I was always under the impression that the City of the Damned was more like an outpost rather than an actual city. The few buildings that are present are quite large and look (to me, anyway) as if they were smaller fortresses that laid outside the main one (Pandemonium). The rest of the area is pretty much vacant, leading me to believe that it was just open fields or something similar.
I have a bit more to add (I think), but I'm having some trouble trying to form my thoughts in a way that makes sense.
Oh and yeah, I too felt really dissapointed to see that church missing in D2's Tristram. D2's version of this town doesn't look any close to that of Diablo. The church is gone, the river between that rocky pass where that peg-legged boy, Wirt was is gone. All that remains is the center of the town, which is also far smaller than that of D1. Was that added to the game in a hurry? Probably on the 11th hour?
I'm probably just repeating what everyone else has said, but I felt the exact same way when I played the game the first time. At first, I was so excited to go back and revisit Tristram because I loved that little town, especially the cathedral.
Imagine my disappointment when I found that only the center of town was added. The buildings weren't really even placed right (with the exception of the tavern and blacksmith), and the bridges to Adria and Wirt were completely gone. What disappointed me the most, though, was the cathedral; it was extremely small (even though it had burned down) and there was so sign that the cemetery had even existed. The only real perk was being able to pick on Wirt's corpse (that swindling jerk of a kid), and run around pretending that the other corpses were people from the first game (poor Ogden never left his doorstep ).
If and when Diablo III is released, I hope they go back to more of what the first game had to offer, especially in terms of architecture. Diablo II's monastery had a little bit of what I was looking for with building design, but it wasn't quite as foreboding and confined as the original Diablo was.
I have a bit more to add (I think), but I'm having some trouble trying to form my thoughts in a way that makes sense.
I'm probably just repeating what everyone else has said, but I felt the exact same way when I played the game the first time. At first, I was so excited to go back and revisit Tristram because I loved that little town, especially the cathedral.
Imagine my disappointment when I found that only the center of town was added. The buildings weren't really even placed right (with the exception of the tavern and blacksmith), and the bridges to Adria and Wirt were completely gone. What disappointed me the most, though, was the cathedral; it was extremely small (even though it had burned down) and there was so sign that the cemetery had even existed. The only real perk was being able to pick on Wirt's corpse (that swindling jerk of a kid), and run around pretending that the other corpses were people from the first game (poor Ogden never left his doorstep
If and when Diablo III is released, I hope they go back to more of what the first game had to offer, especially in terms of architecture. Diablo II's monastery had a little bit of what I was looking for with building design, but it wasn't quite as foreboding and confined as the original Diablo was.