Original post by dwarfsoft
Where was the choice of role to be a jester, a farmer, a hersman, a healer, anything but a mindless slaughterer. There was no role (despite how anybody argues it) it was pure violence. Diablo comes under the term ''TPS'' which is Third Person Shooter (though shooting is more like hacking in this game). At least Theif was more like an RPG than Diablo, you were actually playing your role, not just clicking on an infinite array of bad guys.
Sorry, Dwarfsoft, but the logic doesn''t hold. Yes, you were playing, as Earnest Adams called it, an pest control exterminator for monsters. However, how you played that role meant a different game experience (which roles normally give us). You could play cautious, or bold and in your face, rely on magic or no. Limited, yes, but a role nonetheless, and a role-playing game by traditional standards when you add in the other stuff I mentioned.
BTW, I can turn your argument against you.
Listing a bunch of roles isn''t adequate criteria. After all, how many traditional tabletop or computer RPGs let you play a prostitute, or a molecular biologist, or a kintergarden teacher, or an airline pilot, or a medieval washer woman? (In the rules!!!!)Does the exclusion of these roles automatically mean an RPG where you can play thief, mercenary, or spy mean the game isn''t an RPG? No? Then neither do the exclusion of the roles you cited above apply to Diablo.
Admittedly, it''s borderline. But that''s why it''s labeled a hybrid between action and RPG. When you hybridize a game, you normally get less of what it is that makes both genres distinct.
Just waiting for the mothership...