1.07 looks great

[BenBos]

The dark wanderer isn't comparable for the simple fact that we don't know everything about the dark wanderer in the first act. We literally know everything about Leia in the first act and it becomes fairly obvious what's gonna happen in the end. In fact for someone NEW coming to the story we don't even really know that hes the player from the first game. He's a much more mysterious figure than leia who is obvious from the first act. I mean you don't even see his face. He doesn't say anything. Leia doesn't shut up. She tells you everything from the minute you get her into your party. It's not even interesting or well written dialogue either. SHES BORING. Theirs a few moments when the companions say something funny but on the whole I wish they would shut the fuck up to. I'm so tired of the templar making inquiries about the enchantress. In fact it's so bad I recall people asking for an option to shut them the fuck up. The dark wanderer doesn't even have an actual name, you just call him the DARK WANDERER. Certainly leaves alot more to your imagination than Leia from the block. You must be kidding if you think they're on the same level.

I am sorry but Diablo 2 is now just some very badly animated pixels with a clunky fighting engine on top. D2 ... "dark" ... I would say badly aged yes.

Nothing more nothing less.

And for anyone wanting a H&S game to have a story: read ONE chapter of Shakespeare 80 times in a row and tell me if you are surprised after the 81st time ...

If NPC's talk too much in D3: blame it on SW TOR's crap story telling that was going to "take the world by storm" as talkies was gonna be the 4th pillar of game design.

Now we know better.

Anyone playing a H&S for the story ... is playing the WRONG game.

But anyone telling me that D3 is not MILES better than D2 in both engine and 3D graphics is not even sincere.

And ... a good responsive fast reacting engine is ALL that a H&S needs. The fact this speed is achieved in an on line mode is awesome.

the rest is blabla bla "gear/stats" and blablabla "how to acquire it through grinding or in the case of ALL D games: through an external cash shop OR a built in one"...

[namelessone]

In a PoMo sense it's probably is but unfortunately for the developers D3 can't hide behind being PoMo. It is of the same TYPE of story telling as it's predecessor, the same art but obviously a massive failure by comparison. You don't put the mona lisa up against say diamond dust shoes or campbells soup. It isn't a question of cultural significance because the childs painting really can't have cultural significance. It's a question of quality. The childs painting may have personal significance but really the mona lisa is a better painting by any measure. In a similar aspect you may personally find d3s story to be amazing, you may also find piss christ to be the best painting ever that does not mean it actually is. Especially when d3 is compared to say d2. Another piece of art in a similar vein and similar genre.

Ultimately it's just poorly written. To paraphrase Harlan Ellison, Chris Metzen "couldn't write for sour owl poop". In fact it really feels like he wrote it over the weekend, pool side with the kids having a beer. It doesn't feel like serious craft at all and frankly I'd be just as happy if they hadn't bothered. It's so bad it detracts from the experience.

You keep mentioning this "any measure", you you always weasel around without presenting this actual measure. If there IS really such an objective measure, you should have no trouble presenting it, so that I can independently replicate your results to prove that one piece is objectively better. This IS after all, the definition of objectivity. So far your only ACTUAL evidence why Mona Lisa is "better" is that arts community says it's better, which is anything buy objective.

EDIT: to further my case, my girlfriend who is doing PhD in English, played both games, D2 after D3, and her opinion is that D2 story is a boring mess. Here's an opinion of someone who's actually in art community, as opposed to a D2 fandom community.

[Deleted]

Or the loss of desire. I'm not gonna shit on the mans professionalism at his job but d3 reeks of phoning it in.

That might be true. Well I'm with him on this one, fuck having to work when I can just stay at home and count my money all day.
Should consider passing the torch though.

[Glorious Leader]

You keep mentioning this "any measure", you you always weasel around without presenting this actual measure. If there IS really such an objective measure, you should have no trouble presenting it, so that I can independently replicate your results to prove that one piece is objectively better. This IS after all, the definition of objectivity. So far your only ACTUAL evidence why Mona Lisa is "better" is that arts community says it's better, which is anything buy objective.

I did present a measure. Go back and read the conversation I had with the other guy about foreshdawoing. Their are techniques in story telling especially (but their are techniques in other art) that are used by writers to build their constructs. They aren't used well in D3. The mona lisa is a better painting than your childs painting because the artistry behind it is better. Brush strokes, use of color, the accurate capture of the subject. This is why art is taught as a subject in major universities. Not because it's just this total subjective cultural significant thing. But because their is actual measure behind it. Because you can actually teach someone techniques and abilities in art that help them become a better artist. The measure of good art and a good artist is how well he or she can apply those techniques.

