Diablo 2 getting a bad rap

Insanity · Post by **Insanity** » Tue Apr 17, 2001 7:17 pm

I think this game is getting a bad rep on this awesome gaming site. It was kind of bad timing to come out at or near the same time as IceWind Dale. IceWind was a kickass game, but for some reason I never have the itch to go back and play it again after conquering it. I admit the graphics on Diablo 2 don't compare either but when I want to really enjoy playing a game over and over, its obviously not the graphics that I'm so concerned with. Yeah I know the lag isn't a fun thing either, but lately I think it has been a lot better. It also depends on which realm you play in at different times. There are just so many different items and things to do on there with the 3 levels of gameplay. I'm sure I'm going to get a lot of negative responses toward this, but I still think it's a kickass game and an awesome online game. I know it has occupied a lot of my time. I also had a question for the main man of the site, have you heard anything of a game called Demonsbane; which is supposedly from the world of Diablo?

Flagg · Post by **Flagg** » Wed Apr 18, 2001 1:13 am

Personally I feel that Diablo 2 and Icewind Dale are altogether two completely different games. I really don't see the use in comparing different games. I have played through Icewind Dale and the only reason that I can think of when it comes to playing it again is the Heart of Winter expansion.

To be honest, I have not yet played Diablo 2, but I have read a lot about it and I have extensively played the first game. I really don't think that it should be compared to a game such as Icewind Dale. Why not compare it to games such as Nox for example?

A nice comparison for the Icewind Dale game will be the Pool of Radiance game that is to be released in June.

I haven't heard from the game Demon's Bane, but then again I am not the main man of the site.

rapier · Post by **rapier** » Fri Apr 20, 2001 1:53 pm

You can't compare DiabloII and IWD, Diablo is Hack 'n' Shlash, while IWD is more tactical, I enjoyed DII more, because I either want a good, strong story(PS:T, BGII)OR HackNSlash(DII), not some cross(IWD)...

ThorinOakensfield · Post by **ThorinOakensfield** » Fri Apr 20, 2001 2:22 pm

I know somebody is going to get mad, but D2 is absolute crap. The classes are crapy except the necocromance. You fight the same creature nonstop. Animation is horrblbe. The game is a piece of ****.

fable · Post by **fable** » Fri Apr 20, 2001 4:57 pm

Can't say I see any grounds for comparison between D2 and IWD, either. The former is pure action, despite all the marketing money spent trying to get it regarded as an RPG. IWD is an RPG that consists of one battle after another, and it has a strong squad-level strategic component. If nothing else, the facts that you can pause the game and save anywhere, repeatedly, in IWD set it (and the other Infinity engine products) apart from D2.

Personally, I enjoyed D2 for a little while, but ultimately found it too confining: a nice game, just not my kind of thing. IWD is more interesting, though I prefer BG2 and P:T.

Insanity · Post by **Insanity** » Sun Apr 22, 2001 4:19 pm

Well the responses weren't as bad as I had actually expected, though a few felt the way I thought you would. I do understand your point about the 2 games being quite different, but I wasn't really comparing them for that reason. Quite a few of you have played both, so it isn't like they are at the other end of the spectrum from each other. I think I mainly used IceWind Dale as a comparison because of the release times. They both came out at or near the same time. They both did quite well.

However, I did play Diablo II quite extensively, and in my opinion, it's an instant gratification game. You login in, hack n' slash a level or two, gain a couple items, and log out. On the flip side, take games like Baldur's Gate I or II. Sure there is still plenty of hack n' slash, but there is so much interaction in the game that it keeps you immersed in the extensive storyline (at least it did for me, and still does).

There also can be too much storyline and that is why the re-playability isn't there. Sure you get lost in the world of IceWind Dale or Baldur's Gate the first time around, but after that it loses its thrill. It's like, at least in my mind, too much to go back and do all over again. I really think any of these games are about killing a bunch of creatures and gaining access to advancement in the game. It is just in a lot simpler terms in D2, with the ACT format. You still have to accomplish mundane little tasks in Baldur's Gate and IceWind Dale. Thanks for all the comments, I was curious to see how people felt about this game.

[ 04-22-2001: Message edited by: Insanity ]

ki-master · Post by **ki-master** » Fri Jun 01, 2001 6:18 am

Diablo 2 sucks bigtime ,I only like the multiplayer part.Lol this is coming from a clan leader.I really dislike the length and the story.The character devellopment is pretty cool though but after lv 60 it gets a little boring because it takes ages to level up.

Nightmare · Post by **Nightmare** » Fri Jun 01, 2001 7:12 pm

Diablo 2 absolutly sucks. The save-game system, gameplay, and the amount of bugs are the perfect blend of crap.

