What is the true Diablo 2 Successor: Diablo 3 or Torchlight 2?

[Deleted]

Neither does Starcraft.

Starcraft 2 does require a monthly fee in South Korea though, I guess that's because they knew they could get away with it there since it's so popular over there.

EDIT: Sorry, on-topic: I'm more on the Torchlight 2 wagon, Diablo 3 seems to lack the "feeling" for me personally.

[Verdugo]

TL2 is going to rock. Too bad there will be so many shining armoured individuals accepting whatever trash Activision spits out.

And then we have fans of Indie development, who buy any trash just because it wasnt made by big company.


Hipster...

[backabacka]

Torchlight 2 will be good, but not as good as Diablo 3. Its been a long time since Diablo 2 and I think we've forgotten what a new age Diablo willl have to offer.

[Dalorian]

have you actually read up on the ah? its not pay to win and ppl who keep saying it obviously dont even understand what pay to win means. im honestly tired of always hearing this term, pay to win implies some great advantage you pay for that f2p people cant access. the diablo 3 auction on the other hand gives you the option to sell the items YOU FIND in the game, that ANYONE can find. seriously people stop this free to win bull shit.

but back to the topic at hand, i personally didnt like torchlight. sure it was like diablo 2 but it was TOO similar. i mean i love d2 and all but the no respec (which they added later into d2) is a pain. ask anyone who screwed up a few points here or there and had to start from scratch again >~>

I call BS - it's just a way to drag people who would otherwise never pay a Pay 2 Win-game into the business, they just want to make P2W acceptable with D3, once it has become acceptable there'll be no end to it. I for one won't buy D3, I don't feel like throwing money at a corporation like Activision that is renowned for screwing over its customers.

Well, the consumers have one weapon to use, it's called pirating - certain people use that, if you catch my drift..

[probert]

Activision's account management, won't it be using battle.net?

My presumption is that Activision is using Battle.net to introduce account management and cash services for virtual goods, in the same way EA is using the once-great Origin name for street cred to introduce their account management and cash services for SW:TOR. I'm fairly cynical about these things though...

---------- Post added 2011-08-10 at 12:59 PM ----------

Diablo 3 sales will crush torchlight 1 and 2 combined. Anything blizzard touches, turns to pure gold with a platinum core. So, say what ever you want about it, money talks.

Torchlight 1 was allot of fun, but full of terrible flaws. No multiplayer in a game like that makes you wonder what the HELL the devs were thinking. Torchlight could have been a 5 out of 5 stars, but with no multiplay, it was a mere 2 out of 5.

My take is that Torchlight was basically an extended demo, indie game proof of concept that did extremely well. Its like the original diablo -- stand alone game, fairly straight forward gameplay. Given the experience of Hellgate: London, running out of money is very bad...Torchlight generated the $ and venture capital they needed to make a true Torchlight 2.

They also get tons of feedback for Torchlight 2 -- iterative, incremental improvement is a much better way to launch a good game IMHO. So while Diablo 3 is basically starting-from scratch (its been 10 years), Torchlight is already on version 2.0.

Diablo 3 will still sell in the millions: Blizzards name plus cross-marketing to WoW and SC audiences guarantee that. But whether the better gaming experience, with longer legs, is Torchlight 2 vs Diablo 3... I'm betting on Torchlight 2.

[unholytestament]

Starcraft 2 does require a monthly fee in South Korea though,

In cyber cafes.

[Deleted]

What you fail to realise is that the Blizzard North dream team is no more, most of the individuals scattered between other developers or started their on company.

Also this might just be me but this just seems like hipster talk.

The 'spiritual' successor for Diablo is not Diablo 3, but is Torchlight -- the design ethos, the music, the gameplay, the multiplayer approach,

Also made me laugh.

[wolfpaq777]

Are you kidding me? How is this even a discussion? Torchlight as amusing as it was, is a cartoon. The item system was terrible, the skill trees extremely bland, and the combat subpar, storyline non existent.

Diablo 3 is the obvious answer. Lack of LAN play, RMAH, always online, all these "controversial" decisions that Blizzard is making for D3 has nothing to do with gameplay. Going from a pure user experience perspective, Diablo 3 is the obvious choice.

[conqq]

Are you kidding me? How is this even a discussion? Torchlight as amusing as it was, is a cartoon. The item system was terrible, the skill trees extremely bland, and the combat subpar, storyline non existent.

Diablo 3 is the obvious answer. Lack of LAN play, RMAH, always online, all these "controversial" decisions that Blizzard is making for D3 has nothing to do with gameplay. Going from a pure user experience perspective, Diablo 3 is the obvious choice.

Oh how wrong you are.

[Surrender]

its diablo 3, i heard torchlight sucked

[conqq]

its diablo 3, i heard torchlight sucked

It's Torchlight 2, I heard Diablo 3 sucked

[Deleted]

The true successor would have been torchlight people's working back at blizzard, along with their writers, the huge resources, the right to use diablo's material etc. Right now the guys at torchlight have to fight a losing battle, since blizz can simple throw more money and make a better product. In the end though, the true losers are we, the customers, who end up with two "good" games instead of one excellent.

