But if you're trying to insinuate that any of those games have the online capabilities and gameplay that Diablo has, then you're making a laughable argument.
Oh, really? Did you ever play any of those "clones"?
Diablo II's PvP is a laughable argument and it has a long way to go until it ever matches Nox's excellent PvP.
Sacred 2's multiplayer is perfectly fine, from what I observed, and you're right, I don't care that much for it because (unlike Diablo II) Sacred 2 has proper SP: it has a shared stash, it has single player muling, etc., so I don't need to go online for the simple sake of muling, thank you very much.
Diablo II's multiplayer is all Baaling and grinding and mfing and a lot of PK somewhere in the middle of that. If you are calling that successful, I'm laughing at you.
Quote from "Lydeck" »
And, this being a Diablo fan site DOES allow him to make such biased claims. That's why people are here. To say extreme love for Diablo and hate on other things, if they so choose. If that's their opinion, who are you to tell them that they're not allowed to express their views, however bias?
Not officially in an article that non-Diablo fans may read, no. You can do it on the forum you can't do it in an article. This is what makes the difference between bad writing and good writing: objectivity and bias, as well as truthfulnes of information, and anyone who understands a thing about games knows they're subjective.
Quote from "Lydeck" »
I'm also curious as to why you wouldn't enjoy Diablo III. Not as a means to attack you, but just to understand what about the game people currently dislike.
Stuff that makes Diablo Diablo. Dungeons, linear world, murky areas,
Quote from "Lydeck" »
And I also don't consider saying that no game of that genre has obtained the gameplay value that Diablo has achieved. That much is true, and is undeniable. And keep in mind, we're not talking about the single player experience. That only goes so far.
I don't see what Diablo achieved. Gameplay value is subjective, I find Sacred 2 funner to play gameplay wise because monsters don't take hours to kill and I don't need to hassle with items. What did it achieve? An x amount of buyers? Sims got more. Don't kid me. Diablo achieved nothing other games didn't. You may go to a non-Diablo fansite someday and find that people have a rather meh attitude to Diablo. Because of people like you who put the game on a pedestal simply because it was one of the most marketed games and it managed to get a bit more players.
Quote from "Lydeck" »
Of course, if you like playing alone, by yourself, without other people and friends - then that's your problem and you're entitled to liking it, I suppose. But you're missing out.
I'm not missing out on anything. I don't see how mf and grinding and running away from PK'ers (does not happen in Sacred 2) is missing out. I heard very few people that play DII that are actually playing the game instead of grinding for items. This is multiplayer for you, regarding of the game, and I do not consider it an achievement. I would consider an achievement making something diffferent about it (Nox).
I don't see what Diablo achieved. Gameplay value is subjective, I find Sacred 2 funner to play gameplay wise because monsters don't take hours to kill and I don't need to hassle with items. What did it achieve? An x amount of buyers? Sims got more. Don't kid me. Diablo achieved nothing other games didn't.
...........!
Your are actually trying to compare two games that were released nearly 10-15 years apart from eachother? (Not sure if you are refering to D1 or D2.)
Yes, I suppose Diablo games are just that good. They stack up against big name games that were recently released! I too, find many games more entertaining than D1 or D2 nowaday's, but I ask you, where were these games ten, or even five years ago? End point. Give these masterpiece's the respect they deserve, please.
For it's time, the Diablo series has achieved more than your average game. There is no denying that.:)
Well, first of all I'm not sure what (Nox) is ... perhaps you could tell me?
And second, what is there to do in Sacred one you've beaten the game? Explore? If so, how is that better than killing monsters and bosses to get levels up and get better items? I don't think it is - and judging by the comparative player bases neither do a lot of people.
And you're really downplaying Diablo's success when you say "it managed to get a bit more players." Sacred 2 and it's other games DON'T have a large fan base at all. Titan Quest has almost no fan base to speak of, and Sacred 2 has a very small one. Does the average gamer even know of these games? Probably not. And most of the ones that do play them are so underwhelmed that it doesn't become something they want to keep playing once they beat it. And both of these games recieved adequate advertisement - to the fact that I saw them in any gaming magazine and any gaming website.
