That sounds like quite the exaggeration.
As for game quality, that is of course always subjective, but I surely consider Classic a better game than BFA. Feature creep doesn’t make for a better game.
1 Like
Dude just stop. He created 2 amazing games and you sit here and judge based on what exactly? That he didn’t create more amazing games?
Like, do you even see what you’re writing? On what grounds are you even allowed to have an opinion if Brevik is to be considered obsolete? Sitting there judging what makes a great game developer rofl.
You defend retail wow which is the biggest garbage ever produced by citing numbers you don’t even have. Who will play BFA 15 years from now, even on a private server? Wake up and smell your dogsh1t arguements. They reek all the way across the ocean.
3 Likes
Perhaps it is, I don’t have the data, of course.
But the point stands. Classic is half a year old and all it does since release is losing players steadily.
It was never that large anyway.
If you consider on release? Yeah, it was a better game.
Now? Side by side? If I had to chose one? I’d go with bfa, simply because there’s more to do.
I am currently choosing neither. Bfa sucks, but classic is just too morally aged to be of any relevance.
I would maybe consider bc or WOTLK. But vanilla is a grind and little else.
1 Like
If he’s such an incredible developer, you’d think that maybe at some point in the last two decades he would have had at least one other vaguely decent game. But he hasn’t. Take off the rose-coloured spectacles.
2 Likes
I think it’s pretty obvious the guy has some good ideas he just needs somone on the outside reigning him in and guiding him a bit.
Case in point with Diablo, it would have been turn-based and not have had any MP had it not been for the guys at Blizzard Irvine. Diablo 2 had no story direction until they saw the cinematics, which were being made independently from the game. He needed them to guide his story better.
Move on to Hellgate and Marvel Heroes Online, and those are filled with unchecked bad ideas and a complete lack of polish. Not saying D1 or D2 didn’t have bad ideas, but those games are night and day different in terms of polish and bad ideas.
It Lurks Below is definitely the best of his post Diablo entries, but it is in no way a runaway hit and not really that original.
1 Like
So, basically, even for his smash hit games, they too would have been awful had the other people not contributed and told him which bits sucked.
1 Like
yes, ofc he had a small team. yes, of course game development requires money. after he left he went on to create hellgate london, a game way ahead of its time that paved the way for borderlands and other shooter rpgs. unfortunately it was riddled with bugs and other issues. it was incredibly unique for 2006 and a blast to play with friends. people seemed to generally like marvel heroes although i haven’t played. he created what lurks below all by himself. the game is a gem and should be in everyone’s steam library. yes, it’s that good.
your points are so hollow
2 Likes
i don’t understand how you can ignore What Lurks Below. he created the arpg genre. his accomplishments speak for themselves.
1 Like
quantity over quality.
2 Likes
You can think that but the reality said otherwise. Neither I or people are making up his failures.
That is why I do think people gave David Brevik too many credits but not his teams or Blizzard.
Very easily. I saw it appear on Steam. Thought it looked like an uglier version of Terraria (which I didn’t like) and swiftly added it to my Ignore list.
1 Like
it’s funny because even his “failures” received higher player scores than Diablo 3. Marvel Heroes 6.8/10. Hellgate London 7/10. What Lurks Below 9/10.
Diablo 3…4/10 Necro DLC 4.8 ROS 6.6 ouch. reality sucks.
if we’re talking about commercial success, sure the blizzard product made more money. blizzard are a monstrous company that can drag a dying game on forever. small companies can’t do this.
3 Likes
i’ll write that down
1 Like
To be fair, Blizzard Irvine created it. Brevik didn’t want real time combat.
1 Like
D3 has an 88/89 score. Players review bombed D3 and therefore the player scores are unusable.
Honestly after lvl 60 grind Classic is much less grindy than retail. More “casual” friendly.
One of the things that make Classic better here and now. Less stuff to do, but each activity are more meaningful.
I agree Diablo 2 is not the best game ever. Not that it has to be. It is up there, and certainly at the top of its genre.
Im sure Brevik is a decent developer. But one person rarely makes all the difference. It is both silly to make him into some kind of god, and to make him seem unimportant.
D3 still able to sold 39 million with that kind of user score. The reality is sure sucks for David Brevik though. I mean, how much money does Hellgate London made? In fact, does it even made as much as D2?
I can see that with London Hellgate (buggy) and Marvel Heroes. So pitiful to the point that Marvel Heroes had to get shut down.
He is conveniently picking the user scores because he knew that D3 is actually doing quite well in term of scoring. If we count the amount of the positive user reviews purely by numbers alone, it still outclassed David Brevik’s other games where it only have hundreds positive reviews per game where D3 alone has thousands.
Makes you wonder why people put so much stock into these D3 user scores. If the game was as bad as they claim it would never have sold so well and for so long.
1 Like
Quantity AND quality over poor quality and little quantity.
I played WoW Classc when it was simply WOW. I raided in one of the top guilds of my region. I saw pretty much everything it has to offer.
What WoW Vanilla is - is a great game for it’s time. Today, doing casual questing in BFA will give you more excitement and experience than the entirety of Vanilla.
For god’s sake, it’s a game where the best raid has fewer mechanics in it than a good Dungeon. Than an Mythic-tier boss like Azshara.
It’s a game where most classes were one-button wonders.
It’s a game where you could perform at 20%, literally playing with your butt, and you’d still kill a boss.
It’s a game where anything you wanted to achieve was solved by a mindless grind. Literally killing thousands of monsters with one of your spells for days, or collecting weeds in Azshara.
Classic? Perhaps.
You know why?
Because Vanilla game was designed to be so easy that a penguin could play it. The only reason there were wipes and long progression - was because people didn’t know WTF they were doing with their characters, played at 15 FPS in raids and 400+ ping.
Today, take all of that away, add in Icy-veins, youtube guides and modern-grade addons - and Classic indeed doesn’t need any grind. I imagine a 15-20 man raid can clear MC or BWL with the same ammount of challenge as it was done in 40 people back in 2005.
Classic is in no way less grindy than retail. Retail has more obvious time gates as opposed to ridiculous amounts of exp needed to level and quest items you need multiples of having incredibly low drop rates, lookin at you Westfall stew quest.
At least in retail you make quick progress in the “grind”, vanillait took for ever and a day to grind most everything.