Is it just me who can't bring themselves to enjoy games

Yeah it's just you

Also, some might argue that, the point is that your skill as a player doesn't matter, but the skill of your in game character does, hence the role playing.

To that I ask, how is that fun?

If I chose my character stats at the start of the game and they just stuck at that level, I could understand the role playing potential and replay value, but as it is, your forced into grinding enemies and just doing the same thing over and over to make numbers bigger in order to progress or learn things. It's not because you unconvered some secret that made you smarter, or that you found some weapon through doing a puzzle that made you stronger, it's literally just grinding until you have enough XP to level up.

File: wiz6.gif (3MB, 638x396px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 638x396px

I like grinding, it's almost relaxing for me.

>>3992414
All of what you said is pretty wrong and ignorant.

Games that give you new abilities are railroading you to use them. Gatekeeping you the same way leveling does, except with leveling if you plan out your stats/skills wrong you are then stuck. To avoid being stuck you plan your character to overcome and do whatever your final plan is. Choice is never a bad thing. Diablo or similar isn't at all like Ark where time spent equals you being better.

Dark Souls isn't about skill either. It is about memory. If you remember where the cheap hits are and the simple time based patterns of the bosses you can beat the game blind.

>>3992423
>how is that fun?

Spoiler alert: it's not. Not in videogames, anyway. It's a holdover from when people were still trying to port Dungeons and Dragons onto computers before they realised it was futile and stopped.

You get the occasional autistic people who enjoy grinding and minmaxing and seeing how far they can break the system, but for you and me and the average person it's just boring. That's why it's a dead genre.

Where this kind of system shines is in narrative-driven games (note that I said game there, so we're ignoring shit like Gone Home). Games like Sunless Sea, where the narrative and the gameplay significantly intersect NEED this kind of system because nobody likes having their access to the next chapter cockblocked while they replay the level enough times to luck their way through it. It lets them participate in the story while also engaging the part of their game that likes playing games, making decisions, that kind of thing in a way that books and movies don't. You can use good narrative and strong roleplaying mechanics together to make some really great stuff, and make the story actually impact on the gameplay in a way that CoD can't.

The player can't play through a CoD cutscene because the player might not be good enough to pull it off, so the cutscene takes control away. In a roleplaying game you make the decision for the character, letting you participate, but the character actually can pull it off "for you".

Anyway, all of this you would already know if you lurked more.

>>3992443
>engaging the part of their game that
brain, not game.

How does that even apply to Diablo? Your XP aren't very relevant since a level just adds a few stat points you can also get from other sources.
The gear drops on the high levels aren't that important either

>>3993275
I would love to see you face the butcher as a level 1 warrior without cheesing shit with arrows and stuff.

>>3992423
If games actually did roleplaying right then it would work. Some do but certainly not most modern ones. The point isn't to grind out to make your character godlike at everything. The point of stat distribution is so that you've made certain choices as to how your character is supposed to be roleplayed. What people don't understand is that combat is just as much an aspect of roleplaying as dialogue choices. If you roleplay an archer then they should be using a bow, not a spear. But players don't like being limited this way so systems are designed that allow players to do whatever they want, which creates illogical and self-contradicting systems as you've described. This is why most modern RPGs aren't actually about roleplaying but are simulated ego tripping.

>>3993524
He isn't suppose to be confronted right away if you are planning to go toe to toe with him.

Also Diablo 1 isn't designed around how much you played, you are thinking about Diablo 2 with its loot drops and the sharp spike between monsters from Nightmare to Hell.

Diablo 1 is 100% manageable in single player in on consistent file. Sometimes you just need to juggle items around because you need certain resistances on different floors.

Levels are basically modes. You unlock more skillsets at the cost of enemies also getting stronger.

>>3992414
There's a good reason, why I often just hex edit/Gameshark my characters when I play games like this. Grinding fucking sucks, and is the shitties gameplay mechanic ever. It interferes with the flow of the gameplay. How it has survived to this day, I never understand.

>>3993524
>without cheesing shit with arrows and stuff.
So he can be defeated with skill.

>>3992414

i've literally never had to grind for levels in either diablo game. did we play the same games?

>>3994283
>>3993636
this.
Diablo 1 never required any grinding. In fact, I can't think of any RPG that I played where I wouldn't think about EXP like in this one. It's purely about skill and luck. I don't know what OP wanted to convey. He he should rethink and make another thread.

>>3992414
You should just play NetHack, OP. Diablo took a lot of cues from rougelikes, it just made the action real time. NetHack is infinitely more deep.