Do you need any more proof?

Diablo II: Resurrected General Discussion
1

Do you need any more proof that D2R was meant to be a remaster of the classic original game?

From February until the present day people on these forums still talk about having new or more modern mechanics added to D2R. (One prevalent idea is personal loot like Diablo 3)

If you haven’t had the chance to see the latest update from Blizzard, here it is below. And I think it perfectly states several times what their intentions were remastering this game and why D3 or PoE elements shouldn’t or won’t be added to the game.

1."Our team of artists has remastered this old-school ARPG"

They state once more it is a remaster

2."We hope Diablo II: Resurrected reignites treasured memories of gaming’s past for veteran players. For new players, we hope it captures the same wonder and awe felt by fans two decades ago."

They show the desire to bring back the same game experience to veteran players as well as let new people experience the original game experience in its modern form

3. "For Diablo II: Resurrected, we wanted to streamline this experience without compromising what made the original game memorable. There are so many unique quirks and systems in this game that, if modernized, would ultimately sabotage the original experience we adore. So, we’ve exercised restraint to protect the authentic experience"

They didn’t want to tamper with the experience that made D2 so popular and loved, even if they thought something was a good idea they recognized that it would impact the whole way the game was meant to be played or originally played.

4. "When we started working on Diablo II: Resurrected, we were humbled by such an incredible opportunity to plunge into the past and rebuild our nostalgia . . . but we also recognized that the original game is a classic for a reason, so we’d have to be prudent. So many people, us included, love this game and want to see it reimagined authentically. We want to do right by this game and its players."

Again they mention the experience the original game gave players and the idea that it is a classic not meant to be modernized in any game breaking way. Just polished to a better state to be replayed again

As I have stated many times on these forums, in many posts: this game is being remastered with the veteran players in mind. New players are always always welcome of course but this game was particularly remastered for the old fans to have a chance to relive the good old days in the diablo universe. And the game has kept the same authentic feel of the original for the new players to have a taste of what was loved 20 years ago. Many people do not understand why others want to keep D2R as close to the original as possible with added support on modern systems.

For anyone who had doubts, anyone who said this game wasn’t really a remaster or people who wanted it to be like D3 or D4. I hope this post helps clear up any misunderstandings of why certain players (myself included) want D2R to remain as close to the original as possible and have the same authentic feel.

16 Likes
2

There is no single definition of what a remaster is, you may have a definition but not even video games agree what is or is not a remaster. Other then one thing, it uses mostly the same engine and systems. That is all they could add or subtract anything they wanted and it would still be a remaster.

Also not sure where in the post it says no new QOL features or changes. While at this point balance changes are unlikely till after launch I do hope they add a new realm that will have balance changes in the future. But knowing Activision I’m not sure we will get much post launch support.

3 Likes
3

A lot of the problem, is this statement is intentionally vague. Yes, the game is a remaster and not a remake. They are not remaking the entire game engine and changing the core mechanics of how the game generally plays. This can mean a number of things, but generally speaking: The Story Progression Structure (Act based, with waypoints, bosses, etc), Character Progression (3 difficulty Structure, Single or Online MP/Solo, Leveling, Skill Tree Structure and methodology,), Classes, Item Structure (White/Magic/Rare/Unique/Socketed/Runeword/Crafted/Variety of equipable weapons and armor/Charms/Jewelry/Gems/Jewels), Mechanics based around frames and breakpoints. Change any of these, such as removing jewelry, gem structure, etc changes the game. Example: Wild Arms: Alter Code F (a remake of the original PS1 cult classic), chose to remove equipable weapons and armor in favor of equipping items that granted pumpable skills. That is a core mechanic change, thus a remake.

While arguably, limited stash space is a core mechanic of Diablo 2, players got around this using mules, hence expanded and shared stash as a QoL that doesn’t necessarily change how players play the game (though I have my own arguments on how it may affect player choices on how much they pick up to store in multiplayer games and how it affects the shared drop balance overall).

Veterans is also another weird topic, as the game has had many iterations, which distinctly fall into launch, midpoint between launch to 1.10, and 1.10+. Veterans such as Llama, have not really played the game for 21 years, and really only played the game devoutly after 1.10, so people like him are going to have different memories of play than the original veterans. It is a much harder task to truly remaster a game like Diablo 2 to capture nostalgia of veterans that have these different remembrances of the game.