Show me a game of the same genre the retains the same replay value that Diablo has. We're not arguing what our personal likes and dislikes are; we're arguing numbers now. The proof is in the pudding, so to speak. Diablo II probably has more players playing it right now than Sacred 2 and Titan Quest combined. Diablo has it's flaws, but it's the best of the genre when it comes to playing online. Period.
And I'm not really sure what else to expect the game to do onine after you've beaten everything. This game was made, what, over 7 years ago, and you're comparing it to a game that was released late last year? C'mon, that's not fair at all.
And I think our opinions really differ because we play for different reasons. You like to play for the solo campaign and exploration part among other things (at least I'm assuming ... I remember you talking about liking the exploration part of Sacred, and you seem to like solo campaign; correct me if im wrong), while I like playing for the story, action, customization, and being able to play with friends.
As far as the article goes, I thought it was really well written. Aside from the truth (in the opinion's of many) it also sum's up the series very well, short and sweet, and accurate.
I especially I agree with the part in the end. I have not really found any game to date, to be nearly as addicting as any of the Diablo games are, except for the Starcraft/Warcraft RTS series.
It bugs me when people make definitive statements like "This game was the best of the genre, end of discussion." I personally like the Diablo series the most out of the genre (though I thought Titan Quest single player was awesome), though I still would like to point out that it's entirely subjective. Bring in sales and fan base all you want, but it is impossible to definitively call any game "the best."
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Everywhere the human soul stands between a hemisphere of light and another of darkness; on the confines of the two everlasting empires, necessity and free will." -Thomas Carlyle
Well, first of all I'm not sure what (Nox) is ... perhaps you could tell me?
It's a Hack&Slash from 2000. It has action adventure style gameplay from the isometric point of view, and its multiplayer resembles that of an FPS (PvP only).
Quote from "Lydeck" »
And second, what is there to do in Sacred one you've beaten the game?
Same thing there is to do in Diablo. Start a new character, or you can take a break, play some other game, etc. I usually look at a game from its beginning to its end. I ask little of a game after I finish it. Replayability was never a biggie for me, especially in RPG's. And Sacred 2 has no replayability issues.
Quote from "Lydeck" »
If so, how is that better than killing monsters and bosses to get levels up and get better items?
Who told you you can't kill monsters and bosses to get level up and get better items in Sacred 2?
Quote from "Lydeck" »
Sacred 2 and it's other games DON'T have a large fan base at all.
Neither does Nox. Why? Bad marketing. No fame (like DII had from DI and from WarCraft and other Blizzard games). Has absolutely nothing to do with the game itself.
Nox has a low fan base because it's different.
LEXX has a tiny fanbase, too, but it's the most amazing movie ever made.
Your point is moot, especially for me. I like many unpopular things, and their lack of popularity is nothing but an indicator of social numbness to me.
If people don't play Nox because they never knew what Nox is, that has nothing to do with the quality of the actual game rather than how it was marketed, and I could care less how a game was marketed, I play the game, not its marketing, and I do not get a share of the company's money, and I do not care of the company's or game's fanbase.
I hope I am making myself clear.
Quote from "Lydeck" »
Does the average gamer even know of these games? Probably not.
Average gamers have a tendency to miss out on anything besides well marketed, albeit crappy (in my opinion, these would be Hellgate and FEAR and WarCraft III) titles.
Quote from "Lydeck" »
Show me a game of the same genre the retains the same replay value that Diablo has.
Heretic. I replayed that game about 300 times.
Quote from "Lydeck" »
We're not arguing what our personal likes and dislikes are; we're arguing numbers now.
No, I'm sorry, if we assume that games are first of all an art, we can only, and only, argue likes and dislikes.
Quote from "Lydeck" »
The proof is in the pudding, so to speak..
You don't want me to get philosophical.
Quote from "Lydeck" »
Diablo II probably has more players playing it right now than Sacred 2 and Titan Quest combined.
WoW has more players than Diablo II multiplied by 3.
Quote from "Lydeck" »
Diablo has it's flaws, but it's the best of the genre when it comes to playing online. Period.
That's a stupid statement considering that Diablo II's PvP is not comparable to Nox's PvP, therefore neither can be named "best", they're just different.
Quote from "Lydeck" »
This game was made, what, over 7 years ago, and you're comparing it to a game that was released late last year? C'mon, that's not fair at all.