[Noctifer616]

That might be true. Well I'm with him on this one, fuck having to work when I can just stay at home and count my money all day.
Should consider passing the torch though.

Couldn't it also be that he simple doesn't have time to write a really good story? I mean, if he writes the main story for all their games he must have a ton of work, there is WoW (which has 2 stories, the live one and the one for the next expansion), Diablo, StarCraft and Titan (which if it is a new IP probably needs the most amount of work).

[Glorious Leader]

Couldn't it also be that he simple doesn't have time to write a really good story? I mean, if he writes the main story for all their games he must have a ton of work, there is WoW (which has 2 stories, the live one and the one for the next expansion), Diablo, StarCraft and Titan (which if it is a new IP probably needs the most amount of work).

Yea it could be that to. I've said for awhile now I think Blizzard is stretched a bit thin development wise and their talent "pool" is also likewise somewhat stretched. Titan, WoW patches, D3 fixes and maybe eventual expanson and sc2 hots. They've got alot going on.

[namelessone]

I did present a measure. Go back and read the conversation I had with the other guy about foreshdawoing. Their are techniques in story telling especially (but their are techniques in other art) that are used by writers to build their constructs. They aren't used well in D3. The mona lisa is a better painting because the artistry behind it is better. Brush strokes, use of color, the accurate capture of the subject.

/headdesk

Two great artist might come together and not agree on what is the perfect "use of color" - and it happened again and again in history. Again, you keep presenting subjective criteria, claiming they are objective. D2 story was drawn out, it was obvious from very beginning that Dark Wanderer is Diablo, and you just slogged through the entire thing retracing steps of that drunk guy. The only few more or less interesting stories were Tal Rasha and story of that guy who was torn apart in background to Act 3, and they were both BACKSTORIES, which screams piss-poor storytelling. "Show, don't tell" - remember that part? Hell, your character has no motivation to participate in the events whatsoever, there's nothing that actually CONNECTS my Barbarian to a story of D2.

---------- Post added 2013-01-20 at 02:54 PM ----------

Think first two quests in D2 - you have to go kill some goblins in a cave and then kill some archer chick on a graveyard - have absolutely no direct connection to the main plot. You only start getting some semblance of the story after your rescue Cain, which is half way through the first act. Before that you don't even know why the bloody hell you are running about killing monsters.

[Glorious Leader]

/headdesk

Two great artist might come together and not agree on what is the perfect "use of color" - and it happened again and again in history. Again, you keep presenting subjective criteria, claiming they are objective. D2 story was drawn out, it was obvious from very beginning that Dark Wanderer is Diablo, and you just slogged through the entire thing retracing steps of that drunk guy. The only few more or less interesting stories were Tal Rasha and story of that guy who was torn apart in background to Act 3, and they were both BACKSTORIES, which screams piss-poor storytelling. "Show, don't tell" - remember that part? Hell, your character has no motivation to participate in the events whatsoever, there's nothing that actually CONNECTS my Barbarian to a story of D2.

I'm not presenting subjective criteria. Look let's use your two artist example again. Two arists go to school and are taught all the various techniques and abilities that an artist will use. One guy is really good at it the other guy is not so much. What does that mean about the first guys painting? well obviously since he can apply the techniques and abilities and has the raw talent his art will generally always be better. Again art is taught in major universities and not because it's some culturally significant study. It's taught because their are techniques and skillsets that artists use to create their work that are not natural or inborn.

Story telling is especially true in this. The story teller wields a number of techniques to help paint his "picture". If it's done poorly it reflects in the final piece of art as it does in the case of Diablo 3. It may have been obvious to you who the dark wanderer is but it is obvious to EVERYONE or virtually everyone who leia is. Their is absolutely less mystery in LEIA who tells you EVERYTHING than the dark wandere who's name you don't know, who's face you don't see and who never utters a word.

That's objective. You know virtually nothing about the dark wanderer, in fact if your new to the franchise you wouldn't know a fucking thing about him other than he's a MYSTERIOUS FIGURE cloaked in black who says little and who doesn't really even have a name. For the 3rd game you already know more about leia in the first act than you find about the wanderer in the entire game. The wanderer leaves much more to the imagination than LEIA who not only doesn't shut up, she also gives away the game in the entire first act.

The two goblin quests at the start are a perfect example. They leave the reader or in this case game player with questions and mystery. Why are you killing these two goblins? where does it lead? what's going to happen next? The reality is you feel less "connection" to the game because it's all given to you. You don't actually have to fill anything in. Theirs nothing left mysterious to you. No questions. It's all presented to you in a neat little package.

[namelessone]

I'm not presenting subjective criteria. Look let's use your two artist example again. Two arists go to school and are taught all the various techniques and abilities that an artist will use. One guy is really good at it the other guy is not so much. What does that mean about the first guys painting? well obviously since he can apply the techniques and abilities and has the raw talent his art will generally always be better. Again art is taught in major universities and not because it's some culturally significant study. It's taught because their are techniques and skillsets that artists use to create their work that are not natural or inborn.

Story telling is especially true in this. The story teller wields a number of techniques to help paint his "picture". If it's done poorly it reflects in the final piece of art as it does in the case of Diablo 3. It may have been obvious to you who the dark wanderer is but it is obvious to EVERYONE or virtually everyone who leia is. Their is absolutely less mystery in LEIA who tells you EVERYTHING than the dark wandere who's name you don't know, who's face you don't see and who never utters a word.

Talk about subjective criteria...

" It may have been obvious to you who the dark wanderer is but it is obvious to EVERYONE or virtually everyone who leia is."

Please. Now you are speaking for EVERYONE? And you are schooling me in what is "objective"? Okay, I'm wasting my time with this conversation.

EDIT: You obviously didn't study art in a major university. I have masters student of arts in my household, I have a very good idea of what they study.

[Glorious Leader]

" It may have been obvious to you who the dark wanderer is but it is obvious to EVERYONE or virtually everyone who leia is."

Please. Now you are speaking for EVERYONE? And you are schooling me in what is "objective"? Okay, I'm wasting my time with this conversation.

EDIT: You obviously didn't study art in a major university. I have masters student of arts in my household, I have a very good idea of what they sturdy.

No Art is not my field although I have masters of art in my family as well and we discuss this all the time. I speak for everyone in the sense that it's more likely the dark wanderer poses a mystery to a larger group of players than leia who is blatant, obvious and lacks any subtelty as a character.

"I have this power it causes me to black out" (and lets me shoot red beams out of my hand I might add)

NOOOOOOOOOO YOU DON'T SAY?!?!?!?! I wonder what that could be? What a TWIST M. NIGHT!

I take it you wasting your time is evidence that you can't formulate a better argument for why the story in d3 is sub par and really bad art? Carry on then.

[Glorious Leader]

I agree, however, there are things done better in D3. First of all, the characters have some background, while in D1 and 2 they have none. Then there a the lore books and journals that we find, those are awesome. They tell us about the creatures and the world. One of the biggest gripes with D1 and 2 is that you learn almost nothing about the world.

Also, there is no character development in any of the 3 games. Mephisto for example. In D2 he shows up at the end of Act 2, you kill him, move on and that's it. In the books, he has character, you learn that he is the dominant one of the 3 lords of hell (at least I remember it that way).

Diablo games have kinda bad story and story telling in general, which is really sad considering how amazing the world and characters are.

Oh I agree. The story telling in the games is poor overall in general, although I have some fond memories of the first game. The first game did a really good job of setting up the universe actually. Alot of the back story is found in it. Like the tomes. Man those things were epic. That was good writing. I would much rather have this



than any of the stuff in diablo 3. In fact I ended up turning off the sound in diablo 3. The story was distracting me by how bad it was. Diablo 1 the tomes just give you very broad strokes and it entices you to explore further. It leaves so much mystery and so much more to the imagination. Their is something to be said for that I think. It's okay I guess that they added all that stuff in diablo 3 but good story telling (especially in video games) is also about knowing what NOT to write. what not to fill in. What to leave to the players imagination.

[Noctifer616]

I'm not presenting subjective criteria. Look let's use your two artist example again. Two arists go to school and are taught all the various techniques and abilities that an artist will use. One guy is really good at it the other guy is not so much. What does that mean about the first guys painting? well obviously since he can apply the techniques and abilities and has the raw talent his art will generally always be better. Again art is taught in major universities and not because it's some culturally significant study. It's taught because their are techniques and skillsets that artists use to create their work that are not natural or inborn.

Story telling is especially true in this. The story teller wields a number of techniques to help paint his "picture". If it's done poorly it reflects in the final piece of art as it does in the case of Diablo 3. It may have been obvious to you who the dark wanderer is but it is obvious to EVERYONE or virtually everyone who leia is. Their is absolutely less mystery in LEIA who tells you EVERYTHING than the dark wandere who's name you don't know, who's face you don't see and who never utters a word.

