In the twilight of 1.09..

[Occhidiangela]

But's what the final verdict on Diablo. Well, it's good, but it ain't that good. Okay, it's fun to play for a while, but with the amount of time this game has been in development, I'd expected a lot more. There's a lack of real depth to Diablo that I suppose I'd come to expect after playing Bethseda's Daggerfall. There's only three characters, and compared to Daggerfall's elaborate dungeons, Diablo's levels are pretty repetitive. There's no real spark of originality. While multiplayer might squeeze a little more out of the game, there are better RPGs and better games around; Daggerfall for example. While Diablo is by no means a crap game, there's nothing here to make it a must have. A bit of a disappointment.

He ignored two things, one that is and one that evolved. The part the "is." KISS. The KISS principle allowed the game to reach a large audience. The balance between playability and complexity has been the bugaboo of game designers for years. Avalon Hill's World War I game andyone? What was it called, 1914? The German infantry was a 7-12-3 . . .

Player imagination and role playing. The ability of many players to seek odd twists and fun variations on a theme.

However, if one is a pure RP player, and not a Dungeon Crawl player, then one appreciates why the reviewer wrote what he did.

I think he also underestimated the number of 13 year olds who would have access to bnet. :)