a standard, I said you have a narrow viewpoint because you apply the same standard to all CRPGs and subgenres when subgenres may have considerably different gameplay elements. It is narrow minded to apply universal standards to subgenres because in the process you're clearly judging what amount to different games under the same rules and refuse to accept it has considerable implications to any meaningful attribution of quality to gameplay specifics.

No matter how hard I try I can't find Devon Aoki attractive.

You judge CRPGs by criteria based on high expectations and arbitrary guidelines; if you were intent on judging CRPGs in any meaningful degree you wouldn't stoop to accusing a roguelike of not meeting the standards of one party-based dungeon crawler series you happened to enjoy because they're obviously built on different gameplay aspects. So if that is the case, then stop spamming the forums with the same 'judging' which we all know by heart. We already know how Diablo doesn't conform to your narrow viewpoint, so move on.

Your criteria doesn't support your statements. Bluntly put, the series has depth of gameplay wheter it fits your criteria for depth or not. Having less depth than what you enjoy seeing in other games, or having depth in gameplay mechanics which you do not care for does not mean it has no depth at all. Again, that it does not adhere to your strict criteria or that you arbitrarily decide it has elements which differ from those you want to see more pronounced does not mean that it doesn't have your much vaunted depth. Diablo isn't Icewind Dale, therefore don't judge it on gameplay mechanics it doesn't have, and don't suggest certain gameplay options aren't available simply because they are different from one game to the other.

Your argument is spurious on several levels and you know it. You make blanket statements of how Diablo has no depth but do not address the previous point of how its skill trees and item combination worked, and allowed players to develop characters with significantly different builds and strategies for combat. You claim it has no depth but fail to account for all the dozens of character builds possible for each character class which are based on different skill sets and items, thus allowing players to come up with different strategies depending on said builds. That you lack any evidence that supports your claims of how all players have to do to advance in the game is to click on enemies repeatedly until they

..Oook. That lessens my "to see" list.

Repeating the same drivel over and over doesn't make it true. Especially when there's proof that points otherwise.

Which doesn't mean it didn't had depth.

No, the Diablo series simply did not fit your criteria for enjoyable games. And that's all there is to it. That you do not like the series doesn't mean there isn't depth to it. The Diablo and Icewind Dale series are clearly different variations of hack'n'slash and are built on different gameplay elements. For all its challenge, Icewind Dale allowed you to create and manage multiple characters with which to advance trough battle and also had the ability to pause the game. Diablo only allowed you to control one character and was strictly realtime. Icewind Dale had a fairly linear form of character advancement, while Diablo featured skill trees and extensive item customization. These factors, when applied to their respective games, considerably enhance their gameplay and influence the depth of options available to characters. That you prefer the kind of depth Icewind Dale provided really has no bearing on the one Diablo has.

Ghost Rider's movie site.

That's Christopher Nolan. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> True, thanks for the correction

Don't you mean flattened?

I think the only comic to movie adaptations I enjoyed, both as entertaining films on their own and as satisfying adaptations of the original source, were the Batman movies directed by Burton (Batman and Batman Returns) and Kevin Nolan (Batman Begins), and Robert Rodriguez's adaptation of Sin City. I've heard good things about Road to Perdition, A History of Violence and Hellboy but unfortunately have not seen the movies yet.

He didn't say they were lacking in the graphics department, only that they were behind what US developers have come up with in the same field. I have to agree with this; while several of their console games have used terrific graphical engines, some of which have pushed some console hardware close to its fullest, they have yet to develop a graphical engine which comes close to the capabilities of something like Source or Unreal's latest iterations.

Exactly, because the dead don't talk back.

Prehistoric Turtlesaurus!

That must be why I'm sinking.

There is no free love. Unless we count the one in prisons where all you need to do to feel love is to drop the soap.