Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Mr_Otingocni t1_j95givg wrote

Diablo 2 was my jam. Loved it.

3 seemed like the screen was too small and I didn't like the skill progression. No real customization. Story was 'meh'. Looked great, though.

Immortal was just... boring. Played for a few hours, couldn't get into the story, and I don't like all the mobile bells and whistles and battlepass bullshit.

Hoping 4 will bring back the greatness but I doubt it and probably won't even try it, too much real life shit to do to waste time finding out.

80

pipboy_warrior t1_j96p61i wrote

Diablo 3's expansion was the best time for me. The whole endgame process of grinding bounties, rifts, greater rifts, and all the gear was really fun for me.

But with 4 having battle passes, I'm expecting the worst.

32

jerekhal t1_j97oad8 wrote

That was all I needed to hear to have absolutely no interest.

Didn't know it was planned to come with a battlepass and I won't be engaging with it at all due to that. Live service design philosophy tends to work directly against enjoyable and complete baseline gameplay.

18

FrugalityPays t1_j98gq13 wrote

They’ve said it’ll only be for cosmetics, but I think there lots of doubts on that

2

jerekhal t1_j98pj24 wrote

Honestly it wouldn't matter to me if it was just cosmetics. Part of the enjoyment of a game like Diablo is looking like a badass while you're going through the game destroying hordes of creatures. A battlepass that's cosmetic only just incentivizes lazy and unappealing cosmetic designs in the base game.

I'd rather that aspect of the game not be piecemealed out and used as incentive to pay for a battlepass or stay engaged. Just sell a complete game. Start working on DLC that will incentivize future purchases or an expansion of the game. Leave it at that.

Fairly confident their player base would be infinitely happier with that methodology. At a bare minimum I would.

8

Helivon t1_j99akl8 wrote

I'm personally comllety OK with certain cosmetics being purchasable only. Almost any game these days that actually survives has continued income. Only making money off an initial purchase guarantees a shortened life cycle, especially for a game like diablo that really needs continued development. Cosmetics are the only way to do that without completely fucking over game play (see immortal)

BUT, when I look at overwatch 2, I feel so snubbed from being able to earn loot boxes that I lost all interest in playing. I hate unlocking loot that everyone else gets at the same intervals.

1

jerekhal t1_j99d5mv wrote

More power to you I simply don't share that sentiment.

Diablo would have a perfectly fine lifespan without live-service bullshit imo. It doesn't need a constant and regular update cycle if they just produced bulky and well developed content drops and sold them as DLCs as that would tide people over for a good bit with each. Besides, games don't need to have perpetual development for years on end, the quality inevitably drops pretty significantly as time goes on. But again that's only my opinion.

More importantly you highlighted something that I think a lot of my distaste comes from. Modern live-service design is contemptuous of the user's time and effort, is designed to be psychologically addictive, and gives the absolute bare minimum possible to keep people begrudgingly coming back. That's not something I think is healthy for the game or a net positive regardless of slow content drips that come with.

4

Mr_Otingocni t1_j96tfbz wrote

I might check out the expansion then. It wasn't the glory days of 2 but I liked it enough to play through the story line. I will say the graphics were beautiful.

1

B0BsLawBlog t1_j993uq1 wrote

3's biggest problem for me was how they forced the hardness for the first go through. Normal was easy, I usually switch every RPG I play to hard.

You could trivially buy (if you weren't the first set of players) weapons way stronger than you could get in game in the auction house. Cheaply. Giant damage gems too.

So either you banned yourself from those items by willpower, or you just had to play the game the first time on what was basically story mode. Which wasn't fun for me.

I just want a hard (but not Souls hard, I have a job and kids I ain't got time for that) playthrough please. With multiplayer so I can hang with my bro like the old days.

3

hashinshin t1_j96e5td wrote

They aren’t going to bring your childhood back. Those developers don’t work there anymore. Stop giving money away to people who just name brand their shitty games.

This sounds harsh but Reddit just shills non stop for name brand games from the good old days that aren’t good anymore.

23

Mr_Otingocni t1_j96ixmj wrote

Lol, I haven't spent a dollar on anything but used 360 games at half-price books in over a decade and that's once every few years 😆. I got bills to pay.

Yeah, seems like every generation gets a nostalgia building chunk of time and everything else after that just never seems to match it, even when the games themselves are objectively better.

−1

SuperSatanOverdrive t1_j96802s wrote

I love D2, but I actually think D3 has a lot of customization, as you can swap up what kind skills you use any time, while in D2 you lock in to much larger degree. D3 is much more about the items though

15

Mr_Otingocni t1_j96i70y wrote

I kinda liked that aspect, being locked in. You had to make your build work one way or another. Which increased the replay factor. I initially liked the ability to switch around the skills at a whim in D3, but instead of creating a ton of unique builds from each class, you just had the same class and a ton of equipment to make each variation work. I didn't really care for it but I do see the appeal.

