Allan Adham says Better is Better. Diablo 2 anyone?

General Discussion
Allan Adham has said in his interviews BETTER IS BETTER - meaning dont change something that works for the sake of changing it, he is referring to Netease's mobile game framework and how it makes sense for Diablo Immortal.

*I'M using it refer to why Diablo 3 was changed SO dramatically from Diablo 2.*

I feel like they had a winning template in D2...i mean when D3 was announced and there were reveals, ppl just wanted MORE of the D2 experience...but with some new sprinkles and shinies: as in better graphics, continuation of Lore (albeit NOT in the direction D3 went), new Skills (IN THE SKILL TREE); basically Diablo 2 BROUGHT into our current time....but STILL D2.

They should just reuse the D2 template for D3...it WOULD make fans (incl ALL the ones that went to PoE, other games, and countless more) pretty happy with restored faith. Maybe new-school D3 fans can see what all the fuss is about then and unify the Diablo community?

A man can dream :)
So the reason they stripped everything "complex" from D2 was in order to make D3 portable to consoles. PC gamers essentially paid the price in both funding the console version, but also in a dumbed down version of the game they loved.

I remember when D3 first released and I had that "what in the actual... " moment with how basic the game had become. It didn't even register until they announced the release to console... then it all made perfect sense why it was dummied down to so few buttons, so few choices, so few complexities... everything stripped to a bare bones minimum.

I guess it helps to understand the "whys" behind the decisions. This franchise has been heading to phones since dummying down the gameplay to suite console players.

I will continue to throw my support towards complex, meaningful decision based ARPGs though from now on. IF D4 even gets released and it remains this shallow, see through, meaningless, shell of Diablo: I will never buy it. If it doesn't have a meaningful skill tree, and complex skills, rigorous decisions made in both gear and skill tree choices: forget it. Never again.
Agree.

Evolving means taking the good things and making small tweaks to them making them better, removing the bad things replacing them for good ones, and adding new stuff on top of that.

Still guessing where "removing the good things" or "annihilating its identity" fits there.
A Diablo 2 reskin to become Diablo 3 is as stupid as Diablo Immortal.

GoldenEye on n64 was one of the most badass games followed by perfect dark a few years later. Should bungi have continued with the control scheme of these games simply because they were so successful?

No. Games should evolve and each step should build on the previous. The problem with D3 was ultimately that it was missing many of the features it promised, it had no end game complexity, RMAH, etc.

If there is a D4, it needs to have features that other ARPGs just can't compete with, the same way wow killed and continues to kill every other MMO on the market. Reskning D2 won't make that happen.
A lot of people think D3 is a better game than D2.

I haven't played D2 in ages but I did play Grim Dawn for the first time tonight. Comparing Grim Dawn to D3, I think D3 is more polished and user friendly. Grim Dawn seems to focus more on character customization so appeals to more advanced (less mainstream?) players who like that added complexity.

I get the impression the people who don't like D3 often don't like it because it's more simplified, and also thematically it's brighter / more colorful, but for many people that is better.

You can have the same argument about whether the simplifications that went into iPhones vs other phones made the phone a better phone or a worse phone.
11/16/2018 05:24 AMPosted by DMal76
A Diablo 2 reskin to become Diablo 3 is as stupid as Diablo Immortal.

GoldenEye on n64 was one of the most badass games followed by perfect dark a few years later. Should bungi have continued with the control scheme of these games simply because they were so successful?

No. Games should evolve and each step should build on the previous. The problem with D3 was ultimately that it was missing many of the features it promised, it had no end game complexity, RMAH, etc.

If there is a D4, it needs to have features that other ARPGs just can't compete with, the same way wow killed and continues to kill every other MMO on the market. Reskning D2 won't make that happen.

I believe that "Evolving" is a bit too generic word. I'd appreciate developing its definition.

I also made a draft of what evolving means for me, let's give some examples:

For example, I talked about identity annihilation. In my honest opinion, going from a mature serious gothic gore bloody style to a family friendly one I believe that has nothing to do with evolving.