I am actually not comparing anything. I usually avoid such comparisons. I'm opposing the claim that the author of that article made, the claim that Diablo is the best game ever (and I bet he never played a proper Nox PvP battle). That is purely subjective. I'd label Diablo II about average. It's fanbase only proves that. Popular things are always average, they're never the best, because only few can appreciate the best.
Quote from "Lydeck" »
And I think our opinions really differ because we play for different reasons. You like to play for the solo campaign and exploration part among other things (at least I'm assuming ... I remember you talking about liking the exploration part of Sacred, and you seem to like solo campaign; correct me if im wrong), while I like playing for the story, action, customization, and being able to play with friends.
I play whatever the given game gives me. I do not take a game and say "I want this this this". I take a game and say "What do you have to offer?" I think this is why Diablo fans cannot swallow neither Nox nor Sacred. They expect Diablo again, they get something else, and they don't like it. Fan stagnancy.
I bloody loved heretic... I'm gonna go fund my CD!!!
Oops, I missed the "same genre" in his question, Heretic is not same genre. Oh, well.
The most replayable Hack&Slash? I don't know. I often consider them one of the least replayable games, they're repetative enough to begin with. I replayed even Half-Life a lot more often than Diablo II.
The most replayable Hack&Slash? I don't know. I often consider them one of the least replayable games, they're repetative enough to begin with. I replayed even Half-Life a lot more often than Diablo II.
I always thought hack and slash lacked enduring enjoyment. Seemed once you cut through it, it's all the same.
Your whole argument about advertising doesn't mean much to me. Until a friend showed me Diablo 2, I had no idea it even existed. You're overestimating it's advertising back then. In fact, I don't think I've EVER seen a Diablo related advertisement. That's from back when D2 was released up until now.
And you're entitled to think that Diablo is average and those other underground games are better, but most people will disagree with you on that. And no, that does not make them ignorant to the other games out there that are "better".
I have yet to play a game of the hack-n-slash genre that was as fun for me as Diablo 2 was. And yes, I've played Sacred 2, Titan Quest, Hellgate, and pretty much any other face-paced action game that has any sort of notoriety. (Underground games don't count ... they're underground for a reason).
In fact, I don't think I've EVER seen a Diablo related advertisement.
Diablo II was made by Blizzard.
I don't know why you have been but back in Ukraine Diablo was all over the place.
Quote from "Lydeck" »
but most people will disagree with you on that.
So, you're basically saying the majority always has the better opinion?
What's the most popular game, song, and movie out there? OK, it's the best, let's just watch that. /sarcasm
Quote from "Lydeck" »
And no, that does not make them ignorant to the other games out there that are "better".
It doesn't, unless they start pushing their view on others.
Quote from "Lydeck" »
I have yet to play a game of the hack-n-slash genre that was as fun for me as Diablo 2 was.
And how do you know it's an issue of games being bad, not just you not being into those games? I mean, MGS is an awesome game but I'm just not into it, yet I can't call it bad.
Quote from "Lydeck" »
Underground games don't count ... they're underground for a reason.
I don't see anything underground about Nox. It was made in 2000 by Westwood and was a normal game. Got a bit overshadowed by Diablo. The problem came when Westwood died and Nox was picked up by fans - it lives off a fan server with a fan patch and etc. But it's not an underground game by any means, unless you think C&C is an underground game, lol...
Underground would be more like Mount&Blade. Which is a very good game.
After you get tired of the crappy games they release these days, you'll have much more respect for underground. Games are getting more and more mainstream, and someday, they'll be too mainstream even for you.
There has been a few Diablo commercials, I remember seeing them only on sci-fi chan though.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Today a young man on acid realized that all matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration. That we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively. There is no such thing as death, life is only a dream, and we are the imagination of ourselves. Here's Tom with the weather."
And unless you're someone who sits there like a fucking nerd and gets annoyed at SLIGHT proportion differences, then you'll be someone who enjoys it and likes it.
It is of my opinion that your opinion sucks.
Troll.........
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from "KonataX" »
lol it can still easily be a ranger since who said you cant shoot arrows at melee distance xD
Quote from "Archie" »
The Barbarian is from Arreat, a very cold snowy mountain top, but they are much tougher than normal humans, so they don't need warmth.
Quote from "Archie" »
Where are Barbarians originally from? Sumeria, or more specifically Mesopotamia, AKA Europe. Think the Alps and the Pyrenees
That's right. Having an opinion is a beautiful thing when it comes to writing an article and expressing ones views. It'd be a bland Wikipedia article otherwise.