Tamerlane · Post by **Tamerlane** » Fri Jun 01, 2001 9:24 pm

Having own both D2 and BG2, I must admit that I enjoy BG2 more and therefore would probably enjoy IWD over D2. However the original argument of this topic was wether D2 was getting a bad rep, and it is. Just try posting something similar on a D2 site, and they'll state that they enjoy D2 over IWD.
What I'm trying to say is that this is a site that caters for AD&D fans, so they'll naturally voice their disliking towards D2

BTW-BG2 is the greater game

fable · Post by **fable** » Fri Jun 01, 2001 10:08 pm

What I'm trying to say is that this is a site that caters for AD&D fans, so they'll naturally voice their disliking towards D2

It might be fairer to write that since this site caters to RPG fans, they'll naturally concentrate upon CRPG games. This clears up a few points, for some of us have no interest in AD&D, while others considerably enjoy D2. There's no active dislike of action-based products among most of us; it's just our interest lies elsewhere.

Craig · Post by **Craig** » Sat Jun 02, 2001 1:56 pm

Yes this game rocks...

C Elegans · Post by **C Elegans** » Sat Jun 02, 2001 2:21 pm

I have played BG2, IWD and D2. I wouldn't say BG2 and D2 are comparable in any meaningful way, I think they are totally different games with totally different pro's and con's.

I very much agree with Buck that D2 is an instant gratification game. I also think the simple storyline and extensive hack'n'slash makes D2 a good "relax after work" game. You don't need to play for hours, you can just clear a module in 30 mins and then quit playing. When I play BG2, I never quit after 30 mins.

I enjoyed both D2 and BG2, but in different ways. BG2 for storyline, graphics and strategic combat, D2 for high tempo, simplicity and never having to wait for reloads.

aVENGER2k · Post by **aVENGER2k** » Sat Jun 02, 2001 7:35 pm

Originally posted by C Elegans:
[QB]I have played BG2, IWD and D2. I wouldn't say BG2 and D2 are comparable in any meaningful way, I think they are totally different games with totally different pro's and con's. /QB]

I absolutely agree with you there.One can hardly compare a simple "action adventure" like Diablo 2 to an AD&D cRPG like Baldurs Gate or IWD.Personally,after I got Diablo 2 I've played it for about a month,and then I got awfully bored with it,especially with all the "balance issue fixing patches" Blizzard's well known for.Remember StarCraft?Sometimes I wonder will that game EVER be balanced in the "Blizzardian" minds?.On the other hand,I got my hands on BG2 about 4 months ago and I'm still playing it now and having lots of fun.Sure,they missed a lot of bugs even after the patch,but at least we've got Kevin D. to help us and he's da man

The only thing in D2 that left some impression on me were the great movie sequences between the acts.

ki-master · Post by **ki-master** » Mon Jun 04, 2001 5:32 am

D2 is a bad game but I'm not saying I don't enyoy it.Having a clan and such is really fun and it can't be compared to bg2 because bg2 is an rpg and d2 is an action game with character devellopment.

Duramath · Post by **Duramath** » Mon Jun 18, 2001 9:28 am

As people have already said, DII and BG2 aren't really comparable, so I won't say anything more on that, but as a stand-alone evaluation, I don't think DII is as bad as people make it out to be.

Its fun, its fast, it has great multi-player support. Okay, people always complain about the Realms being laggy, but my friends and I have had some great LAN and OPEN games. Its the most played multi-player game among my group.

As a side note I've tried introducig BG2 to them, but it didn't catch. DII is a simpler, more streamline concept. Sure it can get repetitive, but then again so can playing BG2 over and and over again. At least with DII, the map for each multi-player session is different, an the monster types occasionally change.

And those people complaining about the graphics should be aware that the expansion, Baal: Lord of Destruction will support 800X600 resolution.

Oh, yes, someone mention something previously about there being no good character classes to play...and that the necro was the only viable one. I don't know how experienced a player he or she was, but I've found that just about all character classes have something going for them, and are unique in their strategies and tactics. And the necro can't really be considered the "best" of them...it all depends on the person playing them. (personally i think necros get kicked by amazons, sorcs and barbs...anyway...)

Alot of people who like RPG's have a kind of knee-jerk reaction to DII. They automatically assume that the game is puerile and it lacks skill or intelligence to play. I think there is a tendency for RPG gamers to develop an air of superiority about their genre. I'd suggest that a person should enter DII with an open mind, and weigh the good and bad points about it, before they make too rash a decision.

As a final note, I can point out that how much RPG content a game has, can really depend on the person playing. And, I believe that there is an offical AD&D conversion for DII characters into a pen and paper campaign.

RPGeek · Post by **RPGeek** » Tue Jun 19, 2001 7:33 am

Alot of people who like RPG's have a kind of knee-jerk reaction to DII. They automatically assume that the game is puerile and it lacks skill or intelligence to play. I think there is a tendency for RPG gamers to develop an air of superiority about their genre. I'd suggest that a person should enter DII with an open mind, and weigh the good and bad points about it, before they make too rash a decision. /QUOTE]

That's impossible to accomplish to me, but very well said, anyway.