I agree that both games could be better if the right people worked on just Diablo 3. However I do believe that Diablo 3 is going to be the real successor because of the huge amounts of cash blizzard have and because of the diablo story, Torchlight 2 team however have the most important people that worked on diablo 1 and 2.

Max Schaefer, Erich Shaefer and David Brevik all working for Runic Games/Flagship Studios (mother company of runic games) they were the 3 most important game developers on the blizzard north team.

In the end we can all blame Vivendi for shutting down Blizzard North because of "poor game quality".

[Wildmoon]

People who think it's only Blizzard North(Condor) who made D1 and D2 are very wrong. It's Blizzard as whole who made Diablo a success. Did you know that Condor made diablo a turn-based ARPG at first? but Blizzard insisted that decision. Blizzard wanted them to make diablo a real time arpg. At first Condor was against Blizzard's decision because that mean they had to throw all the work they had done away but in the end they had to remake it and it turned out to be a huge success. We all have seen what Blizzard North did when they are on their own ( Hellgate,Torchlight ). People can argue that Torchlight is not good because it was made in 11 months but Warcraft 2 was made in 10 months. Is there anyone here who can call WC2 a bad game? I am not trying to say that Blizzard North is a bad developer. In fact they are great developer but it's not only them who made Diablo. Diablo is great game because everyone at "Blizzard" was working together as Mike Morhaime said that Blizzard'd joined working with Condor a lot too.
If you want more detail I recommend you to watch this. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cdBtk...feature=relmfu

[Edge-]

People can argue that Torchlight is not good because it was made in 11 months but Warcraft 2 was made in 10 months.

Except that it was good. It did VERY well amongst video game critics on major websites as well as with fans on sites like Metacritic.

[moaradin]

I didnt like anything said about diablo 3 so far. Torchlight 2 seems more promising to me

[Fojos]

Except that it was good. It did VERY well amongst video game critics on major websites as well as with fans on sites like Metacritic.

Critics have always given high scores (far higher than they deserve, at least) to indie-games. It's like they go easier on all points just because it's not a game made by a big company.

[hakujinbakasama]

Not sure anyone will care but here is my 2cents on this.

I don't think either of them actually fill in the right role. Honestly, best choice would have been Sacred years ago.

If Torchlight is any indication of Torchlight 2 then the game will have nearly zero quality in comparison to D3. I enjoyed TL1. It was fun and cheeky and a good way to kill time at work. However, the list of problems with the game was beyond measure. No respec ability, no multiplayer, pointless gear system, bland talent and spell abilities, no real endgame/boss feel, limited map feel, clunky control layout, and very repetitive music. Despite all of that, I did enjoy the game. But I enjoyed the game because when I got it it was on sale for $10 on steam. And for $10 it was a good time. But in the scope of things, TL1 fell very very short of D2 in my opinion as far as quality and quantity. That there makes me think that TL2 isn't going to magically become something to be considered a Successor.

D3 is having problems from the start. With each passing month the Art concept is looking worse to me and many people. The lack of talent trees is a shame as it removes a step they made forward in such games. They've already divided the community into nearly a dozen groups already with the AH and Online system debates. And those are just the problems we know about.

The real issue with this subject is which of these games is going to give off the feel from D2 and honestly, I still think the D3 will do a better job at that than TL2. And while I will own both, I honestly feel that D3 has a better chance at stepping up to the plate. However, I still feel as if there will still be a lot of us who feel that D2 was a better game and had a better feel overall. The one thing I can say to that is that at least in the scope of things, D3 will have a better chance at updates and added features and changes over TL2, and that is something I'm supportive of.

[Vespian]

TL was reasonably fun, but in the end it became boring quickly. If anything is going to make a real difference, it's the grim style and the perfect adaption of gameplay and cinema, paired with superb graphics that have been the standard in Blizzards hits D1 and D2. By graphics I don't mean 3D and all sort of special effects and shineys, but a perfect embodiment of the essence of an apocolyptic fantasy world. Subtle is the word. Where TL mostly used neon lightning to create atmosphere, DII was like a painting, with sublte gestures that made it more than the itemhunt.

I doubt DIII will be able to bring it back, but I'll still give it the benefit of the doubt.

[Zeta333]

I doubt DIII will be able to bring it back, but I'll still give it the benefit of the doubt.

Im with you, D3 seems to step away from the grim gothic feel of diablo, even the screens and videos of the people fighting shit in like tombs or caves doesnt even look that dark, Ill away remeber playing diablo and seeing skewered bodies on chains and pikes and mutilated corpses spread accross rooms and tables with massive bloodstains. Just dont see that with d3.

[hakujinbakasama]

Im with you, D3 seems to step away from the grim gothic feel of diablo, even the screens and videos of the people fighting shit in like tombs or caves doesnt even look that dark, Ill away remeber playing diablo and seeing skewered bodies on chains and pikes and mutilated corpses spread accross rooms and tables with massive bloodstains. Just dont see that with d3.

I've been annoyed with this for a while, but then I started to think that there is probably a reason we've not seen that. The game industry is really under thumb recently with the rating system and politicians trying to make a name for themselves. I wouldn't be surprised of a lot of that element has been held back from public distribution currently.