Exactly what I thoght too. Couldn't have said it better myself if I tried.
Your opinion & mine as well! Blizzard kicks ass!
- I can't ever remember seeing a Diablo or Starcraft commercial on TV or anywhere.
Perhaps you could post a link to one. I really wouldn't mind seeing one. Thanks a bunch!
"Today a young man on acid realized that all matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration. That we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively. There is no such thing as death, life is only a dream, and we are the imagination of ourselves. Here's Tom with the weather."
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Diablo II's PvP is a laughable argument and it has a long way to go until it ever matches Nox's excellent PvP.
Sacred 2's multiplayer is perfectly fine, from what I observed, and you're right, I don't care that much for it because (unlike Diablo II) Sacred 2 has proper SP: it has a shared stash, it has single player muling, etc., so I don't need to go online for the simple sake of muling, thank you very much.
Diablo II's multiplayer is all Baaling and grinding and mfing and a lot of PK somewhere in the middle of that. If you are calling that successful, I'm laughing at you.
Not officially in an article that non-Diablo fans may read, no. You can do it on the forum you can't do it in an article. This is what makes the difference between bad writing and good writing: objectivity and bias, as well as truthfulnes of information, and anyone who understands a thing about games knows they're subjective.
Stuff that makes Diablo Diablo. Dungeons, linear world, murky areas,
I don't see what Diablo achieved. Gameplay value is subjective, I find Sacred 2 funner to play gameplay wise because monsters don't take hours to kill and I don't need to hassle with items. What did it achieve? An x amount of buyers? Sims got more. Don't kid me. Diablo achieved nothing other games didn't. You may go to a non-Diablo fansite someday and find that people have a rather meh attitude to Diablo. Because of people like you who put the game on a pedestal simply because it was one of the most marketed games and it managed to get a bit more players.
I'm not missing out on anything. I don't see how mf and grinding and running away from PK'ers (does not happen in Sacred 2) is missing out. I heard very few people that play DII that are actually playing the game instead of grinding for items. This is multiplayer for you, regarding of the game, and I do not consider it an achievement. I would consider an achievement making something diffferent about it (Nox).
...........!
Your are actually trying to compare two games that were released nearly 10-15 years apart from eachother? (Not sure if you are refering to D1 or D2.)
Yes, I suppose Diablo games are just that good. They stack up against big name games that were recently released! I too, find many games more entertaining than D1 or D2 nowaday's, but I ask you, where were these games ten, or even five years ago? End point. Give these masterpiece's the respect they deserve, please.
For it's time, the Diablo series has achieved more than your average game. There is no denying that.:)
And second, what is there to do in Sacred one you've beaten the game? Explore? If so, how is that better than killing monsters and bosses to get levels up and get better items? I don't think it is - and judging by the comparative player bases neither do a lot of people.
And you're really downplaying Diablo's success when you say "it managed to get a bit more players." Sacred 2 and it's other games DON'T have a large fan base at all. Titan Quest has almost no fan base to speak of, and Sacred 2 has a very small one. Does the average gamer even know of these games? Probably not. And most of the ones that do play them are so underwhelmed that it doesn't become something they want to keep playing once they beat it. And both of these games recieved adequate advertisement - to the fact that I saw them in any gaming magazine and any gaming website.
Show me a game of the same genre the retains the same replay value that Diablo has. We're not arguing what our personal likes and dislikes are; we're arguing numbers now. The proof is in the pudding, so to speak. Diablo II probably has more players playing it right now than Sacred 2 and Titan Quest combined. Diablo has it's flaws, but it's the best of the genre when it comes to playing online. Period.
And I'm not really sure what else to expect the game to do onine after you've beaten everything. This game was made, what, over 7 years ago, and you're comparing it to a game that was released late last year? C'mon, that's not fair at all.
And I think our opinions really differ because we play for different reasons. You like to play for the solo campaign and exploration part among other things (at least I'm assuming ... I remember you talking about liking the exploration part of Sacred, and you seem to like solo campaign; correct me if im wrong), while I like playing for the story, action, customization, and being able to play with friends.