5

poetdesmond t1_j97l4vn wrote

I don't know, locking builds just means most people are going to crack open Icy Veins and go with one of the preset builds there, and they're doing to top-to-bottom do it in order, while grinding for the gear that fits that build, because an unoptimized build in D2 is basically just an increase to the difficulty level with no ability to dial it back if you don't like it. It also gimps creativity or experimentation unless you want to risk dedicating hours to something that may not work.

Open builds mean I can go, "Hey, I've got a weird idea!" implement it, test it, and make a decision on how effective it was in minutes.

2

Mr_Otingocni t1_j97nlbt wrote

What you said sounds like you are probably right, but, bro, I don't understand half of those references, ha ha. I played D2 with expansion packs on solo, no mods, for years. No guides or anything. I was really too old to be spending all day playing video games back then, when you actually had time to see if some weird ass combo was going to work out or you'd be halfway through the game before realizing you screwed the pooch and should start over or expect a lifetime dependence on potions. So now I'm way out of the loop and so old I fart dust.

I hear what you're saying, and in general I like the ability to reset skill trees in most games, I just liked that with Diablo you really got a run for your money with builds because it took getting your ass kicked but unwilling to restart to find a creative way to make some wonky crap actually work.

3

Wonkbro t1_j994q42 wrote

I liked being locked in too. I liked being a "Fire Nova maxed, Lightning Nova maxed" sorceress. As opposed to just a sorceress.

Even though the build was shit.

2

Nagisan t1_j9915bu wrote

The shift to an item-based focus is what I didn't like about D3. Obviously gear can make or break builds in D2, but in D3 almost the entirety of character progression was based around gear.

Sure you unlock skills as you level in D3, but once you got to the appropriate level changing your build was as easy as clicking a couple buttons. All the skills were gear-based, and sure certain items worked better for certain skills but once your character was leveled there was little reason to level that class again because you could easily swap skills around and just have gear swaps in your stash.

D2 forced you to think about the character you wanted to play and actually build into that character. Once you did it wasn't easy to change your character, so it encouraged replayability by forcing you to remake the same class if you wanted a different build. The only way I spent years playing D2 was due to this, such as leveling up a paladin into a hammerdin, leveling a different one for boss killing (smiter), and even a third as a zealer. In D3 this would've all been accomplished with a single playthrough and some gear/skill swaps depending on what I wanted to play. D2 gave a sense that a character has a specific purpose to me, D3 was just "idk do whatever you want whenever you want" so the characters felt boring and had no real meaning behind them.

That said I still did enjoy D3, I just felt like it was well behind D2 in terms of replayability. I played D2 for 4-5 years when it first came out, I played D3 off and on for maybe a year, and a good chunk of that was to make a little bit of money when the real money auction house existed.

4

fredo3579 t1_j97dx26 wrote

Try Diablo 2 Resurrected, it's the same game but updated graphics and sound. Really well done! I enjoyed it for a bit, but it was ultimately too much of a time sink...

5

Mr_Otingocni t1_j97jbw2 wrote

I'll definitely check that out. Like you, though, my game time has taken a back seat to such a degree that I can't even really get immersed in them anymore. *sigh*

2

Gandaalfr t1_j97vrxi wrote

I couldn't get into the look of Diablo 3. It was so... Warcraft.

5

Gingergerbals t1_j964frf wrote

I'm same with you on the other games. I don't have high hopes for D4 but if I get surprised then great.

4

newnamesam t1_j9929q0 wrote

Diablo Immoral was the most abusive game to be produced in the last 10 years. People are talking about spending over $100k to cap it, and it's a seasonal game. Mind blowing how they're taking advantage of addicts like that.

2

excalibrax t1_j9a2n2f wrote

I loved the demo I played years ago, but it was a single map and one dungeon. It has promise, but I highly suspect they will fuck it up

2

bigtimephonk t1_j9armuc wrote

> Diablo 2 was my jam. Loved it.

As somebody who came to the remaster without playing the original, that game did NOT live up to the hype. Diablo 3 certainly wasn't perfect, but I could see where they deliberately made improvements that addressed deficiencies in Diablo 2. Also split-screen multiplayer.

1

4gb3fe3 t1_j96aa23 wrote

....good feedback? What even is this comment?

"I like some things related to the subject at hand. I don't think I'll like the subject at hand though. We'll see. Might be good. I probably wont even find out though."

People are weird.

0