They mention how modernizing the game engines will hurt the core. This doesn’t speak to things such as balance changes (as balance changes are not a modern concept, and Diablo 2 is no stranger to them). However, this does speak to things such as more modern end game structures such as Paragons or Rifts from Diablo 3.

As for QoL, anything Blizzard surveyed on between their two rounds, I would consider to be additions that they are working on, or have discussed working on for either launch, or post launch patches. I don’t believe many of these will reach launch, but two (or 3 depending how you look at having 3 shared stash tabs) are now confirmed with this blog: In game optional clock, and optional loot display toggle.

So things I expect to not see at all in D2R: New Act (which would change core game structure and would necessitate a full game rebalance), New Class(es) (restructure/rebalance), Paragons, Rifts, New Zones beyond a reskinned map/monsters, New Story, New Skills, Bounties ala Diablo 3, etc.

3 Likes
4

I would say for the most part you are right… however I would say that 95% of the original game is still there and there is no real huge changes. Of course there are changes, like the art and small tweaks here and there but that is what I called “polishing”. It is a new coat of paint and doesn’t impact the game in any major way at all. Even the gold pick up and stash.

As for the term “veteran” and what I meant. Even though there was an expansion and some patches the original game is still there for the most part. Even Llama and other people who played the game 20 years ago are still going to be able to relive their old memories playing the game even if it has changed a little. The main game is there, the same sounds, the same music, the same scenes, the same characters, etc. Everything they had will be there. There will be very small amounts of changes and for the most part they will genuinely be able to relive their memory.

As for the small QoL changes like the clock and stash and display toggle. Those don’t impact the game whatsoever. This goes back to what I mentioned about adding support to modern day systems. To me, a clock is just another small insignificant feature that doesn’t affect the game at all and isn’t relevant.

I think the general point of my post remains the same. The game is the same and the experience is the same. If we looked at every single change you will find a lot but I am talking about big changes.

I really disagree, if they did anything like personal loot, rifts, wings, pets, portals to endless amounts of gold, legendary powers, huge damage bonuses, etc. I really wouldn’t classify it as diablo 2.

“Remastering usually involves enhancing the quality of an original ‘master’ version, meaning the fabric of the source is merely enhanced, rather than modified”

"Remastering usually involves enhancing the quality of an original ‘master’ version"

" A remaster takes the original source material"

" Remaster definition : If a film or musical recording is remastered , a new recording is made of the old version"

The one prevalent thing is almost every single definition of the word remaster refers to enhancing the original or using the original to make a better version of that original.

In the gaming community a remaster is generally what I said it was, a polished version of the original with no new additions or mechanics that change it or alter it in any serious way that takes away from the original

5

For me I fear that the word “modernising” when used in the gaming context generally seems to mean dumbing down for uber casuals, which is something we see a lot now and is why we end up getting sold games such as D&D Dark Alliance, which is a game where you can find “legendary” items on the first attempt and can max out at level 20 in an hour.

3 Likes
6

You are aware every single one of those definitions are film and music right ?

"Remastering usually involves enhancing the quality of an original ‘master’ version"
This definition falls into what I said, who says what a enhancement is, I think a optional instanced loot system when you start a game would be a enhancement. You do not, I think a charm inventory would be a enhancement you may or may not. We have differing opinions on what would be a enhancement, quite frankly the devs could have differing opinions as well. Don’t be egocentric and think your opinion is law, and the devs or anyone else agrees with your definitions of a remaster. Your bound to get burned and have disappoint, it might not be from pre-ordering this game, but you can’t infer your own definitions especially when many are very vague.

I didn’t agree with EA removing mass effect 3 horde mode multiplayer from the mass effect remaster, as I quite enjoyed it now if they could remove the micro transactions and just make the lootboxs based on what difficulty you cleared that would be great.

I’d hardly call dark alliance a modern game lol, that game as game mechanics strieght out of 90s 3d action games. The game was obviously rushed and given to inexperienced developers. These type of games have existed since the very first games.

7

Fine with me. A straight remaster was pretty much what I was hoping for.

