The Future Of Diablo

General Discussion
102

Not true. People buy a lot of shtty games on steam. If D2 were to be released there today, it would be a HUGE success.

Pretty much every mechanic is flawed, archaic or simply worse than what was done after.

They only archaic thing there is stamina and, to some extent, monster immunities. Everything else is perfect mechanics wise.

Yes, different newer arpgs, including D3, made something new and improved on - but the golden standard is D2 still - and it is perfectly playable.

103

Are you comparing the bronze age to video game development?

It’s not. Vanilla failed, was redesigned and expansions were cancelled.

Strawman? Your position is “20 year old game with limitation inspired an entire genre but not objectively better.” LMAO.

104

Ok, stop nitpicking on words.
You know full-well what I meant, and you chose to play dumb and make a counter-argument against an easy literal reading of my words. This does not contribute to discussion.

If you insist on being difficult - OK. Not “NO ONE would buy it” but “So few people will buy it that it would be a slightly below average game at best - and a financial flop in the eyes of Blizzard’s investors.”

Yeah, right.
Because people today are:
a) very patient
b) don’t need any motivation to keep playing
c) dream of doing Baal runs as end-game content
d) dream of having the game balanced so well that you can beat the highest challenge of the game half-naked and still without much trouble
e) like that the poor balancing means that every build is viable - not because they are all good, but because there is no real difference between good and bad in a game that is tuned so poorly
f) people just ADORE the mechanics that serve zero purpose but to increase player frustration - like inventory tetris, potion belts, etc.

I can go on.
The truth will remain the same - Diablo 2 is littered with poorly designed BS that people were ready to forgive in 2000, but each of which will earn a 1* on metacritic for the game today.

Not even close.
The golden standard is POE, D3, and on a smaller scale - Titan Quest.
On even smaller scale - Wolcen and Grim Dawn and Torchlight.

Each of those games will come up in a conversation of “What is the best ARPG to play” before Diablo 2. Not because D2 is old. But because each of the things that D2 did well - other games did or do better.

The only merit of Diablo 2 today - is nostalgia. That, and also people feel that they belong to an elite club for cool kids, real-game connoiseours - by praising D2.

Yes.

Diablo 2 came out in what was the bronze age of game developement. It was that time when games only just barely were beginning to turn from a niche thing for absolute nerds into an actual mass industry.

Back then, Diablo 2 was HUGE. Because there was very little in terms of what it could be compared with. There were so few actually good games - that every one that came out became a cult hit.
But.
BUT. that doesn’t mean that it is forever above the games that are coming out TODAY, in an over-saturated market. Today, we have 10+ actually good games coming out EACH YEAR, with 1 or 2 of them being real gems. Today, and even 10 years ago - a good game coming out is not a HUGE deal. That’s why D3 would never have an impact of D2, even while being superior.

Not because it’s not successful.
D3 is one of the most Successful games that Blizzard owns.
The expansion was cancelled because making D4 at this point makes more sense and more money than investing more dev time into an 8-year-old D3.

People like you just LOVE the cancelled expansion argument. But it’s a stupid thing to do to link cancellation with lack of D3’s success.
It has sold 40+ million copies, for christ’s sake. It’s a financial, critical and de-facto success.

And as any successful game, it has haters. Like you. Who are ever-present on the forums and validate each-others existence by bashing the game and agreeing with each other.

Yes.
It is objectively not better.
If you take each of design choices or mechanics of D2 and compare them to the same in D3, you are left with that plain fact. D2 mechanics are objectively poorly aged and are not good by modern standards.

1 Like
105

Yeah. D2 was the best A-RPG there has been, within the context of the time it released.
But today. Not really. It is still a fairly good game even today though.

1 Like
106

It seems you haven’t got it. If it were to be released today, it, of course, with its pixelated graphics would be THE KING among ALL pixelated games on the world game market, and would be of phenomenal success in this area, because it is so awesome game - no pixelated game, no matter how well done, could compare with it.

107

This is kinda true.

Not Diablo 2 case, but I read from one of the indie developer said that their game got rated a bit lower because it has too many unfair instant kill platform, thus frustrated a lot of players, so he was not sure whether he should reduce the instant kill platform or not in their game at that time.

