[What If] Diablo 2 Expansion after the Remaster

[kenn9530]

I disagree with your opinion and your argument. I think we can leave it at that since we're both going nowhere with this, since neither of us agree on each other's definitions.

I use the only definition that matters the oxford dictionary so if you dont use that then you are always going to be wrong in terms of definitions.

See I would HARD DISAGREE, as I find PoE to be complete shit game, the combat was crap, the talent tree/system is convoluted bullshit, the story is non-existent, and the graphics are meh at best. I would only consider it pinnacle if you mean the pinnacle of shit games. The only way I would play that game again would be if they paid me 10,000s of dollars per an hour.

You could say the story is non existant in any game if you dont care about it, the combat is PoE is still better than what is available in D2 since its an old game it just has the most basic combat system.

D2 is just a more basic version of D3 in terms of gameplay and content.

[Triceron]

I use the only definition that matters the oxford dictionary so if you dont use that then you are always going to be wrong in terms of definitions.

Meh.

Nowhere does it say in Oxford Dictionary does Pinnacle mean Insurmountable.

"‘After working in the hospitality industry for 21 years, Gao has proved herself to be a person who reaches the pinnacle of success in whatever field she involves herself.’"

See here? There's an active threshold on the definition. Who reaches the pinnacle of success in whatever field she involves herself. Not just one pinnacle, but many, including future outcomes. There is no one defining threshold of which all other future achievements may never surpass said pinnacle.

So even Oxford Dictionary itself has examples that aren't following your personal definition, that there can not be more than one defined pinnacle or that it must be applied to something that is absolutely insurmountable.


Again, we're not agreeing on the same definitions, and it's clear to me that you aren't even abiding to the examples provided by the source you're using.

Here's more examples from Oxford Dictionary:

‘Cllr Staunton said that Westport had reached the pinnacle of success, but added that there are still challenges ahead.’

‘Knokke's Casino represented for a Belgian singer like Brel the pinnacle of success, glamorous like Las Vegas was for Frank Sinatra.’

Examples of multiple pinnacles and gauges for pinnacles, and all contextualized as subjective values. Pinnacle of success is not one static or factual value; it can be contextualized in any form just as the Belgian singer's 'pinnacle of success' is equated to a completely different singer in a completely different place. There's no one pinnacle when measuring that success, and it isn't in the context of Knokke's Casino being the only place where a Pinnacle of Success for a Singer would be defined. And that's the difference in how you are choosing to view the definition compared to how the definition actually works - in context to what we're actually talking about, and not just to any one singular point of 'Financial' or 'Popular' success.

The original context was D2 (LoD) is the pinnacle of aRPG game design, which means its design has been the critical high point of ARPGs. And in respect to PoE and D3, their overall designs can be argued to not have surpassed D2's because they haven't actually done anything to surpass the design elegance of it. PoE literally takes the formula and runs with it; it's not actually improved the system and is still criticized for being overly complicated despite its depth. It's not praised as being the best ARPG system.

Popularity does not factor into "pinnacle of aRPG game design" because we're not talking about what is popular, but what design is the best. And arguably, that still goes to D2 as an overall package. When was the last time anyone talked about how good PoE's story was? D2 was a better full package.

PoE has a 86% score on Metacritic. 8.0 User Score.
Diablo 2? 88%. 8.8 User Score.


And let's be clear here - this stuff I'm pointing out doesn't mean that PoE isn't or can't be considered the pinnacle of ARPG design either. It very well may be considered that. But if you're going to start talking about *FACTS*? Then yeah, I'm gonna bring evidence that proves PoE is not universally considered higher rated or better design than Diablo 2. It's still a general consensus that Diablo 2 is better overall, in both professional and user scores.

What facts do you have to prove otherwise? Your opinion that the Potion system sucks, or that not many people are playing D2? ARPGs are pretty dead as a genre anyways as far as gaming is concerned. PoE reaches 270,000 players at its peak level of play, and the average amount of players is closer to ~25k concurrently, ~50k daily. Compare that to MOBAs like League of Legends which numbers in the MILLIONS daily, with 4 million players concurrently, 11 million daily. So talking about popularity is all relative.

[kenn9530]

snip

The meaning of pinnacle is the most successful point, the highest possible peak, in simple terms for you that means its the best and cant be beaten.

You have been beaten just accept it, D2 is not the pinnacle of game design and it never was.

The amount of nonsense you post just proves you have lost the argument.

D2 is a decent game thats all it is, barely anyone is still going to be playing the remaster in a few months, because the game itself is just not that good to keep ppl interested.

[Triceron]

The meaning of pinnacle is the most successful point, the highest possible peak, in simple terms for you that means its the best and cant be beaten.

It means it's the best and hasn't been beaten.

It means the most successful point of ARPG design, and it rings true when games like PoE and D3 actually take directly from D2's design.

So no game has actually beaten D2 in that regard.

[bledgor]

The meaning of pinnacle is the most successful point, the highest possible peak, in simple terms for you that means its the best and cant be beaten.

You have been beaten just accept it, D2 is not the pinnacle of game design and it never was.

The amount of nonsense you post just proves you have lost the argument.

D2 is a decent game thats all it is, barely anyone is still going to be playing the remaster in a few months, because the game itself is just not that good to keep ppl interested.

I mean it was literally the undisputed best for over a decade, and no one would argue against that. No modern ARPG can make that claim.

[kenn9530]

It means it's the best and hasn't been beaten.

It means the most successful point of ARPG design, and it rings true when games like PoE and D3 actually take directly from D2's design.