6 Likes
8

I would not over-interpret this Blizzard post. It was focused on Blizzard’s response to the single player alpha. If there are changes for multiplayer I would not anticipate seeing them described yet where some may still occur after the multiplayer beta. We already know from this post that there is a new tab called “Game Creation” in the options section where we do not know what is in there yet.

In terms of accessibility, I would suggest that there still may need to expand things for multiplayer such as semi-transparent pets, reduced visual clutter from effects, and instanced loot.

1 Like
9

Dude, this is like posting for masochists. There is a reason I don’t reply to some people on this forum.

  1. Omg guys, this game is sooo old
    and it needs all the improvements I can give it even if it may fundamentally change the feel of the game. What is hubris?

  2. Well, what is a remaster anyway? Oh you have proof of what they intend? Well I mean it’s so vague it could really mean anything I interpret it to mean, and it will.

  3. This idea of mine just makes the game easier, I’ll disguise it as QoL, but really I’m just lazy.

  4. My idea of what a remaster should be is more valid than yours, because look at these random internet polls.

  5. If you don’t want to see my personal improvements implemented that fall outside a remaster, the original game is still available.

Have fun because this thread will be a whole lot of THAT. Still, I support your passion. Fight the good fight. :+1:

6 Likes
10

So let’s take stacking gems and runes.

Is it hard to make a mule character? No.
Is it challenging to make a mule character? No

For me personally, if I need a mule character, I turn on the game while watching TV. Create a new character and occasionally move the mouse around. After awhile the character is permed and I have stash.

Also, Blizzard has given multiple interviews where they discuss their ideas on a remaster. Blizzard’s idea is not a strict video/audio update as evidenced already.

2 Likes
11

Yes. I haven’t seen any “proof.” A lot of conjecture. A lot of hyperbole. A few direct comments of “intention.” Numerous anecdotes.

No proof.

1 Like
12

A bit of a stretch to say that instanced loot falls under “accessibility.”

I know you want instanced loot to be an option, and while I agree that said option wouldn’t be the D2-destroying apocalypse the purists claim it would be, you do tend to grasp at straws in an effort to cling to the hope that the announcement of instanced loot is still forthcoming. (The chances of which look smaller by the day.)

This straw is one of your “graspiest” yet.

3 Likes
14

Eh, I think it’s less that and more caution. If you can ploot it, why not change the drop rates too? Why not change runewords? Why not balance class skills?

It’s a culmination of alterations that will destroy D2. If they win on ploot, what’s next? Where does it end?

There are a lot of us that would argue “modernization” is the exact problem with current games. Loot boxes, features being stripped and added behind pay walls, extremely easy gameplay, shallow or pigeonholed builds, esports, pay to win mentality and a whole lot more.

There have already been threads where kids ask for subscription fees for D2R. The purists are pointing backwards at a city already burned to ashes.

2 Likes
15

Remastered doesn’t mean an HD port. If you like your original vanilla game so much, why don’t you stick to the original D2? It’s still vanilla flavor just like you guys want it.

16

if you don’t like the concept why don’t you stay with D3 ? YOU have just as little right to demand anything to break a classic with your wish list.

17

D3 is a trainwreck. We only want a spiced up D2 with things balanced.

Apparently you guys want the exact same game, hence why I recommend you to stick with vanilla LoD and stop trying to bring your hellbent traditionalist ideas to a new game where you purists will become the minority once nostalgia players + new players come back to this game.

18

Ah, I see you’ve iterated number 5. Bravo for making it so far down the list.

19

The good old slippery slope argument which isn’t a good argument as rarely happens the way people describe, followed by a argument saying micro transactions and subscriptions and features being stripped is somehow modernizing. This is a general gaming industry problem not a problem with modern games. Specifically this has to do with investors wanting more profits year after year and marketer/salesmen getting more and more control over game design. This has nothing to do with the people arguing for more changes, most of us want the game to stay on the more difficult side, and don’t want loot drops to increase. So please stop comparing us to profit hungry marketers and executives.

1 Like
20

i dont stick to vanilla because they make a remaster of ist and YOU dont have to break it. Thats the reason. you dont like it as it is? your problem. Play another game.

1 Like
21

Uh literal … wut?