Limiting choices of gear (sets) in a game about getting gear I believe that's shooting yourself in the foot. I mean, they're 2 rules that contradict themselves, it has no sense having both, you have to choose one or the other, either making the game about getting loot or making the game around fixed preset gear. And choosing the second means going back to the "identity annihilation" point.

About the point I mentioned about tweaking good stuff: a lot of people loved runewords. If you remove them, you're removing a good feature. They had a problem of perhaps being more powerful than they should, so being more careful with the numbers is all they had to do. I can't see any evolution in removing something that a lot of people loves.
I don't understand why there are so many D2 vs D3 threads with slightly different themes and why we keep making new ones when there's a ton of older ones to post in.

If you like D3, play D3. If you like D2, play D2. They're two different games, they both have their own servers and seasons and you can still play the full experience of either game. There's no need to continue to compare and make wish list's of something that still exist.

All of these "I wish D3 was more like D2 or what should have been" doesn't make a lot of sense when you can still play the actual product you crave (D2) with no problems. Why wish when you can boot it up and play it now? If it's the masterpiece most here feel it is, then wouldn't we just be playing that instead of speaking about a game you don't like (D3)?

Asking for a friend.
11/16/2018 06:11 AMPosted by DiEoxidE
I don't understand why there are so many D2 vs D3 threads with slightly different themes and why we keep making new ones when there's a ton of older ones to post in.

If you like D3, play D3. If you like D2, play D2. They're two different games, they both have their own servers and seasons and you can still play the full experience of either game. There's no need to continue to compare and make wish list's of something that still exist.

All of these "I wish D3 was more like D2 or what should have been" doesn't make a lot of sense when you can still play D2 with no problems. Why wish when you can boot it up and play it now? If it's the masterpiece most here feel it is, then wouldn't we just be playing that instead of speaking about a game you don't like (D3)?

Asking for a friend.

800x600, no new story, more than a decade without new content, ...
11/16/2018 06:14 AMPosted by Salzwer
800x600


Then why not just ask for wide screen support? Game is already near perfect, just get that juicy screen ratio thing goin.

11/16/2018 06:14 AMPosted by Salzwer
no new story, more than a decade without new content, ...


But it's a masterpiece now, like right now. Do you need more content in order to play a masterpiece that was always good? It's not like D2 got worse over the years. No reason not to play it.

If i remember correctly, there are many games that are considered timeless that will never get updates and are considered masterpieces, especially single player games and people still play them. For how D2 is talked about here, I'd put it in this category, no?

If blizzard decided to shut down D2 servers and it's no longer playable, I'd totally understand because then you're stuck playing a successor you didn't like, but that isn't the case.
The most ironic thing of all is that POE actually also got ported to consoles (PS4 port arrives in December), but it didn't have to sacrifice one BIT of its depth to play, on console. It's still insanely deep, choices still matter, and they matter a lot.

If a company WANTED a deeper Diablo experience that also could be played on consoles, it could be done. It's not impossible. There's a difference between dumbing something down or watering something down, and allowing flexibility between platforms without sacrificing vision of gameplay mechanics/character development. But different people like different things.

I personally enjoyed all 3 Diablo titles, but I can see how some would feel the way they do about D3. But that's a dead horse that's been long since buried.
11/16/2018 06:26 AMPosted by DiEoxidE
11/16/2018 06:14 AMPosted by Salzwer
800x600


Then why not just ask for wide screen support? Game is already near perfect, just get that juicy screen ratio thing goin.

11/16/2018 06:14 AMPosted by Salzwer
no new story, more than a decade without new content, ...


But it's a masterpiece now, like right now. Do you need more content in order to play a masterpiece that was always good? It's not like D2 got worse over the years. No reason not to play it.

If i remember correctly, there are many games that are considered timeless that will never get updates and are considered masterpieces, especially single player games and people still play them. For how D2 is talked about here, I'd put it in this category, no?

If blizzard decided to shut down D2 servers and it's no longer playable, I'd totally understand because then you're stuck playing a successor you didn't like, but that isn't the case.

