Diablo® III

The Argument.. and why it doesn't fly

Posts: 2,652
It's amazing that players still can't get over the fact that this is a new game.

It's not a continuation of D2/LOD, and therefore should be looked upon as a different game.

If you don't like it, move on. Don't expect Blizzard to change this game around and go back in history to make it a D2 clone.

Personnally, I still play D2/LOD now and then - I have two different mods of that game installed - but overall, I like D3 very much and don't wish for any D2/LOD stuff to be imported into this game.

As long as Blizzard keeps putting out patches, this game will get even better over time.


This would be a good argument if t wasn't called Diablo 3. D2 took the core elements of D1 and built upon them to move the series forward. LoD took the groundwork of D2 and continued to build upon it to advance the game.

D3 on the other hand completely scrapped everything done before it and proceeded to essentially re-invent the wheel. The truly ironic part is that essentially all the improvements made to D3 have consisted of re-incorporating elements of D2 (paragon levels such that the entirety of endgame isn't an item grind being a big one).

Don't want the game to build on the diablo series? That's fine, but they should've started fresh and not milk the franchise name for more money.
Reply Quote


Don't want the game to build on the diablo series? That's fine, but they should've started fresh and not milk the franchise name for more money.


You can not be serious on that one, really.

Telling a company not to make extra money? Not to milk its own franchise?

good joke, but will not happen in real world
Reply Quote
Posts: 2,652


Don't want the game to build on the diablo series? That's fine, but they should've started fresh and not milk the franchise name for more money.


You can not be serious on that one, really.

Telling a company not to make extra money? Not to milk its own franchise?

good joke, but will not happen in real world


No, I'm not arguing that a corporation shouldn't try to maximize its earnings :P

My argument is that it was a foolish move on blizzard's part to try to reinvent the wheel for a direct sequel, especially when the formula for success was already set before them. I think blizzard realized they made some mistakes too as they've been steadily making the game more and more like its predecessor.

To be fair, I do have to give them credit for working to improve the game and not stubbornly sticking to their initial ideas.

That being said, if blizzard wanted to try something new, they really should've tried creating a new series as in the long run, a new hit series would be a much greater money maker than just milking a franchise by making a sequel in name only.
Reply Quote
the thing is they just "try" to make it closer to previous games. For making it really as succesfull like the old games they have to actually comletely change the item and skill system which is so shallow in D3 ... its not even funny anymore. And the skill system in D2 was already rather simple ... but together with the item system it still had some depth. D3 on the other hand ... way to shallow and random.
Edited by CrniVuk#2227 on 12/7/2012 8:22 AM PST
Reply Quote
@ Revanwood

They can make still diablo 4+expansions , diablo 5+expansions, etc hahahahahaahahhaaha

but hey, they already did WoW ;) no sequel but 100 expansions ^^

I personally preffer diablo 2 LoD to currect diablo 3 for lots of aspects that could have been "imported" to d3 but I still think d3 can become a really good game.
Reply Quote
D2 released was a great game
LoD made it amazing

D3 released is a turd
Xpac needed to make it playable
Reply Quote
The issue with using a previous game as a template is then you end up like CoD, where all the games are basically the same.

There is no problem with creating new systems. Sometimes people like them, sometimes they don't. Unfortunately for Blizzard this time around, it's the latter. Though they could have done much better, even if they didn't use D2 as a template.
Reply Quote
It's amazing that players still can't get over the fact that this is a new game.

It's not a continuation of D2/LOD, and therefore should be looked upon as a different game.

If you don't like it, move on. Don't expect Blizzard to change this game around and go back in history to make it a D2 clone.

Personnally, I still play D2/LOD now and then - I have two different mods of that game installed - but overall, I like D3 very much and don't wish for any D2/LOD stuff to be imported into this game.

As long as Blizzard keeps putting out patches, this game will get even better over time.


Clone? I think you did not read some of the threads written all over on this forum. No one expect a clone but no one want something that has no relation with the previous installment too.

Removing the hallmarks and replacing with nothing or something worse? That is certainly not putting them in a loving spot.

Are you silly enough to believe that there will not be any reactions from returning customers to a product changed so much?

Even a attempt to discontinue the hallmarks of something, you cannot parted the game apart from it's past. Even you could, you still have to replace it with something better for people to buy and respect that decision.

Did the current team success. Judging from sea of the " Trolls " I guess not.

If so, how can this game be called Diablo? If it bears no link to it's past?

Give them time? Was years before not good enough? With so much past materials available to them. They should certainly do better.

It is ok not to copy any past material for a new direction for a project, however it is not forgiving not to foresee problems and troubles that have and had occurred to the previous series.

Why go back to square one?

Is the developers new to the genre, i personally believe there is a number of them who are not new to this genre. However the refusal to look what had been done before and not take any as a reference of any kind, is utter silly.