108

Did you forget that Activision-Blizzard is a corporation? There’s production costs, employees, CEO salaries, marketing, dividends, taxes, etc.

“But but but COPIEZ SOLD” is not even an argument.

It’s something a nerd says when they lack a basic understanding of business.

Now go tell that to the 8% of employees who suffered layoffs last year.

Itemization is objectively better.

Allocation of stats is objectively better than auto leveling. (Paragon anyone?)

Trading is objectively better.

Player vs player is objectively better.

Ubers are objectively better and their rewards.

Endgame variety is objectively better.

Okay okay auto gold pick up is objectively better. DIII wins that one.

Wow despite the limitations of being 20 years old DII is still considered a good game and is even actively played today?

I guess that is all that needs to be said.

109

Depends on what you are trying to say.
Is D2 a genre-defining game, with significant influence on gaming? Yeah.
Does it mean new games should brainlessly copy it? Probably not. Learn from it? Sure.

No, actually trading is so much worse.
I sure as hell hope Diablo 4 does not try to copy that aspect of Diablo 2.

D3 got the best trading in the genre, as in; nearly no trading.

What? No. Both D2 and D3 are horribly bad here. PoE clearly wins that one.

110

That’s literally the point of this thread. Take what worked: improve and expand while learning from past mistakes. DIII being the mistake here.

Yeah well that’s like your opinion, man. I prefer the best of both worlds.

Some BiS items earned through game play, others freely traded. Economies provide a ton of incentive for loot hunting.

The developers already said it will exist to some degree.

Okay so endgame variety goes: D2>DIII<POE.

Have yet to get into POE. I’ll give it another go eventually.

111

So is that why nothing is done with D2 anymore lost player retention

You mean just like they do with D2

To really clarify you don’t dislike Diablo 2 and can’t stand Diablo 3

So the RMAH choice backfired and they didn’t make a ton of money from that alone
Funny I thought the whole point of a business was to make money and that was a hell of a cash cow

So are you claiming that RoS isn’t an expansion and a redesign, in that case D2 suffered the same fate and failed and got redesigned into LoD

This proves you have no clue about business, All the things you are claiming people are forgetting is factored into how many copies sold, because they have to sell the damn thing to start making their money back and if they think they will make a profit they will go ahead and make the game
It’s not like people buy the game before they have even started making the game and the business makes their money without actually doing anything

ROTFLMAO
I would rather run normal rifts ad nauseum because they are inheriently different as opposed to going to the last waypoint in D2 and say here we go off to kill the same monsters on the same maps to kill the same boss, at the end after 3 Baal runs I’ld be over D2

And yet you want to bring in all the D2 mistakes into the game

1 Like
112
113

D3 itemization is better.

Paragon offers more interesting power for your character than your typical enough str to wear, ignore energy, dump all to vit or dex.

Both game PVP use the same damage reduction rule. Also, Arpg PVP sucks.

Legendary gems from D3 are a better rewards.

D3 endgame is a lot better than farming the same campaign area over and over.

Playing the game to get your own loot is objectively better.

The only mistake here is you trying to bring the flaws of D2 into the next game. At least all the good/positive things about D3 is going to be used in D4.

In other words, your “Future of Diablo” is nothing but “Please make D2 HD please!”.

114

You really need to learn what objectively means because all your objective facts are subjective.

115

Well unfortunately for you facts are not subjective.

Thanks for coming to my Ted Talk.

116

rofl XDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

1 Like
117

I don’t expect an Lv23 paragon player with 2 legendary items and all yellow rare equipped to know any better. :smiley:

118

No way.

Itemization is by far the thing that D2 did better the most than to D3.
There were other things which D2 did better than D3, but itemization is (imo) the best.

Yes, D2’s itemization is not without flaws, like some of the super OP RW’s and some of the uniques that came out in patch 1.10 which made older uniques and RW’s obsolete, itemization having some (severe) balance issues and a few other things.

All of that could have been handled better, but it still is much better than in D3.

  • In D3, when you do not were a specific item, your build is totally non-competitive, while in D2, even if you do not were the best items, you build still can keep up with others (for the most part).

  • Item progression was incremental. In the mid to late game, you e.g. found a good unique, then replaced it with a better unique, then that with a better midgame RW, then that with a better unique and then one of the better lategame RW’s until you finally got some of the high runes for a BiS RW.

