It was marketed as a remaster with some QoL changes and then the possibility of more along with balance changes and bug fixes as the community weighs in. Clearly the people who wanted some changes outweigh those that want no change.
3 Likes
Indeed.
Yes. That is the obvious, and best, solution.
It didnt need to be in at release, since the changes at release was small. But all future changes should go to the “Resurrected” realm. While having a “Original” realm for those wanting the classic experience. Just like the pre-expansion Classic realm has offered in the past.
“Going back to D2” is not a solution of course. That doesnt give you the remastered graphics, new UI, gamepad support etc.
D2R should be able to both preserve the original gameplay of D2 AND offer something new. Never had to be either/or.
2 Likes
Or the D2R team finally realized that D2R was not selling well enough as those who want changes in D2R didn’t or haven’t bought D2R, so they hope the upcoming future changes will change those people’s minds that haven’t bought D2R yet. 
1 Like
I disagree with this assessment. In all the large publicly available polls pre-release where the results were known, the no change group was the vast minority. There were disagreements about what specifically should be changed but some changes were widely favored while others were controversial.
3 Likes
While it’s certainly better for D2 to change, a lot of people bought D2R thinking it would stay a 1:1 copy with the original like SC:R. Since that didn’t happen Blizzard should either:
1] Open a classic realm
2] Allow for refunds
2 Likes
I understand that. My point was that Blizzard clearly indicated otherwise and at release it was not 1:1 copy.
I suggested this back then as a solution as a win-win for the no/few changes versus changes crowd. The link below is a thread that I created back in July 2021.
I dunno about this. Can you link a blue post clarifying it? Note that I don’t follow D2R so I may have missed such thing.
In their official surveys to beta testers they asked whether people wanted massive changes, such as Charm inventory etc. If they would never make any such changes, it would make no sense to ask about it.
And in various interviews with media sites, they said that they would consider adding new stuff and changes post-launch “if the players wanted it”.
At no point did they say nothing would change.
1 Like
The quotes in question were not “blue posts” per se. The quotes in question were from publicly reported interviews from the D2R producer and game director. I found some old posts of mine from pre-release that are copied below:
See:
How Diablo 2 Is Changing on Its Path to Resurrection… While Staying True to Its Roots (ign.com)
Direct quote:
The team also wanted to gauge the fanbase’s reaction to some of the small quality of life changes that had been implemented, such as automatic gold pick-up. “For the most part people really liked them,” Gallerani says. “In fact they want to see more. The game is still a work in progress - this was a tech alpha - so even from the design side we have a lot of thoughts about [additional] quality of life updates and ways we can make them better.”
“A lot of the feedback has been specific, low level, little things across the board,” Gallerani continues. “The community has been amazing, we have sites of people putting together surveys and PowerPoints for us. It’s awesome to see them share how they feel about it.”
“We can’t promise that we can or will change everything,” Lead Artist Chris Amaral adds. “But when there are things we agree with, we can push them a little further.”
Here are undeniable facts and statements that prove that Blizzard is considering balance changes if the players want them.
On March 7, this Blizzard interview was released and directly quote from
How Diablo 2: Resurrected is calling on the spirit of the original ARPG | PCGamesN
**Players have cheesy strategies and classes they’ve come to love over the years. Are you keeping those intact, or will the game receive a balance pass to give the lesser loved classes their time in the sun?**
**Chris Lena:** Yeah, we made a decision not to do balance changes right now, for the very reason that we want to make sure we deliver the authentic experience. Who knows what might happen in the future with feedback. I know our designers have a list of things they would love to do. So we’ll see how that goes going forward.
**How will Diablo 2: Resurrected be maintained once it releases? Will there be balance patches or updates to keep it fresh?**
**CL:** I think that conversation starts with the technical alpha and goes through to launch. It’s really about what players are looking for and what they want. We love this game – we’re remastering it 20 years later – so we would love to continue giving players what they want.