CyberPunk RP Nexus
I especially I agree with the part in the end. I have not really found any game to date, to be nearly as addicting as any of the Diablo games are, except for the Starcraft/Warcraft RTS series.
It really is "The Great" wait.
"Everywhere the human soul stands between a hemisphere of light and another of darkness; on the confines of the two everlasting empires, necessity and free will."
-Thomas Carlyle
Same thing there is to do in Diablo. Start a new character, or you can take a break, play some other game, etc. I usually look at a game from its beginning to its end. I ask little of a game after I finish it. Replayability was never a biggie for me, especially in RPG's. And Sacred 2 has no replayability issues.
Who told you you can't kill monsters and bosses to get level up and get better items in Sacred 2?
Neither does Nox. Why? Bad marketing. No fame (like DII had from DI and from WarCraft and other Blizzard games). Has absolutely nothing to do with the game itself.
Nox has a low fan base because it's different.
LEXX has a tiny fanbase, too, but it's the most amazing movie ever made.
Your point is moot, especially for me. I like many unpopular things, and their lack of popularity is nothing but an indicator of social numbness to me.
If people don't play Nox because they never knew what Nox is, that has nothing to do with the quality of the actual game rather than how it was marketed, and I could care less how a game was marketed, I play the game, not its marketing, and I do not get a share of the company's money, and I do not care of the company's or game's fanbase.
I hope I am making myself clear.
Average gamers have a tendency to miss out on anything besides well marketed, albeit crappy (in my opinion, these would be Hellgate and FEAR and WarCraft III) titles.
Heretic. I replayed that game about 300 times.
No, I'm sorry, if we assume that games are first of all an art, we can only, and only, argue likes and dislikes.
You don't want me to get philosophical.
WoW has more players than Diablo II multiplied by 3.
That's a stupid statement considering that Diablo II's PvP is not comparable to Nox's PvP, therefore neither can be named "best", they're just different.
I am actually not comparing anything. I usually avoid such comparisons. I'm opposing the claim that the author of that article made, the claim that Diablo is the best game ever (and I bet he never played a proper Nox PvP battle). That is purely subjective. I'd label Diablo II about average. It's fanbase only proves that. Popular things are always average, they're never the best, because only few can appreciate the best.
I play whatever the given game gives me. I do not take a game and say "I want this this this". I take a game and say "What do you have to offer?" I think this is why Diablo fans cannot swallow neither Nox nor Sacred. They expect Diablo again, they get something else, and they don't like it. Fan stagnancy.
The most replayable Hack&Slash? I don't know. I often consider them one of the least replayable games, they're repetative enough to begin with. I replayed even Half-Life a lot more often than Diablo II.
And you're entitled to think that Diablo is average and those other underground games are better, but most people will disagree with you on that. And no, that does not make them ignorant to the other games out there that are "better".
I have yet to play a game of the hack-n-slash genre that was as fun for me as Diablo 2 was. And yes, I've played Sacred 2, Titan Quest, Hellgate, and pretty much any other face-paced action game that has any sort of notoriety. (Underground games don't count ... they're underground for a reason).
CyberPunk RP Nexus
I don't know why you have been but back in Ukraine Diablo was all over the place.
So, you're basically saying the majority always has the better opinion?
What's the most popular game, song, and movie out there? OK, it's the best, let's just watch that. /sarcasm
It doesn't, unless they start pushing their view on others.
And how do you know it's an issue of games being bad, not just you not being into those games? I mean, MGS is an awesome game but I'm just not into it, yet I can't call it bad.
I don't see anything underground about Nox. It was made in 2000 by Westwood and was a normal game. Got a bit overshadowed by Diablo. The problem came when Westwood died and Nox was picked up by fans - it lives off a fan server with a fan patch and etc. But it's not an underground game by any means, unless you think C&C is an underground game, lol...
Underground would be more like Mount&Blade. Which is a very good game.
After you get tired of the crappy games they release these days, you'll have much more respect for underground. Games are getting more and more mainstream, and someday, they'll be too mainstream even for you.
Agree to disagree.
CyberPunk RP Nexus
Exactly what I thoght too. Couldn't have said it better myself if I tried.
Your opinion & mine as well! Blizzard kicks ass!
- I can't ever remember seeing a Diablo or Starcraft commercial on TV or anywhere.
Perhaps you could post a link to one. I really wouldn't mind seeing one. Thanks a bunch!