Sometimes the game tries a few thousand combinations when a player enters a dungeon before being satisfied by the results (there are configurable constraint sets).
For some reason, not a single other similar game I've played has had the same effect on me. Maybe there's bias going on (obviously I was younger then), but I've played a huge number of games since, and not a single one quite scratched the same itch. I will be saving this article.
Diablo 2 was a bit more on the rails to me: if I play a specific amount of time, I can acquire the specific pieces of gear that I want for a specific build. Diablo 1 it felt like you were chasing pieces, but grand scheme of things, you just wanted the best in slot more often than not. Story was more there too and the quests appreciable. They didn’t phone in the sequel and really delivered a great game.
Diablo 1, however, I enjoyed stacking Intelligence as much as possible so that I could have pretty substantial levels of casting skills from books (since you had to have x amount of points in it for the next level book to work). In that way, it felt like you could have a God Character in a way that D2’s 20 max assignable (more could be gained as mods on gear) didn’t. You had to also work at that, which felt rewarding.
If you choose to define Roguelike to include permadeath or that it must be turn based, then it is not, of course. But if Diablo is not a roguelike, its next door neighbor is.
Another comment linked the creator's postmortem; he said he was influenced by roguelikes but specifically called out that Diablo doesn't have permadeath as opposed to roguelikes. His original design doc included permadeath, but it didn't make it far into production.
I never considered permadeath an important part of Angband or any other roguelike because I always scummed.
Coincidentally, I played Diablo II with a self-imposed permanent death rule several years ago. I made it to the... Desert, I think it was? and then got killed and never really got back into the game. It just wasn't designed for that.
It's not wang tiles - Wang tiles do not actually specify how you pick them, and the diablo tile sets do not fit together the way that wang tiles do.
Wang tiles doesn't say anything specific about the arrangment of tiles as there are many tilesets that have the Wang Tile property.
And Diablo tiles aren't wang tiles, it would be inaccurate to describe them so. It's not to do with the shape, it's to do with connectivity. You can have a floor tile north-west of a wall tile, you can have dirt north-west of a wall, you can have floor north-west of floor, but you cannot have dirt north west of floor. Wang tiles do not permit restrictions like that.
> The tiles aren’t marching squares though, and calling them after how they were generated is confusing!
I don’t understand how this could be misunderstood by someone reading in good faith. I think that, if a reader remarks “this is confusing because…”, you shouldn’t tell them they’re wrong and it’s not confusing.
I wonder if such things are taught in today's game design courses.
Instructors may be aware of these techniques but would be hard-pressed to turn them into assignments that wouldn't fail all but a couple of people in the class.