**CA:** Yeah, I think our focus is really to listen to the community and see what they say online, and then see where it goes from there.
Another Blizzard interview is directly quoted from:
Diablo 2: Resurrected’s single-player alpha starts this Friday | PCGamesN
Lena told us that the door is open for things like balance changes to help keep the game vibrant for a modern community – if, indeed, players indicate that they actually want that to happen.
We also know that Blizzard asked about introducing balance changes in BOTH of their D2R surveys. Of note, the second survey indicated that balance changes may be introduced after launch, suggesting that the duration of the multiplayer beta and release date is not terriibly relevant to whether balance changes are introduced post launch.
1 Like
I know about the surveys, but did they said it OFFICIAL?
If they haven’t, from a legal standpoint a player wanting to refund, because of changes, would have all the right to do so.
These are vague btw.
The truth is they started making a remake from the remaster (which should have been done from the very start) and I think it would be fair to allow for refunds those players that want the authentic experience.
Doing remaster -> remake yields you more profits for sure, but those players that want a true remaster have to be compensated.
Players would have absolutely no legal leg to stand on.
Games changing, sometimes drastically, is a default in the industry. No matter if it is said out loud - which it was in this specific case. And Blizzards track record in games, would also make it clear.
It sold more than 2.5M units in 3 months. Best ABK remaster in terms of units sold.
The quotes above are from the D2R game director Rob Gallerani and others pre-release. I think if the game director says it that means it is pretty official.
They are vague; however, they are clear in that changes were possible so an educated consumer would not have been blindsided.
The problem was the game was never 100% authentic at release even. This was well known and anyone who wanted could have refunded it then.
The whole remaster versus remake argument was done to death pre-release. The fact is there is no uniform definition of remaster relative to the video game industry. The fact is D2R at release was not a true remaster as evidenced by simply things like controller support and support for non-4:3 screen dimensions that have gameplay implications.
1 Like
Then too bad for them for not paying 1 second of attention.
No they don’t. There was more than enough information before release to know what they were buying. It’s not Blizzards fault they bought a pear thinking it would be an apple, especially since Blizzard emphatically said it would be a pear and my turn into an orange later.
Even after reading the quotes it’s vague to me. They never said it loud in order to make more profits. Marketing it as a remaster and doing a remake from it surely brings most profits, but that should be accompanied by clearly stating that anyone wanting a refund can get it.
If they had announced a remake they would have gotten way less profits so refunding those players wanting an authentical experience as close as possible would still yield them more than announcing a remake.
But it was closer to the original. What about those players that have nothing against the changes in v1.0, but don’t like the next patch? A refund would be fair for them.
They are not doing a remake. Even with the changes they are adding now, and possibly in the future, this very much is a remaster. A remaster can have massive changes. Some remasters have received entire expansions.
Should I be able to get a refund of D3 because I dislike what Blizzard has done post-RoS?
Where does it end?
What would be fair (and smart) is two realms, allowing the game to work for both those who want changes and those who don’t.
I agree that this would have been the best solution.
Having been one of the main forum posters informing others what to expect given Blizzard’s own words that I quoted and being proven right with the clarity of hindsight, I have less sympathy in relation to refunds. I do know that manyD2R purchasers do not ever visit the Blizzard forum but these quotes form the D2R leadership were widely accessible on the internet.
It never ends once you do a remaster and transform it into a remake. A player should be able to receive a refund always as long as there isn’t a classic realm.
Say there is a player that voted in surveys the way the game was released. That is not the case in next patches. He deserves a refund. That’s it.
The only excuse for Blizzard would be before the release of the game to be officially announced that a lot of changes are planned post launch. That wasn’t the case here.
Blizzard also didn’t announce a lot of changes would come to D3 post launch. But they sure did.
This would be completely unreasonable, and ruin game developers. It is already bad enough that you can refund games within 2 hours on Steam (as difficult a topic as it is, since refunds are pro-consumer, and thus, by default, good. Refunding a working product after you already used it however, not good).