  • In D3 item progression is also incremental, but always on the same item, by finding a new one that has the right affixes and higher rolls.

  • In D3 you have the 4/2 Affix system which makes items feel kinda underwhelming.

  • Rare items were useful in D2. In D3 they are basically nothing.

  • Most items in D3 are useless for other classes due to the existence of mainstat. In D2, most attributes were useful for all classes (except Energy)

  • In D3, the Crit Chance + Crit Damage combo is way to prevalent.

  • D3’s legendaries are skill specific, while uniques and RW’s in D2 where more generic, as in ‘benefiting various skills and builds’.

  • probably a few more things that I can’t think of right now

I agree that the D2 attribute system had flaws and should have gotten major improvements in D3, but there is one thing that makes D2’s attribute system better than Paragon in D3:

you only had a limited amount of attribute points and you had to make a chice, while with D3’s Paragon System you have enough points to max out everything.

I don’t think he is suggesting to bring the flaws over to the next game, but rather to improve upon systems that had flaws instead of completely getting rid of them.

E.g. the Attribute System.

  • What if gear no longer had attribute requirements?
  • What if all attributes would be universally useful for all classes? They don’t have to be STR, DEX, VIT and ENG, but things that are useful for all (e.g. Power = increases all damage by 1% per point).
  • …

So rather than replacing the attribute system with mainstat, they could have improved upon it.

He is probably a EU or Asia player and has his main account in another region.

2 Likes
119

Because unlike most of the trash unique from D2, D3 legendary with legendary power > item with raw stat ala rare item.

How is that a problem? D3 legendary is designed to be a powerful and build changer. You don’t really expect that you should clear a harder content with trash or weaker gear, right? Keep up with others is rather subjective here.

Also, single element build is kinda unplayable if you don’t have Infinity in D2.

Isn’t this is the same for D3 as well? You started the game with blue, then you go for rare, and then you use any legendary available for you, and starting to aim for your class legendary item, good if you found Primal or Ancient on the first drop but if you don’t you are going to use normal class legendary item for quite some time, and then slowly replacing it with Ancient with good roll so you can upgrade it with legendary gems in the end.

I don’t want an item with 10 filler stats like (+10 STR, +10 DEX). More stats don’t mean good.

Not an issue because we got Mystic for that. Also, finding the copy of that item for other classes isn’t difficulty either.

Not true because CDR and IAS are important as well. Most of the time you will find yourself sacrificing CC or CHD for CDR or vice versa because finding a perfect jewelry that will roll CDR, CHD, CC and Socket is extremely difficult.

That is what making D3 legendary a legendary. Except for Enigma and Infinity and few powerful unique and RW, I probably don’t remember most of the unique names because they are so bland.

There is nothing wrong with maxing out everything as long as it is useful stat. You guys keep saying there is choice but in reality, there is not. If I don’t put the STR for the item I need to wear, I can’t wear it, thus my character can’t progress further. And after I invested enough STR, I can’t continue to dump it because this will lead to a brick character ala 99 STR for a Frozen Orb Sorc.

He outright saying that D2 endgame is better in his post. How is that an improvement upon system from his part? He just want D4 to be D2 HD.

Worry not. I don’t do accusation. I already checked his profile whether from Taiwan and Korean long ago and he is EU player.

This is his EU profile:
https://eu.diablo3.com/en/profile/Lolli42-2538/hero/121932798

120

So what is the max points for main stat and vitality?

121

It is not just legendaries in D3 being a bit better than rares, legendaries in D3 are being ridiculously and unnecessarily powerful.

Rare and magic items should be powerful and imo also BiS items in certain slots (not in every inventory slot, but in some), at least after they have been upgraded with a cube recipe that adds stuff to them.

I talk about this idea of rares and magic items being BiS in various posts that I left in this thread here, if you wanna check it out - which you don’t have to, it is just for reference.

Rare and magic items being useful was for me and other players one of the more exiting things in D2, since it made these items actually have a use and worth looking for.

For various reasons:

  • there are not several BiS items for each build in D3, which significantly reduced choice and customization options
  • when you do not wear the right one and only legendary for a specific skill, then your char totally sucks, while in D2, even if you did not wear the BiS item, your build was not falling being much.
  • the hunt for the BiS items actually took time and didn’t rain from the sky like legendaries in D3, …
  • …which also ties in the fact that item progression was much more incremental in D2 than in D3.
  • and maybe a few other reasons that I currently don’t think of.

