How to potentially solve a "Cursed Problem" in ARPG's (Making multiple playthroughs of the Campaign Fun)

PC General Discussion
1

I recently watched an interview on youtube between Darth Microtransactions and Adam Jackson (Diablo 4 Lead Class Designer). One problem that Adam brought up about ARPG’s is a “Cursed Problem” ARPG’s have with designing “One Shot” events such as the story campaign versus repeatable content where they need to design the repeatable content to be “fun” to do hundreds of times.

My answer to this concerns the story campaign specifically and the solution has already been invented with Soul’s like games. The solution is to have side characters that have a journey you can take them through. Some side characters can conflict with other side characters so you really have to make a choice on which side character to support through there journey.

Depending on your choice, you get different rewards depending on your choices you make. Does the player help the side character to the end of their journey? Do they change their mind and support another side character that conflicts with your initial side character choice? Do you kill one of the side character’s part way of their journey through to get certain rewards you wouldn’t normally get otherwise? Maybe Side Character A lets you have access to two exclusive dungeons during their journey, but Side Character B lets you have access to two completely different dungeons on their journey. These are all choices that players need to make in a Fromsoft game. All this creates variety in replaying the campaign.

Another thing that creates variety in the campaign is having alternate endings. Alternate endings in conjunction with side character’s journey with your character really help provide great replayability value. Maybe you save the day and become the hero, or maybe you side character you chose to support lead you down a different path and there is horrible consequences to the area.

How can this translate to an ARPG campaign? Having interesting side characters with their own motivations, backstory, and decisions as well as unique endings for the base campaign experience can be translated to the equivelant of separate games. Think of the end of an ARPG as closing the chapter on that area you journeyed through, regardless of ending and side characters you supported. In an expansion, you start a new campaign with all new side characters and the conclusion of that expansion could have its own alternate endings. Maybe a side character you supported didn’t conflict with the next expansion story so their journey can continue in next expansion. The point is that an expansion is really not just expanding the existing world but it essentially a sequel to the base game. If you think of this in terms of an ARPG as Dark Souls, expansion 1 as Dark Souls 2, and expansion 2 is Dark Souls 3, the way ARPG’s campaign can become fun repeatable content is made clear. Especially with dark fantasy settings and enviromental storytelling.

That is all well and good, but how are players supposed to group up to do content if the choices they made created disparities between what each player has access to? The answer to that is to have the party leader’s world progression what other party member’s zone into. The party leader’s world is now canon for all party members as long as they are grouped up. The party leader can still interact and make advancements with their side characters, however the other party members won’t have access to their side characters while grouped up. Additionally, you could have certain main city hubs either be uneffected or effected by choices but not to a significant degree so that you can still run into other players that are in different progression states. When the party disbands, the party members return to their worlds progression at the same moment they left and joined the party.

What will it take to make? This is just my personal opinion, but the more Side Characters, the more repeatable the campaign becomes. I would say minimum roughly 5+ side characters with their own model, dialog, backstory, and personal loot they can drop at certain stages of their journey. Also I believe it would require reserving or creating 1-2 pieces of unique content exclusively for choosing them as your side character. That content would need content exclusive rewards. I would also say that as far as alternate endings go, you don’t necessarily have to have an alternate ending for every side character. That being said, having a good ending, bad ending, and 1-2 alternate path endings where things are neither good/bad or where the side character becomes the “hero” of that area campaign instead of you.

I think this would be an interesting way to approach this particular “Cursed Problem” in ARPG’s and would make replaying the campaign over and over again far more enjoyable. I think the amount of content needed to make this viable would really only amount to a major patch (or Seasonal Patch) and would greatly increase replay value of the base campaign. I would like to know the community’s thoughts on this as a potential solution.

2 Likes
2

Can we get a single sentence interpretation of your post? So that I may roast it with minimal personal time investment.

3

No. It needs to be read to be fully understood.

2 Likes
4

This was done traditionally through randomization/procedural generation since the dungeon crawler/rogue era.

All levels are procedurally generated/randomized.

5

That has nothing to do with what I am talking about.

6

The story campaign has procedurally generated levels, so that alleviates a lot of the issues.

7

Random generation doesn’t solve the campaign story being the same every single time. It solves dungeon variety and nothing more.

8

What’s the TLDR?

20c

9

While I do think something can be done to make campaigns more replayable, and Grim Dawn already did some things with joinable factions, I would also argue that even a campaign without these choices in them, can be way more interesting to replay, than the content that was supposedly designed to be replayed.

Simply because doing super short NMDs 500 times, will feel way more repetitive, than doing campaign 3 times. Not because the NMDs are worse as such, but it is being repeated much more often. Good luck designing something that wont feel repetitive under such circumstances.

So… just add the campaign as a replayable endgame activity. Then you can work on making it more varied later on.

Now, as for what could be added;

  1. I am not in favor of genuine “good” and “evil” campaigns. Diablo is a fairly simple story concept. Joining Hell would be silly. And also way too expensive to develop.
    But there could of course be good/evil choices along the way, classic stuff like how much you are willing to pay (or rather let those around you pay) for victory. Still, not convinced it is a good way to spend development hours in an A-RPG.
  2. I agree side characters can work well. In much the same way that factions can in Grim Dawn. This could also be tied to a mercenary system. Playing the campaign, growing a mercenary and/or a faction along the way. Play multiple times to grow multiple different mercenaries/factions. And so on.