Really, this is starting to sound like the "do you have phones?".

Yes, we have phones and also have D2 available to play. But I feel like you're telling me how I should enjoy the game.

Things get old, and even people gets bored of masterpieces if they're more than a decade without content. Masterpieces end up by being at shelves or inside a trunk. Where's D2 at Twitch ranks now?

You yourself say that a masterpiece should remain untouched, so that's why we need a new installment instead of modifying a 18 year old game.
11/16/2018 06:38 AMPosted by WarriorPoet
The most ironic thing of all is that POE actually also got ported to consoles (PS4 port arrives in December), but it didn't have to sacrifice one BIT of its depth to play, on console. It's still insanely deep, choices still matter, and they matter a lot.


I just wish it would get ported to Switch. Or that xbox one (normal, not s) supported 4k. /sad

I wish the sales that are happening now on the X would lower the price a bit more than 50$. Need to eventually get one, but I JUST upgraded my tv to a beautiful 4k.
11/16/2018 04:57 AMPosted by Krymm
Allan Adham has said in his interviews BETTER IS BETTER - meaning dont change something that works for the sake of changing it, he is referring to Netease's mobile game framework and how it makes sense for Diablo Immortal.
Isn't this the same guy who claimed D:I was "built from the ground up?" I mean, we all knew it was untrue when he said it because NetEase already told us D:I is using the same engine as their other games, but now to hear Adham admit it... the lies just never end.
Who the f--- is Allan Adham, and why should I give a pair of fetid dingoes kidneys what he says?
I think he just says a lot of manipulative things that fit in the moment, he doesn't actually mean them.

Because if he was honest, actions would match words. But they don't. So pants on fire.
11/16/2018 05:25 AMPosted by Jinx
A lot of people think D3 is a better game than D2.

I haven't played D2 in ages but I did play Grim Dawn for the first time tonight. Comparing Grim Dawn to D3, I think D3 is more polished and user friendly. Grim Dawn seems to focus more on character customization so appeals to more advanced (less mainstream?) players who like that added complexity.

I get the impression the people who don't like D3 often don't like it because it's more simplified, and also thematically it's brighter / more colorful, but for many people that is better.

You can have the same argument about whether the simplifications that went into iPhones vs other phones made the phone a better phone or a worse phone.


The rest of us can tell the difference between a well designed game and a heavily funded game.
11/16/2018 05:10 AMPosted by FadeXF
So the reason they stripped everything "complex" from D2 was in order to make D3 portable to consoles. PC gamers essentially paid the price in both funding the console version, but also in a dumbed down version of the game they loved.

I remember when D3 first released and I had that "what in the actual... " moment with how basic the game had become. It didn't even register until they announced the release to console... then it all made perfect sense why it was dummied down to so few buttons, so few choices, so few complexities... everything stripped to a bare bones minimum.


Funny how PoE with its complexity works on console, sure the trading is not the same and no global chat, but it's complexive tree and various build possibilities are still there, basically just means that Blizzard sux, if an indie company manages to make a transition to the consoles why can't a so called triple A company then? Hard to believe that this is really the reason, but if so, then it really just shows how Blizzard makes little to no investment with Diablo.
Adham's comment doesn't mean that D3 or D4 should be a prettier D2 clone. Here is States Exhibit A to prove that a minority wanted a prettier D2 clone.

What the future Diablo game needs to do is to have a vast improvement over the best of D3 and D2. Having a game that both Diablo North and Diablo Irvine fans can love and enjoy playing together would be a winner. I do believe that it is possible. As long as the game is deep enough to keep the Blizz North fans happy. But still simple to learn and you don't need to have a completely optimized build to beat the hardest content in the game. Then everything will be fine.
This is spot on and exactly what I thought when D3 was released. How could you possibly !@#$ up something, when you had the perfect template to go off of! Dumb %^-* Jay Wilson was trying to reinvent the wheel so he could put his name on it, too bad it wasn’t half the game d2/ d2 lod was...

Edit: “Better is better”

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum