Diablo 2 Ressurrected : 44$ USD (54$CAD)

[Sorshen]

I already own the game i dont need fancy graphics. gameplay and story are the most important things to me and neither of those are changing.

That said i couldnt give two shits about the price I could easily buy it with tokens from gold ive made in WoW.

So save your basic bitch business lesson for someone who actually gives a shit

You misrepresented the deep dive to drive some point about 'only graphics', when it's obvious you don't know shit about the technical difficulty of turning a 25fps animation frame sync game into a physical based render that's running at 60fps while maintaining the consistency of said 25fps breakpoints. They're pricing it at 40$/€ because they know people will pay, and it's in line with their previous work pricing. Regular D2 classic b.net servers will still (as is stands right now) be up, with all the good and bad that comes with it (bots, limitations, items that avoided the rust storm, etc.).

Read about the "Kruger effect" - You will learn a lot about humans and mentality to be VERY confident on things they don't know anything about.

You'll find people who understand what you are saying and can give some good argumentation based on facts and truth, bother with those!

Ironic, cause you don't know what you're talking about either.

[Rucati]

Yeah I agree that's an insane price to pay for a 20 year old game.

Never played Diablo 2, a couple friends always talk about how good it is, I'm not going to drop $44 on a remaster of it though. I'm so bored of remasters and HD upgrades honestly, just companies rereleasing the same game and charging the same as a brand new game over and over. It's honestly insane that people are willing to pay for it imo. Tells all the developers that making new games is a waste of time because you can just up the resolution of an old game and make the same amount of money.

Same shit Nintendo does all the time, instead of making new Zelda titles just release old ones with HD graphics and charge $60. Don't really blame them, it's 100x easier to just take a game that already exists and make it look better than it is to come up with a whole new game. But it's really sad consumers are so content to spend money on games they likely already own.

[Kumorii]

You think he's going to wake up and realize he was wrong all along? You think he's going to tell you "Yeah you're right, thanks for explaining, it seems I was wrong" ? You think he's going to realize he doesn't know what he is talking about and will thank you for it ?

I did, I was wrong that it runs on the old engine. I thought it didn't. I even said that in my 2nd post after getting video link.
Cool, I have no problem saying I'm wrong about things I'm wrong about. That however doesn't change the fact that it's not "3d models slapped onto old engine" because it's not. If you watched the video and devs explaining it you would absolutely understand that it's the old engine + a new engine for handling the art. Which makes it completely false to say "3d models slapped onto old engine".

Dude, he's going to argue with you on every wording, every sentence, every way possible. Even if he knows he is wrong he will never admit it, too hard for him.

You can clearly see that he doesn't know what he's talking about, why waste more time? If you get frustrated, that's on you man. Learn to let go.

Read about the "Kruger effect" - You will learn a lot about humans and mentality to be VERY confident on things they don't know anything about.

Try to look at it this way : By spending your time to explain it to him, in a way, you're kinda helping him to be a better person. Why bother? Are you humanity's helper for narrow-minded people?

You'll find people who understand what you are saying and can give some good argumentation based on facts and truth, bother with those!

Are you his alt account? Nowhere was an argument even presented... it was "watch this video at this time stamp" which is fine, good basis. So I did, and lo and behold even the devs themselves debunk the original claim if you keep watching it for just a few more seconds.
Afterwards it's been "REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE" and throwing insults. O.o

Glad you brought up Kruger effect though. Maybe he learn something; or you for that matter.

[RobertoCarlos]

I did, I was wrong that it runs on the old engine. I thought it didn't. I even said that in my 2nd post after getting video link.
Cool, I have no problem saying I'm wrong about things I'm wrong about. That however doesn't change the fact that it's not "3d models slapped onto old engine" because it's not. If you watched the video and devs explaining it you would absolutely understand that it's the old engine + a new engine for handling the art. Which makes it completely false to say "3d models slapped onto old engine".

Dude, he's going to argue with you on every wording, every sentence, every way possible. Even if he knows he is wrong he will never admit it, too hard for him.



Are you his alt account? Nowhere was an argument even presented... it was "watch this video at this time stamp" which is fine, good basis. So I did, and lo and behold even the devs themselves debunk the original claim if you keep watching it for just a few more seconds.
Afterwards it's been "REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE" and throwing insults. O.o

Glad you brought up Kruger effect though. Maybe he learn something.

Just stfu. No it's not my alt account I'll quite happily tell you my opinion and I don't need reinforcement for mindless zealots like yourself

[Hellobolis]

You ignored the part of my comment where I outlined why a remaster costs almost as much to make as a non-remaster. You're defining content as playable content, but you can't ignore the technical content, especially if you're questioning price.

Are you implying the price needs to be that high for them to break even? Cause i seriously doubt that. This is entirely priced to what the market will bear, not to costs.

Even THQ Nordic rakes in 40% profit margins on their crappy remaster business plan using niche franchises, but here we're talking one of the most famous games of all time.

[kosajk]

Yes. tl,dr: remasters on the market can hit up to 70usd. Also the D2 + D2:LoD is 20usd still this day, so its just double as much and if im right u will get the old game too by buying the remaster so its beyond reasonable price

i gave for it 2-4 bucks, started it once, thinked "that time is over" and never get back to it :P
tbh for me d2: resurrected is overpriced but i hope everyone will have good time playing it ;P

[cozzri]

Yeah I agree that's an insane price to pay for a 20 year old game.