If one day Bentley decided to do a Audi engine and car body. Would people who loved Bentley still buy from Bentley?

Originality and loyalty far out win everything in business. Especially something as personal as a game.

You do not do a " like it or go away " in business. Especially to the core buyers. Buyers buy due to past experiences with the products and the reviews they get from others, especially their friends and close one. If not for the existence of Diablo II, no one would be buying Diablo III .

Please, i think you are a very logical person.

The cast was perfected, it reached a new height. Everyone look forward and in turn got a simple plastic toy that bear no similar image to the previous cast. Once again, you think there will not be any reactions?

If one day Starcraft start turning into Diablo III or a MMO. There will be no one playing it.

No one.

Different genre? Yes, so was Diablo, a series that is a pure hack and slash game which now got mutated into something forcefully placed upon.

Is it a MMO? No, not even close to the level of World of WarCraft. When it is at that level. It is a MMO.

If this game came out as World of Diablo, would anyone complain that it does not feel like Diablo I and II?

If World of Warcraft turn into a bloody hack and slash game. Would you still play it?

This game, is very flawed. Even for a game which is totally different from the past Diablo's series.

Selling a product this unfinished, even it already has previous installments, shows how terrible their management was with this project.

You seriously think people spent their time all over the internet, - from game reviews website to personal blogs and forum - writing negative critics because they are jealous of Blizzard?

So many threads which contained so much valid points get trolled to the ground just because of reactions and replies like " you obviously like something a game 12 years ago", " go play diablo II" , or something as stupid as saying " Diablo III is better than Diablo I and II. "

It is indeed very amazing that some human still do not get it, that if you removed a product too far from it's origin.

It become something else.

Since it is something else. Why is the game called Diablo III? Why promoted it as Diablo? Why the continuation with the barbarian from Diablo II. Why is there Deckard Cain and Tristam?

In terms of hallmarks, they are all the story hallmarks of Diablo I and II. They should remove the orbs designs for health and mana as well since it was a very classic design from Diablo I and II.

They should sever everything all together. Since in your own words. "It is not a continuation of Diablo II and Lord of Destruction. "

Some of us went to buy Diablo. Not Diablo III.
Edited by Dutchmilk#6229 on 12/7/2012 9:09 AM PST
Reply Quote
tldr

I still don't see how it doesn't fly. Diablo 2 came out 10+years before Diablo 3. Diablo 2 and Diablo 3 are made by the same company. Diablo 3 is the sequel to Diablo 2. Diablo 3 should use !@#$ from Diablo 2 as a template and be better than Diablo 2.

It's not a competition from the developers to see who can do what from scratch. Us players don't give a !@#$ who is a better developer. We only care about how fun the game is.


I'm actually in agreement with you! Meaning the people who keep bringing up the argument that D2 took years to get where it was, so why should we expect D3 to be any different.

As you said Stelity, the D3 team should have used D2 as a template. D2 left off with all those goodies in the game. There was no reason why this dev team didn't add all these things back in, then just add their own goodies after.

In essence, all they did was go back 12 years ago, re-create D2 again (with better graphics), with the exception that they removed PvP and most of the loot.

I think some people are confused on what I was arguing about. What I'm saying is, D3 should have used D2 as a template and implemented all these core goodies within the game, somehow some way. The fact they didn't use the stuff from D2 when it was all sitting in front of them is beyond me
Edited by Deadlysynz#1583 on 12/7/2012 12:28 PM PST
Reply Quote
Say I owned a convenience store, and there were 4 items that continue to sell out (hot dogs, twinkies, slurpees, and bubble gum); I then decided to rip down my store and make a more modern version of it.

Would it not make sense to re-add the hottest selling items first, then add in whatever goodies you think would be hot sellers after? Not leaving your store half empty and slowly adding things over a years time that people don't even want. Seems to me that would be a perfect way to drive people away.
Reply Quote
So then you have to ask yourself this: Upon making D3, why did they remove the majority of the items, the runes, charms, jewels, rune words, horadric cube, an act, a class, the randomness, the PvP, the ladder, the social system, skill diversity, build diversity, the offline mode, chat rooms, 8 player max.

So it can be added later in an expansion, forcing people to give Blizzard more money if they want a good game.
Reply Quote
Posts: 1,474
View profile
12/07/2012 06:04 AMPosted by KainDraven
With that said D3 should be everything learned over the years of D2:Lod and expanded on. Not a clean slate, realizing it was a bad decision, and then patches making it more like D2:Lod day to day.


Those who do not learn from history....
Reply Quote
Let's flip the argument around and ask this question instead: Why did the D3 dev team literally go back 12 years and in essence, re-create D2 like it was released on day 1, with the exception of them removing PvP and the majority of the loot


People say that because this is D3 not D2, a lot people say D3 should be better then D2 with all the same features but new stuff too, and that makes sense but isn't necessarily true. And if it was a re-glorified D2 I feel D2-2 would be a more appropriate title, not D3 in my opinion.

