Actually the procedural generation is one of the first things that gets written as code. It’s pretty much 100% done in an Alpha version.
Not true, procedural generation is an ongoing effort that needs to be developed for every tileset. If it was 100% done that would mean every tileset and zone is currently 100% done as well.
If I had to guess the demo implementation was very barebones and due for many updates. Linear levels are very easy to generate compared to complex dungeons or open layout levels.
1 Like
That really depends. There’s not really a rule for that stuff. That may be the case in a game that’s 100% reliant on procedural generation, like a roguelike or the previous Diablo titles, but if they’re working on building an open world, that could very much be designed before they dedicated time in designing dungeons. Plus, development efforts in any type of software are usually an iterative process, where all the areas are revisited and improved during the whole process.
A little off topic on that regard, I honestly believe procedurally generated dungeons are bland and lazy, it would be great if Blizzard embraced some actual level design with puzzles and such.
Why for every tileset? This means adding new tilesets in expansions would make their work super tedious.
The procedural generation is just a code that works with the tilesets. Adding tilesets later do not change that code.
Because every type of map has a different algorithm for dungeons. Take D2 for example. The algorithm for act 1 caves is completely different than the algorithm for the jungle maps of act 3, for example.
If that’s the case then it’s an ongoing process. But I think they should be smarter than back in D2 and using AI to do the generation now.
From a design point of view it’s good to have both of these. And that’s quite on topic btw.
i would argue that, if you leave New Tristram, you can go on running, visiting the whole D3 world, without ever having to return to town…only the 1 entrance and 1 exit per subzone is a point…that can’t be resolved for technical limits, that form of instancing is needed.
1 Like
Each layout is often generated with a unique algorithm (caves, dungeons, fields, etc), and some layouts might even have post-processing to add complexity to the layout. If D4 goes the D3 route they’ll have large pre-made assets to fit in and around generated content which will require special logic.
Tilesets might also have unique features like rivers or visual background elements, or props and foliage that needs to be placed in a unique manner to match the environment artist’s vision. We saw in demos they had some fancy climbing features and they might bring some of that over to the procedural generation, this will require a special implementation.
That’s kinda just highlighting the big things, when it comes down to writing the actual code to do all this work there’s so much more involved. Even after the level is generated and looking good there’s more work to be done on the pathfinding and event/entity side.
There’s an insane amount of work involved in procedural level generation if they want to maintain high fidelity.
Can’t they just write an AI, feed it with the Key dungeons and some more templates, and let it do the random generation? That seems a lot easier than the old D2/D3 way of generating maps you explained.
AI isn’t that smart, all generation logic has to be implemented manually. It’s possible to feed a generator modular pieces and props then tune it to replicate an environment as close as possible, which is probably what they’re doing, but to give each level that Blizzard level of quality there’s probably still manual work involved on the programming end. Each tileset requires a great deal of assets (trees, cave walls, rocks, etc) so there’s that too, many of these need to be created before they can even begin with the procedural generation.
I think you are underestimating AI’s power. It could be written in such a way that the new assets being added with expansions won’t create problems for it. Yes, it will need manually designed templates including that finishing touch so the AI could learn optimally, but besides this there’s nothing else that would require great time investment from them.
Their whole idea with D4 is to hit hard on expansions. I expect two of these each year including new zones, character class, monster types, items etc… They won’t do that efficiently if they have to write new procedural generation code with each new asset they add to the game.
The optimal way for them is to just write a global AI for maps generation and feed it with the manually designed Key dungeons that will come with each expansion.
Their main selling points for Diablo 4 are:
- Adding multiple expansions per year like in HS
- Releasing new MTXs on regular basis
- Hitting all gaming platforms
- Fast paced gameplay with zero loading/lag
Diablo 4 has been fully designed with these in mind from start. They can’t allow losing much coding time on anything else besides the new content itself. Diablo 4 is like a big virtual store that will regularly be updated with new merchandise. Once you are done with the code for the store itself, you just start to focus on the merchandise.
Right now they are pretty much ready with the core game. They could release the game tomorrow if that would grant them more money long term. But it won’t and that’s why they want to add a few more things before launch.
The date for Diablo 4 release is simply the date making them most money. The game won’t be 100% polished on release, but it doesn’t have to be. At some point it would be considered ready for sale.
Linear maps are required thanks to consoles.
Exactly. This complies with #3 from post above.
The chance we see diverse paths in Diablo 4 is very slim. Sad days to be a PC gamer.
Skelos, D3 has already lagproblems in some cases (WD are refused in a group for instance), i really fear how D4 will bring as many spectacle as D3…except the only trick i know: instancing, like they did in GW1.
The demo is not Alpha. The demo is a set area/level for someone to see what is coming. It is not the fulll game. It is not even guaranteed to be IN the game. Someone said this is barebones, I would argue that the demo is less than that. It’s the consideration of the bare bones of the game. Does it mean they don’t have bare bones? Or an alpha? No. It means that what they showed is not at that level, and was probably created specifically for the reveal.
Their current maps have too wide walls/edges, and when they connect each static section, they get linear corridors.
I think they could make their walls thinner. It’s more flexible to work with to get close to infinite iterations of the map.
Think of making a labyrinth in a 100 feet square room, with 2 pianos.
You get more subtle options of labyrinth if you work with slim boards.
D2 was great in terms of random environments (act 1-2, a little 4). You didn’t even knew where are town’s gates when you first get into it. I know it’s easier to combine level chunks in 2D than 3D but there is nothing which can’t be done.
For me it was one of the biggest selling point on D2 replayability. Each game was different outer world setup. This linear running from A to B gonna be boring reallty fast. D3 is an example.
D2 was great in terms of random environments (act 1-2, a little 4). You didn’t even knew where are town’s gates when you first get into it. I know it’s easier to combine level chunks in 2D than 3D but there is nothing which can’t be done.
For me it was one of the biggest selling point on D2 replayability. Each game was different outer world setup. This linear running from A to B gonna be boring reallty fast. D3 is an example.
I think I understand your point. The open world aspect of Diablo 4 won’t be randomized, but will have events to try to make it more dynamic. How well that works remains to be seen, but I do tend to find myself bored of games with that kind of content (i.e. Guild Wars 2 world events)… these kind of things just aren’t that interesting after the first couple of times experiencing them). Personally, i think for this to work then the zones also need to really feel alive and be more dynamic, with meaningful changes between seasons and/or based on story progression.
However, Diablo 4 is also reportedly going to contain ‘hundreds’ of dungeons in the game at launch. These instances will be the randomized zones like caves or buildings or rifts you can enter, if I understand them correctly. It remains to be seen if the term used - ‘hundreds’ - applies to actual visitable dungeons, or are just gimmicky variations of a theme though.
Hundreds of randomized zones is a lot… Diablo 2 had about 15 maps per act (some with multiple levels), much less for act 4 to try to make it shorter and more tense in the end game (though I think shorter act 4 content didn’t effectively build tension either in D2 or D3 - I prefer more interesting tilesets or thematic areas to give variety instead)… so less than 100 for the entirety of D2. The big question is how well that works in practice, and how interesting and/or varied they are.