True, but your analysis really does not account for time at all. Time is a very very important factor because diablo 2 came out a long time before diablo 3. Any game coming out after a previous one has the huge benefit of hindsight to change/fix or improve any existing elements, and to look back at what they didnt like or did like. The previous game had no such benefit which makes a huge difference.
If by deeper you mean an infinite scaling system for more grinding then sure, but your trading one grind for another. I would make this argument simpler by saying I like the systems and mechanics in D2 more than D3. I like the music/graphics, and game itself better. I like the items better. I find the entire more memorable, and the story much better because I dont care at all about the story and its all instantly skippable.
Let me also say this your not comparing apples to apples. Really in 20 years you need to come back and do this same discussion/topic again about D3 vs the current game and see if you can argue D3 has more depth then the current game 20 years newer. That is the only way its really better then Diablo 2. Because without accounting for the 2 decades later its a pointless discussion. D3 is only at 9.
Due to All Resist it might as well be 1 resistance. One of D3s many problems.
In general, D3 is lacking the feel of an RPG.
Enemies hardly matters. You just gather them and AoE.
(note that this was not true when D3 released, but current D3 has resulted in this).
Characters/Builds are very close to being meaningless, since you can respec freely in a second.
Gear design is immensely bad in most cases, with large bonuses to a single skill, that removes all choices. If you want to deal dmg with skill A, you must pick item Z.
Lvling/playing the campaign is a joke. Something you are outright not meant to do. Also not the case at release, but today it is.
I like D3’s holistic approach better than D2’s static RPG system. D3 vs D2 is just an argument of holistic/dynamic vs static RPG system. Apple and orange really. Since Blizz is catering to mass appeal it’s no wonder they went for the holistic approach.
Your posts are too long, man… can’t even answer all of this. Yes, D2 is more of an RPG to me, then D3, because as I said, D2 concentrates more on modifying random Rolls, of which there are also more in D2.
D3 concentrates around modifying skills.
you already showed me, that you destroyed duriel with a werewolf… that is one build. Sure, there are strong builds on D2, but I also know, that you won’t be able to do that, if you just play from normal through hell in singleplayer. Have you ever done that? It is really hard imo. Even with a hammadin it is harder than the campaign of D3.
Yes, I think, GR150 is harder than inferno.
Still, it is only harder, because it is a time trial against monsters with 1000000000HP. If it was only about killing them and surviving, it would still not be that hard. I just think, these time trials are no good endgame for such a game.
D2 is a genuinely difficult game, because of the mechanics. That’s, what a lot of people like about it.
D3 is only Hard in GRifts. Getting there is super boring. That’s my point… it had a hard campaign, but it was toned down and thus became boring to me to play through. And the campaign is the only thing, I would play in D3, because GRifts are boring to me, too.
Which doesn’t make D3 not an RPG.
Clearly, you know nothing or you just underestimated everyone or you are just bad in D2. Pick one.
I started my werewolf druid from Lv1 to Lv85 in singleplayer. It was done when I was waiting for the next D3 season to come at that time. No FHR either because I can’t find a gear with FHR affix at that time.
Nonsense. Playing thru Hammerdin from Normal to Hell. Without full GG items, still able to deal at least 8000+ damage per hammer.
My hammerdin without Enigma and I forgot to switch to Concentration aura (only switch it at last second after realizing it) and still able to destroy Hell Andriel. 
Seriously, who are you trying to fool here when you said Hammerdin is hard?
Good. Should have said it earlier instead of keep finding an excuse of undermining it.
It is content for those who want to push their GG character to the limit and see how far their character can go at their peak.
You keep saying it is not that hard but I see no video of you clearing GR150 solo until now. All talk, no action. If you actually watch the GR140+ video I linked in the past, you should realize that your character will die with two or three sloppy plays or missteps.
It is not a difficult game. Not when you can spam a health potion to victory and able to open the town portal instantly in the middle of the fight. The only boss battle that is hard in D2 is Hell Ancient as the fight will reset the whole battle when you opened a town portal in the middle of a fight. But still, people still can cheese it by littering all potions on the ground before activating the fight and then spam the potion to victory if your character was undergeared at that time.
Not a game problem if you are not willing to play the campaign at the highest difficulty and actually stick thru it instead of reducing the difficulty every time you see a roadblock. I started a campaign run with my new Lv1 character at Torment 1 difficulty in the past and it wasn’t easy at all.