D3 uses new resources, and leveling/skill development (regardless of whether you think its good or bad; i'm personally not a fan of the skill system) and many more differences, so it will have flaws that will need to be rectified, and too compare it to a different game, when "this not even a diablo game" as some might say; is kind of foolish.

When both the games launched, they both had their own personal issues and some similar, but because some of the issues are similar doesn't mean the prior game should be the bench mark for the latter when its a new game entirely.

They share the same Title "Diablo" and the same concept in terms of hack and slash action RPG elements but they are different games; just like D2 was different then D1. That's why I think it is valid too use as a rebuttal in terms of defense as too why it is okay for D3 to have its flaws, that will be fixed. If they don't get fixed that's a whole other story.
Edited by TastySouP#1157 on 12/7/2012 1:17 PM PST
Reply Quote
Think about it this way...was there anything diablo 1 did better than diablo 2? Just one thing? Even plain D2 right after it was released, was there one aspect where people would have said "man, I wish they had kept x from diablo 1".

The answer is a big resounding no, diablo 2 was better than diablo 1 in every way possible, as soon as it was released.

Now ask yourself this, is there anything diablo 2 did better than diablo 3?

I think the answer to that should be an obvious yes, countless things were better in diablo 2.

D3 is better in certain ways, and has a certain amount of promise, but it seems to me this game was released in an early beta form. They made so many huge changes right before they released the game and right after they released it...evidence they just rushed the release to make a quick buck.

Does anyone remember when D2 came out? They delayed the release of that game so many times it started to become a joke...but the end result was a really solid gameplay experience. I would have much rather they delayed the release of D3 a year or so, to where the game was complete and tested, instead of selling everyone a 60 dollar beta test.
Reply Quote
Why do all of you fanboys always fall back on D2 being a mess at release? That's completely irrelevant.

You don't release games in an unfinished state just because previous games have been. That's bizarre logic. lol

-OTIS



+1 This
Reply Quote
Part of the issue is that D3 was designed from the ground up to be its own game for both good and bad. I believe I read somewhere that 2 expansions were being planned for D3 so that's alone 2 more acts of content and story. There is the Mystic that Blizzard didn't like the design of so she was canned till i'd guess one of the expansions. There is the Nephalem Cube that was canned but is still in the game files that could be brought back as well as a rumored Nephalem cave dungeon in act 1 from before beta. We can also safely assume that there will be 1-2 classes added each expansion pack for a total of 7-9 playable classes. There were also initially pets that were being designed for D3 but were canned as well because they didn't seem to really "fit" with the gameplay.

One great thing though about D3 is that it is flexible and most of the complaints with the game can be addressed via content patches and/or an expansion. The actual combat, class design, etc are fairly solid. Perfect? no but there is always room for improvement.

A great similarity to the D3 design approach is SC2.....it was released with only the Terran Campaign and could be considered "incomplete" and lacking content. We know 2 expansions are being planned for SC2, 1 with the Zerg Campaign and 1 with the Protoss Campaign. Does this make SC2 a bad game? or does it make it an incomplete game?

In the same way as SC2 has been improving over the various patches (including the new Arcane Battle.Net UI) I see Diablo 3 continuing to improve and evolve over time. Now the first few patches were pretty much crap to be honest.... 1.0.1 was basically nothing, 1.0.2 made MINOR changes at best and 1.0.3 actually made the game worse. Finally though with 1.0.4 and 1.0.5 Blizzard stepped up their game and actually worked on improving D3. I am hopeful that 1.0.7 will add some more fun and interesting features and that the 1.1 PvP patch will be worth the wait.
Reply Quote
Posts: 2,744
12/07/2012 06:16 AMPosted by Zymurgeist
It's an unnecessary argument if you like D3. D3 is a better game than D2 was in any form.


Incorrect. Diablo 2 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> D3.

D3 <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< than every other game i have ever played.

Thanks , come again.
Reply Quote
Posts: 980
12/07/2012 06:16 AMPosted by Zymurgeist
It's an unnecessary argument if you like D3. D3 is a better game than D2 was in any form. Your basic assumption is based on the opinions of only the people who agree with you.


Very Laughable sir.. D3 needs alot more work before it even touches D2... If you enjoy a half-!@# game more power to you. The only enjoyable part of the game was leveling to 60. I do have some faith in the Dev team. So i'll wait for a decent patch or the expansion to give this game another shot. And i'll be sure to test the expansion before buying it of course. No need to waste anymore money on a zzzzzzzzzz game.
Reply Quote

Please report any Code of Conduct violations, including:

Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.

Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.

Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.

Forums Code of Conduct

Report Post # written by

Reason
Explain (256 characters max)
Submit Cancel

Reported!

[Close]