That said. I also believe, as much as I personally would like to do this stuff over NMDs and Pits, that it should be entirely optional. So any rewards should be obtainable from running NMDs/Pits too. And the other way around, all NMD/Pit rewards should be available from replaying the campaign in endgame.

10

I got you fam:

TL;DR:

  • Addressing the “Cursed Problem” in ARPGs involves incorporating Soul’s-like mechanics with side characters and alternate endings.
  • Side characters with unique journeys and conflicts offer players choices impacting rewards and story outcomes.
  • Implementing at least 5+ side characters with exclusive content enhances replayability.
  • Party leader’s world progression becomes canon for the group, while individual progress is retained.
  • This proposal could be realized through a major patch or seasonal update, significantly boosting the base campaign’s replay value.

This definitely wouldn’t work for Diablo games, but it’s an interesting concept that obviously works for Souls-like games.

3 Likes
11

Same main story, different experience. Your 2nd char’s journey through new levels itself makes up a new story overall.

This is what aRPG is about traditionally. New journey, new experience, new story through randomization and procedural generation.

12

Thanks Iggy. Coming in clutch with a good TLDR. :slightly_smiling_face:

Why not?

Breaking tradition usually results in evolution of a genre. What makes Diablo 4 any different from its predecessors? Not much honestly. Sometimes the best way to move forward is to break tradition.

13

Sounds like OP is a seasonal player that wants nothing more than to come out as a closeted eternal player.

14

What does a Seasonal Player or Eternal Player have to do with wanting replay value in creating a unique campaign experience every time I create a new character?

1 Like
15

It’s a gift and a curse. I read fast, I tl;dr even faster.

Think of the average player for a Diablo game. This works for the more, shall we say, enthusiastic gamer. Souls-like games are for the more enthusiastic gamer as well, it’s a niche genre to say the least. Not that it isn’t popular amongst those who play it, but it’s definitely niche.

A Diablo game at it’s core is killing and looting. What you’re proposing is completely flipping that around by having it be more story focused. You want choices to matter to the player. Diablo games only hard choice is what skills to pick and what gear will better help those skills. This is what they’re known for. Also why I say it wouldn’t work for a Diablo game.

I like the idea, it just doesn’t fit the Diablo motif. You’re prolonging the process of getting back to killing and looting by offering more complex choices. Now if they made Diablo - A Nehalem’s Tale, made it a single player experience, and made choices matter, I could easily see it taking off and getting its own devote player base. Combat would obviously be changed to compensate, and now you have a brand new game.

17

The purpose of this game is like to have your very own tamagachi pet.
You must care for it after birth…and level it up. You only get 5 pokemons…and the full process is very involved. You should never create a duplicate class…because that would be playing the game incorrectly.

18

BTW other aRPGs like No Rest for the Wicked will also suffer from this since it has a full hand-crafted world.

19

I agree. But the campaign (or post-campaign quests for that matter) can offer those choices too.
When you pick factions in Grim Dawn, it comes with a bit of story sure, and might affect which cities are available to you, as well as some dungeons.
But what you are especially picking, is which vendors, recipes, gear pieces etc. you have available to you.
It is a build choice somewhat similar to which paragon boards you pick.
Just wrapped in a “story” package.

Fits the genre perfectly fine tbh.

20

Soul’s like game play is unique but having choices to make and alternate endings in an RPG is not a new concept. Think of Witcher 3 or Baldur’s Gate 3. They also had choices in those games that impacted the ending and gave unique rewards for making those choices. Im not suggesting anything as grand. This is why I gave Dark Souls as an example as the side character’s involvement was more minimalistic but picked its moments where those choices mattered.

Not necessarily as the endgame activities can remain uneffected. I am not suggesting putting in endgame build defining gear. Maybe the choices you make let you get a piece of gear that is cool and you can make a build around it before other players, however, the same piece of gear is dropped in its endgame version in WT4 from an Uber Boss or something. Like a soft lock.

I don’t think this would prolong killing and looting anything. If a player wants to go through every single variation the revamped campaign has to offer then they can. If someone wants just the loot, they can blast to max level and get it to drop from an Uber Boss or something.

Thing is all this does is allowing players a choice when it comes to leveling up. Do they want to try a new route through the campaign or do they just want to hit the skip campaign button? If the campaign offered variations, I would rather play the campaign every time I made a new character versus skipping just to face melt grind mobs.

21

I agree with you here, but ultimately you aren’t choosing the fate of your previous characters you’ve made along the way, which is what the OP is proposing. PoE has ‘choices’ as well, albeit limited, but nothing that would necessarily break or kill off your character in the long run.

What the OP is proposing is a completely different type of experience within D4. I’m all for more choices, but even Grim Dawn as well it’s mostly about getting back to the action. That choice, while having longer lasting affects, is small in comparison to the rest of the game.