What Kills a Game? Why do game developers do this?

I played Diablo II in the original. Not because I desired it, but because it was so popular, I figured as a game designer I needed to know what was up with it. I didn't think it was "all that". I think I replayed it 3 times on different difficulty levels and I may have beaten it on whatever the hardest one was, or the 2nd hardest, can't remember.

I didn't think it exhibited all that much play style variety, for having done it that many times. Ultimately it all pretty much reduced to whack whack whack whack whack your enemies, somehow. You're pressing a button X number of times for your enemies to die. It's kinda mindless and repetitive that way. Item drops tried to Skinner box you into caring more about what was happening, but I was not fooled. I noticed the long term uselessness of items I accumulated, as some other group of items would soon eclipse whatever I'd acquired before.

The only level I really liked was the secret cow halberd level!

Haven't played III; wouldn't. If people say it's worse, ok fine whatever. So whoever did a "really good" ARPG? I didn't think much of the genre, as Diablo II seemed like a glorified arcade game to me. I think II has the virtue of being an early title, when there wasn't much competition. That doesn't make it an awesome title, just a well-remembered title.

I think the age at which you play such things matters as well. I played it in my 20s, when I'd already had tons of experience in many arcade games and various RPGs. If I had played it as a little kid, I bet it would have impressed me more. "Your first games" and all that. How many people play II now, as experienced gamers, but no previous loyalty to the franchise?