Never played Diablo 2, a couple friends always talk about how good it is, I'm not going to drop $44 on a remaster of it though. I'm so bored of remasters and HD upgrades honestly, just companies rereleasing the same game and charging the same as a brand new game over and over. It's honestly insane that people are willing to pay for it imo. Tells all the developers that making new games is a waste of time because you can just up the resolution of an old game and make the same amount of money.

Same shit Nintendo does all the time, instead of making new Zelda titles just release old ones with HD graphics and charge $60. Don't really blame them, it's 100x easier to just take a game that already exists and make it look better than it is to come up with a whole new game. But it's really sad consumers are so content to spend money on games they likely already own.

It's purely nostalgia appeal; the game honestly doesn't hold up to well with similar games on the market. I was an avid diablo 1/2 player when they were new, played countless ARPGs since that time, each passing year gets harder and harder to revisit D1/D2, it doesn't help that they don't update the game in 10 years, unlike Titan Quest which gets expansions 10+ years after release.

They abandoned D2 for too long for me to care; the price doesn't matter at this point. Nostalgia is gone.

[Zarithras]

Are you implying the price needs to be that high for them to break even? Cause i seriously doubt that. This is entirely priced to what the market will bear, not to costs.

Even THQ Nordic rakes in 40% profit margins on their crappy remaster business plan using niche franchises, but here we're talking one of the most famous games of all time.

Not necessarily in regards to profit margins, but more just comparing dev costs between a remaster and a non-remaster. OP implied that remasters have no new content, but I'm arguing that while there's no new playable content, the technical side of it is no different than a new game.

[RobertoCarlos]

It's purely nostalgia appeal; the game honestly doesn't hold up to well with similar games on the market. I was an avid diablo 1/2 player when they were new, played countless ARPGs since that time, each passing year gets harder and harder to revisit D1/D2, it doesn't help that they don't update the game in 10 years, unlike Titan Quest which gets expansions 10+ years after release.

They abandoned D2 for too long for me to care; the price doesn't matter at this point. Nostalgia is gone.

Game hasn't aged well at all. You can't even damage half the mobs in hell difficulty because of immunities and good luck making an infinity pole arm without dupes

[EternalBany]

40 $ is not reasonable at all
And iam not poor basement dwelling either, its an old game that most of us own already

[Hellobolis]

40 $ is not reasonable at all
And iam not poor basement dwelling either, its an old game that most of us own already

that's not what you pay for with remasters. most old games you can make look decent and make work on a modern pc yourself if you put in some legwork.

you pay for the convenience of not having to go through that hassle. and i guess the beancounters think it's $40 worth of convenience.

[ClassicPeon]

Whoopsiedaisieiquotedwrongly

[Kolvarg]

i dont know why you are so adamant about thinking you are right when the devs themselves said this in the interview you so obviously saw(RIGHT?) when you keep speaking about this subject

Because regardless of whether you consider it a remaster or a remake, what the devs say in the interview proves there is quite a lot of complex technical work going into this game, which is not what you are relaying at all. So there definitely is a possibility for things to go wrong, and for the game to be buggy/unstable like W3R was at release.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

40 $ is not reasonable at all
And iam not poor basement dwelling either, its an old game that most of us own already

Ok.

So it's not reasonable for you

Other people find it quite reasonable.

[Sluvs]

$40 bucks seems fair to me.

At least they are not pulling a Skyward Sword and slapping a 60$ price tag on it.

[Jibjub]

Goddamn business trying to make money to pay their employees decent wages! I want more cheap-ass shit from China (but I still personally want to make a decent wage)!

[ClassicPeon]

Because regardless of whether you consider it a remaster or a remake, what the devs say in the interview proves there is quite a lot of complex technical work going into this game, which is not what you are relaying at all. So there definitely is a possibility for things to go wrong, and for the game to be buggy/unstable like W3R was at release.

Ah. You are moving goalposts now. Nice twist lol.

i havent said anything of the sort. I've even said they are adding features.

Why cant you just admit you have no fucking clue what you are talking about?

[Hellobolis]

Goddamn business trying to make money to pay their employees decent wages! I want more cheap-ass shit from China (but I still personally want to make a decent wage)!

but they don't pay decent wages.

[Kolvarg]

Ah. You are moving goalposts now. Nice twist lol.

i havent said anything of the sort. I've even said they are adding features.

Why cant you just admit you have no fucking clue what you are talking about?

I can't really change my mind when you literally contribute nothing to the conversation. If I'm wrong, don't just say I'm wrong, tell me why I'm wrong, prove it. I'm not inside your brain, I'm not going to magically realize I'm wrong because you told me I'm wrong. You have to articulate it and support it with logic and/or evidence.

What goalposts do you believe I have? Because my intention has always been to challenge your position that people shouldn't be worried about D2R and is totally safe to pre-order despite how badly W3R turned out, because in your mind one is a remake and the other is only a remaster.

I've explained why I think you're wrong, and that by the conventional usage the industry applies to those terms, they are both remasters.

I've explained how if you ignore the standard usage of those terms, then if anything they would both be remakes.

I've explained how even if you look past the nomenclature, W3R and D2R are similar on a technical level, and if anything D2R is more complex and therefore prone to failure.

I've explained how even if D2R was simpler, there's no guarantee their objectives and goals won't change between now and release, just like W3R ended up cancelling or downscaling planned features between pre-purchases were available and the launch.

[hulkgor]

it means you'll have stutterstep and animation/movement lag after every cast means shitty game

and alas, you keep spewing misinformation.

why bother.