I just can't help disliking D2, since it lacks skill or intelligence to play, the way I feel. Of course, I have never multiplayed it before, except with some Paladin guy who ran off as soon as I used Teleport. IWD, on the other hand, doesn't have any scary teleport magics.

Sure it can get repetitive, but then again so can playing BG2 over and and over again.
YOU FORGOT A COMMA!

And, I believe that there is an offical AD&D conversion for DII characters into a pen and paper campaign.

There is, though the AD&D Spell Points are exchanged with Mana. And all you do is walk around killing monsters like "The Butcher", "The Hatchetman", "The Slayer", "The Murderer", "The Demon", And finally Andariel, Duriel, Mephisto and Diablo. Period.

The thing I hate is that it's so addictive! I think Blizzard has hidden nicotine in the waypoints!

IWD, on the other hand, provides me hours of fun. I have no idea why, but in my opinion, it even surpasses BG2, probably because BG2 was a bit to "formal" for my taste.

humanflyz · Post by **humanflyz** » Sun Jul 15, 2001 11:47 am

IMO, Diablo is not anything like a RPG. You don't get to customize your characters, there is absolutely no interaction with the game world. The story sucks like s***. It is really repetitive. It is cocaine, you smoke it to get instant satisfaction, but too much makes it bad. The only reason that Diablo is promoted to be a RPG is because Blizzard is trying to appeal to a wider audience. Blizzard is good at making games that appeal to a mass public no matter what the critics or people who hate it say.

Aegis · Post by **Aegis** » Fri Jul 20, 2001 1:51 pm

A feel DII is nothing but DI with updated graphics, and little bit more variety. Nothing new, nothing special. There isn't anything in that game that makes me stand up and shout, "Hey! That's cool!" it's all hack'n'slash'n'hack'slash and so forth. Being a big fan of Blizzards works, and owning them all, except DII, I'm pretty sure that's a good idea as to where the qualty of that game was when compared to the previous ones in their retinue. I feel they could've done a lot better with it, like maybe adding a worthy story. If these people, who managed to put a story in an RTS for heavens sake, could not put a story into something they call an RPG, then thats pretty dissapointing. Well, My two cents.

Duramath · Post by **Duramath** » Wed Jul 25, 2001 8:53 am

This particular forum doesn't get too many posts, but I'm surprised that this topic is still here. I haven't been reading the GamesBanshee forums for awhile, for the simple reason that I've been playing the Diablo II Expansion pack.

Any-ho, I find the point that some people have been making, about DII not having a good storyline, to be hard to accept.

{And this I may point out, is a point in which DII and BGII are comparable, since i agree wholeheartedly that in terms of game play, they are not.)

Sure the *character* may not be as deeply involved in the storyline as those in BGII, and it doesn't contain as much PC intervention and twists, but i found the background and concept to be fascinating. The storyline is fairly epic - old powers, celestial influences...almost Lovecraft-esque with a slight pseudo-christian slant. And the cut-scenes that carried the storyline along were, in my opinion, superior to the short movies that are found in BGII. I found the concept art of Tyreal to be very evocative (ribbon-wings!! Who'd have thought of that!).

Of course the storyline does appear to be vaguely incoherent at times, but not to the extent that some people on the DII forums have been claiming - that it makes not sense at all. It captured my imagination at least.

And on a slightly divergent topic, during my recent break between uni I bought both Throne of Baal, and Bhaal: Lord of Destruction. I'd say that I enjoyed LoD alot more...I found ToB to have some annoying flaws in it that made it much less enjoyable than the original BGII...for example I thought Sendai's voice acting was atrociously bad, and the expansion pack seemed to make my games take absolutely *ages* to load.

(I actually found Sendai to be highly annoying in general, and not particularly fitting...almost as if the designers thought "we know the audience likes drow...lets find a way..any way...to stick some in". And drow wearing forest green elven armour? Never, never happen).

The battles were either too difficult or far, far too easy, without a happy middle ground (take, for example, Melissan, who was ridiculously easy for an avatar). And i found Melissan's betrayal to be annyoingly predictable.

The higher end skills I also found to be disappointing, especially for my Mage, who after lvl...30?...ceased to stop getting any new skills, since he already had all those that were available, unlike my fighters who could always get an additional WW, etc.

I didn't hate ToB by any standard, but it didn't have the same 'grab' for me that BGII had. I think I will...somewhat unfortunately...be playing LoD alot longer than I will be playing ToB.

Hmmm...now I'm rambling

p.s. Some of the dialogue in ToB was also...badly done. The first time i heard one of the chracters scream out "I will steal your Baal essence!!" I almost fell out off my seat laughing. Puerile, but true.