It’s kind of irrelevant because class fantasy and efficiency held over choice in Diablo 3. Your Wizard or Demon Hunter will never be able to bear a shield yet push high in Greater Rifts for instance.
Months ago, I complained that area damage is every where and there’s not enough alternatives, such as pets and clones. I think they have read that and implemented in the recent builds. I await the moment where classes have space to include hand bare shields after an overhaul or tweak, but I am not hopeful on it.
I think, we won’t get anywhere here. I think D2 is a hard game. If it is easy for you, it’s fine.
Lol… my level ~90 hammadin with HoZ, shako and vipermagi‘s does like 6.000 dmg per hammer. What are you talking about? You need best gear, without skillers to deal so much damage.
I never said, that juiced up chars have problems in hell. But show me your playthrough from normal to hell. That’s, where the game is hard, not after aquiring a bunch of nice gear.
Anyway, you have quite some D2 chars it seems. If you like D3 more, that’s fine. I just think, D2 is the better game for me, because it feels way more RPG like to me. D3 does not for the given reasons. Also you having a different opinion will not change, that D3 bores the hell out of me, whereas I am super hyped for D2R, even though I played so much D2 in the past.
Yeah, also a good point.
To bring things back to D4, I sure as hell hope that all classes are meant to be able to use shields, and using them will be a viable choice all the way through endgame.
On this forum I have too often seen comments like “Barb is not a shield class”… And I get a deep desire to smash something. ALL classes should be shield classes. A Sword and Shield sorceress is one of the most classic RPG characters.
Ok.
Hammerdin at peak can deal 15k~20k damage. Dealing 7K~8k is just your average Hammerdin. As I said before, neither my Hammerdin has the best gear and is optimized.
You can see from my video, where I forgot to use Concentration, and I am still able to bring down Hell Andriel HP to so low. If I am not mistaken, without Concentration, my hammer is dealing like 3k damage yet Hell Andriel fell so fast.
You expect me to throw down everything I am doing now just to make a video for you where you can’t even show me the video of you clearing GR150 solo despite that saying GR150 is not hard. Not planning to do that as well because FF14 has took so much times from me at this moment and I still planning to find a time to play S24 Diablo 3.
Also, D2 spellcasters will clear D2 Hell with little difficulty with decent gear. People are farming at Nightmare/Hell after 9 hours of playing the new ladder started.
Screenshot of people reaching Nightmare/Hell after 9 hours
https://i.imgur.com/F4q1bR2.png
Here is the video of my low-level werewolf beating Normal Duriel with almost no gear equipped:
Too bad I only recorded this normal playthrough battle when I started playing my werewolf druid from Lv1 at that time.
Of course. Unlike many haters out there, I actually played both games enough to judge it instead of making stuff and false claim on why they hate X game.
D3 bores you is one thing. Calling the D3 campaign is easy because you lack willpower not to lower down the difficulty is another thing when D3 gives you options on how to play the game at your pace.
And I am not hyped because it was basically a new game with new paint. Not helping when I just played the original D2 few months ago.
I never said that.
Never did that, I am just saying, the campaign does not require you to solve any problems, when you can in principle lower the difficulty to your needs. It feels less immersive and way less challenging to me, just because the option exists.
Well, it looks really dope though and you will have 144 FPS <3 also the ladder wollten crowded again
Yeah, completely fair to say a game is as easy as its lowest ‘required’ difficulty.
That doesn’t mean the higher difficulties dont exist of course.
A big part of D3s problem is all the difficulty settings though.
When you can finetune the optimal difficulty, for whatever gear/paragon you have, through 150 individual difficulty settings, the difficulty, like so much else, loses its meaning. You can always pick the one that allows you to run through a GRift at optimal speed/xp reward etc. Like with character builds, there are no pro’s and con’s that you need to take into account.
Having very few difficulties, with large jumps between them, means that going to next difficulty can feel challenging. There is never a reason to do that in D3.
O really?
You did. You have been parroting that the D3 campaign is not hard because you can lower the difficulty at will to finish it.
Whether it feels less immersive or less challenging, it is up to the players to decide that. Players are given the option of how would they want to play their game.
Honestly, it is never an issue. Only you will make it like an issue here where you could just ignore the low difficulty option and play like how you play D2.
That assuming I will even play D2R or original D2 in September when I will be busy playing FF14. The games that I am looking forward in this year is FF14 Endwalker expansion and Diablo Immortal.
Diablo 2 was simply better.
There are a few reasons that are immediately obvious.
Diablo 3 is built around the endgame, Diablo 2 is built as a game world and not on endgame. That’s one of the sticking points… also Diablo 1 is built as a game and not an endgame grinder… That’s why D1 is also far superior to D3 in many aspects, even superior to part 2 because of the slower gameplay and the good atmo.
Diablo 3’s skill system is bad because it:
- everything is blurry open.
- is always easy to change instantly.
- it doesn’t provide depth as different trees with altered gameplay as a whole, which Diablo 2 did very well.
I could play an amazon with a bow, using different attack types, or I could play her as a throwing spear ama… or as a melee spear ama, where just the balance was messed up. And everything was just binding.
You went one way and that’s what you did. That’s what RPG is all about… Decisions and paths and then to have fun in there and specialize, best with trainer, hidden skills and spells, or as a let’s say druid at some point in front of the choice, werebear or werewolf and, not both and best with great quest and story around it and then there again new skills and continue to work on themselves …
And until the synergy patch there were many options, after that it was more limited, which was not so nice, because suddenly many combinations no longer worked, which you could see well with the sorceress… the points were simply not enough.
Diablo 3 would have been weak even in the year 2000… Maybe even much more ticked off, because the people at the time, were still used to hardcore RPGs and not this sports game drama in Endgame… But it would certainly have found friends there too.
Diablo 3 was created with a completely different background and that was noticeable in all corners and ends of the game and just flopped, because it was and is not a game, but a hidden sports game in the endgame. And that is uninteresting for RPG players, not desirable and simply not their genre.
This has nothing to do with nostalgia… Diablo 3 is at least 2 steps behind Diablo 2 and I would even rather play a remake of Diablo 1 than Diablo 3… Diablo 3 is not my genre… Blizz made something else out of it and screwed it up.
And if Diablo IV also becomes a much too overpresent endgame game, I honestly see black and it will fail as an RPG and thus lose all those again who actually want to play a game like D2 and D1 and not an eSport around numbers and rifts and seasons etc.
I hope Blizz understands this, otherwise they have to implement it just then in Diablo 5 hopefully and one has finally understood it there…
Also in the MMORPG market is the disease of the genre… There are only endgame solo quest MMORPGs with way too much pace and action and oh stop it… That’s not what MMORPG players want…
Never said, the higher diff doesn’t exist… but surely, it is easy to get through the campaign, if you can always lower the diff to your needs… that’s all I am saying.
Are you trying to annoy me? I never said, GR150 is not hard… I literally even said, it is hard, but the campaign is super easy. Troll someone else.
I can say the same back to you. You have been keeping repeating the same old campaign is super easy when you have the option not to do so. More options are good. It is completely up to the players to decide whether they want to make the content easy or hard.
As I said before, go to play Torment 6 first with your fresh Lv1 character and then come back to tell me it is super easy.
Sorry, didn’t mean to imply that you said that. Was just agreeing 
I do have a different opinion on that. I think, ARPGs are better, if you can not change the difficulty, but have to play around and modify your stats and your combat style, to overcome difficult parts, at which you might get stuck.
In D2, there are builds, which do not get stuck at all usually. With e.g. a Barbarian, zealot or Bowazon, I did get stuck and solving problems with game mechanics feels good and rewarding imo.
I guess, our philosophies of what makes an ARPG a rewarding experience just differ too much, to ever get together here.
You can do that in D3 as well. Not the game’s fault if you yourself chose to low the difficulty every time you get stuck.
in normal mode? Nonsense. Also, you can solve all problems with spamming potion and town portal tricks even in Hell unless you are intentionally building a brick character, which can be resolved by respec option.
Either you are really a bad D2 player or you are sure to love to cook up a fake scenario to justifying your claim here.
You also ignore that you can make the D3 campaign harder than the D2 normal campaign if you wanted to ala T6 Campaign Mode.
I believe he meant Hell difficulty. There are builds that get stuck because they’re such underdogs. A weak magic find build will get stuck somewhere, they don’t have to comfort to the idea of a power fantasy to play the game.
I think same apply to you too on some degree.
You are repeating yourself. I already said, I think, D2 is an objectively hard game. No matter, if you can crush hell with your geared Druid. It is not a fake scenario, that most D2 players have never beaten hell in singleplayer.
I never said anything else: I said excplicitly
I am not contradicting your statements here. It is just my opinion, that it is better for ARPGs if you can’t change the difficulty to your needs.