Maybe it should be able to clear the same content, just slower.

It is good that legendaries are powerful, that is cool, but but they should not be so powerful that there is only one right legendary for each main skill - aka Skill X deals 800% increased damage - and these kind of special affixes are also really, really, boring.

I totally agree with that. Monster Immunities were a bad design. High Monster Resistances would have been much better, because you still could deal at least a bit damage against enemies with just 75% [single resistance] than to an enemy that is completely immune to your damage type.

Having High Monster Resistances instead of Monster Immunities also opens up new ways of dealing with them and new gearing and character building options.

Not exactly.

  • in D3 a legendary of the same level is basically by default better than a rare of the same level, because it rolls automatically with higher stats.
  • in D2 magic items were also useful and powerful because although they rolled less affixes than magic items, they could roll with stronger affixes.
  • In D2 a rare item could be better than a unique item of the same level (in specific slots, like boots, gloves, rings, etc) (for some builds) which made rare items at least worth taking a look at.

There is a middle ground (as it is in almost everything).
Too much is not good, but neither is too little.
6 main affixes is fine for rares.

Also, D3’s main stats shouldn’t exist in the first place.
And in D2, what you call “filler stats”, like single resistances, where actually useful.

Sure the combo of crit damage of crit chance is way too prevalent. You basically can’t get enough of these and if it would roll on more slots you probably would take them there as well, while CDR (which also is too prevalent) you get as much as you need at a certain point, so even if you wanted more it will not have much of an effect.

One reason for why CDR is so prevalent is that self buffs like Wrath of the Berserker or Ignore Pain do not start their cooldown first once their effects have expired. This is already a feature on skills like Seven Sided Strike, Smoke Screen or Spirit Walk. If WotB, Ignore pain, Vengeance and other self buffs would have this feature as well, CDR would not be a must have affix, but rather one out of many choices.

LotD is a bit different due to mechanical reasons, but LotD probably should never have been in the game in the first place.

‘generic’ in this context is not equivalent to bland, but rather refers to ‘being useful for various builds and skills’.

You know, if you are a Hammer of the Ancients Barbarian, would you rather have the choice between

A: D3’s current legendaries

  • Bastions Revered (more Frenzy stacks and hits + Frenzy AoE damage)
  • Gavel of Judgement (800% increased damage to Hammer of the Ancients)
  • Fury of the Vanished Peak (500% increased damage to Seismic Slam)
  • Bul-Katho’s Sword Set (massive damage bonus to Whirlwind)

Or B: something like these:

  • https://imgur.com/YOaPXLC
  • https://imgur.com/iCLIWdW
  • https://imgur.com/VdcXh9B
  • https://imgur.com/JrrPyIx
  • https://imgur.com/BTEz3jA

Sure, you may not like that these items have so many sockets (imagine the sockets away if you want, since they are besides the point) and the numbers on them might not be balanced too well and that there maybe be a bit too many affixes on them for your taste, but the point is that with these legendaries you actually have a choice for your HotA Barb and all of them would be viable.

Also, I would say that these legendaries might be lot, but definitely not bland.
Legendaries having a broader use for various builds and skills does not make them bland.

But if you have enough points to max out everything, then there isn’t really a choice.

As I said, the Attribute System should have gotten a major overhaul in D3, instead of being replaced by the mainstat sytem.

Items should have no Attribute Requirements and attributes should have been more universally useful.

This here for example or something similar would have been a much better Attribute System:
https://imgur.com/yzDooUH

I don’t speak for him, but I think that there are things that D2 did better than D3 and that there are also things that D3 did better than D2 and I personally would like to se D4 go in some ways more into a direction D2 (and also improve upone these) and in other ways more into a direction of D3.

I don’t think nvvr also does not want a 100% copy of D2, but just like many other D2 players who were disappointed by D3, he wanted to have a game that improves upon D2 and fixes its flaws instead of a D3 that removed a lot of the things that made D2 great.

You basically have an unlimited supply of points, while in D2 you only had a limited amount of attribute points and therefore the fact that VIT and mainstat being uncapped is irrelevant in this context.