That's objective. You know virtually nothing about the dark wanderer, in fact if your new to the franchise you wouldn't know a fucking thing about him other than he's a MYSTERIOUS FIGURE cloaked in black who says little and who doesn't really even have a name. For the 3rd game you already know more about leia in the first act than you find about the wanderer in the entire game. The wanderer leaves much more to the imagination than LEIA who not only doesn't shut up, she also gives away the game in the entire first act.

I agree, however, there are things done better in D3. First of all, the characters have some background, while in D1 and 2 they have none. Then there a the lore books and journals that we find, those are awesome. They tell us about the creatures and the world. One of the biggest gripes with D1 and 2 is that you learn almost nothing about the world.

Also, there is no character development in any of the 3 games. Mephisto for example. In D2 he shows up at the end of Act 3, you kill him, move on and that's it. In the books, he has character, you learn that he is the dominant one of the 3 lords of hell (at least I remember it that way).

Diablo games have kinda bad story and story telling in general, which is really sad considering how amazing the world and characters are.

[namelessone]

No Art is not my field although I have masters of art in my family as well and we discuss this all the time. I speak for everyone in the sense that it's more likely the dark wanderer poses a mystery to a larger group of players than leia who is blatant, obvious and lacks any subtelty as a character.

"I have this power it causes me to black out" (and lets me shoot red beams out of my hand I might add)

NOOOOOOOOOO YOU DON'T SAY?!?!?!?! I wonder what that could be? What a TWIST M. NIGHT!

I take it you wasting your time is evidence that you can't formulate a better argument for why the story in d3 is sub par and really bad art? Carry on then.

You know there's this logical fallacy called "Reductio ad absurdum". Look it up.

[Glorious Leader]

You know there's this logical fallacy called "Reductio ad absurdum". Look it up.

I know what it is but I fail to see how it applies in here. I would suggest you avoid watching the big bang theory though. They use broad concepts like that and fail to educate their audiences on proper usage.

[Jokerfiend]

I know what it is but I fail to see how it applies in here. I would suggest you avoid watching the big bang theory though. They use broad concepts like that and fail to educate their audiences on proper usage.

It's funny, you vehemently argue the game is crap with opinion. You have been banned several times because of it. Yet, you don't learn. It's plainly obvious you are butt hurt about the game, we get it.

But your objective opinion is just that, opinion.

I happen to agree with your opinion to a point, yet, Diablo 2 had little to no story. It's lore muddled, confused, and entirely pointless. The game doesn't need lore, you kill to get rich or die trying. Diablo is bad kill him, that's all you need to know. If your enjoyment of a Hack n' Slash loot pinata is based on a "story" then you're going to have a bad time.

[Deleted]

Oh I agree. The story telling in the games is poor overall in general, although I have some fond memories of the first game. The first game did a really good job of setting up the universe actually. Alot of the back story is found in it. Like the tomes. Man those things were epic. That was good writing. I would much rather have this



than any of the stuff in diablo 3. In fact I ended up turning off the sound in diablo 3. The story was distracting me by how bad it was. Diablo 1 the tomes just give you very broad strokes and it entices you to explore further. It leaves so much mystery and so much more to the imagination. Their is something to be said for that I think. It's okay I guess that they added all that stuff in diablo 3 but good story telling (especially in video games) is also about knowing what NOT to write. what not to fill in. What to leave to the players imagination.

Indeed those tomes were great. The event that gave you Arkaine's Valor even more so.

[Orange Joe]

It's funny, you vehemently argue the game is crap with opinion. You have been banned several times because of it. Yet, you don't learn. It's plainly obvious you are butt hurt about the game, we get it.

But your objective opinion is just that, opinion.

I happen to agree with your opinion to a point, yet, Diablo 2 had little to no story. It's lore muddled, confused, and entirely pointless. The game doesn't need lore, you kill to get rich or die trying. Diablo is bad kill him, that's all you need to know. If your enjoyment of a Hack n' Slash loot pinata is based on a "story" then you're going to have a bad time.

Only reason I know the D2 story is from playing it so much... Beyond that I made no effort to learn more as it was so bad.

[Deleted]

Someone here asked for diablo 2 1080p. Here it is:

http://www.fenixstarsolutions.com/20...hi-res-for-pc/

[Shinzai]

The game's been out for ages now and I'm still shocked that people even attempt to bring up its story as being an issue. As pointed out numerous times, the same applies to D1 and 2. It's goofy and over the top, pretty much on purpose.

If anything, D3 had the advantage of the follower's stories. The followers have more interesting back stories than the game itself.

[Lysah]

stuff

I only play hardcore mode. You sure have missed a lot of the conversation, haven't you? How about you stop replying to me if you don't know what you're talking about. You can pretend any build is viable all you want, not using your skill points at all is viable on softcore.