So no game has actually beaten D2 in that regard.

D2 is just a copy from previous games available, every game has beaten D2 and that is fact. Diablo 3 was just a better and more enjoyable game and its the most successfull aRPG game sold.

If you honestly think D2 is the best, then you have really low standards for gameplay.

- - - Updated - - -

I mean it was literally the undisputed best for over a decade, and no one would argue against that. No modern ARPG can make that claim.

Im not saying it wasnt the best in its time, im saying the game is not the pinnacle of its genre as some of the die hard D2 fans are suggesting

[Triceron]

D2 is just a copy from previous games available, every game has beaten D2 and that is fact. Diablo 3 was just a better and more enjoyable game and its the most successfull aRPG game sold.

If you honestly think D2 is the best, then you have really low standards for gameplay.

Already told you, I think Monster Hunter is a far better game and series, so no my standard for gameplay is not low at all. Monster Hunter is a far better designed game that is played by more people than Path of Exile even.

But in regards of the best designed ARPG? That is still arguably Diablo 2, from which most-to-all Hack and Slash ARPGs have derived from. Again, it's not an argument of what *I* think is best, it's an argument of what *IS REGARDED* as being the best. And Diablo 2 arguably that game.

[kenn9530]

Already told you, I think Monster Hunter is a far better game and series, so no my standard for gameplay is not low at all. Monster Hunter is a far better designed game that is played by more people than Path of Exile even.

But in regards of the best designed ARPG? That is still arguably Diablo 2, from which most-to-all Hack and Slash ARPGs have derived from. Again, it's not an argument of what *I* think is best, it's an argument of what *IS REGARDED* as being the best. And Diablo 2 arguably that game.

D2 is not the best designed aRPG, PoE alone is far better designed, better designs come with evolution, a 20 year old game is never going to be the best designed aRPG. D2 took alot from its previous games design, and all evolutions will take good things and improve on them for future games.

[bledgor]

D2 is just a copy from previous games available, every game has beaten D2 and that is fact. Diablo 3 was just a better and more enjoyable game and its the most successfull aRPG game sold.

If you honestly think D2 is the best, then you have really low standards for gameplay.

- - - Updated - - -



Im not saying it wasnt the best in its time, im saying the game is not the pinnacle of its genre as some of the die hard D2 fans are suggesting

? What is pinnacle then? The final game in a genre to make that game? D2 was the pinnacle of ARPG for over a decade, no game since can make the the claim of being the best since (unless you want to insert your own opinion). More so it was completely undisputed, which again no current game can make.

D2 is not the best designed aRPG, PoE alone is far better designed, better designs come with evolution, a 20 year old game is never going to be the best designed aRPG. D2 took alot from its previous games design, and all evolutions will take good things and improve on them for future games.

See I would 100% disagree, I think even D1 was better designed than PoE.

[Kokolums]

The reason d2 was a wild success was it was on bnet 1.0, which was the pinnacle of blizzard social play. The remaster is a mere shadow of what made d2 fun because the bnet ecosystem was destroyed by blizz.

You could try to add QoL but thats the wrong path and will fail. The social play must be brought back which blizz refuses to do.

Without bnet 1.0 propping up d2,you might as well play torchlight 2. Better graphics and gameplay in an ARPG.

[Verdugo]

? What is pinnacle then? The final game in a genre to make that game? D2 was the pinnacle of ARPG for over a decade, no game since can make the the claim of being the best since (unless you want to insert your own opinion). More so it was completely undisputed, which again no current game can make.



See I would 100% disagree, I think even D1 was better designed than PoE.

Why are you people arguing with Star Citizen cultist?

[minteK917]

If you are honest it didnt age too well, its still okay. Its kinda like 1999 deus ex. Brilliant game, didnt age too well. And thats fine.

[EntertainmentNihilist]

If you are honest it didnt age too well, its still okay. Its kinda like 1999 deus ex. Brilliant game, didnt age too well. And thats fine.

What does "didn't age too well" even mean in this context? I still enjoy D2 far more than most modern games. There's a bit of weird clunk with the stat system & a few other things - but none of those things even come close to ruining it for me. The game is wonderful.

[Beefhammer]

What drugs are you on? Back then people played for years in a row. We did D2 and D2:Lod with synergies.

I'm against any and all change. I personally feel that allowing respec (2010?) already oversteps. I'm a purist. D2 has way more than 10h of gameplay in it, in the range of another 10k on top of the previous 10k, and if it's not your type of game, go play D4.

No expansions, no more additional content. Bring me D2 as it was, and especially do not let any of your woke devs touch more than the Amazon and Assassin, because my God, that alone manages to make me cringe when thinking about it, I probably couldn't handle them implementing LQTBXYZLMNOP characters to force feed "morals" to people that just want a good game. That's what D4 is going to be like, you can have it.

Only a relative few did. The majority played through the first difficulty and stopped. Some did more than one and stopped. Few played for years on end. I beat Diablo on Hell in one character and stopped playing. Did the same with Baal a d stopped playing. Haven't really touched it since. Tried a while back in 2010 to show the Wife as she looked interested in D3. That just last4d about 5 min before I uninstalled it again.

But being a purist and against change, good thing you van still play the original.

- - - Updated - - -

What does "didn't age too well" even mean in this context? I still enjoy D2 far more than most modern games. There's a bit of weird clunk with the stat system & a few other things - but none of those things even come close to ruining it for me. The game is wonderful.

Old systems and gameplay that have since been modernized and have grown far superior to D2. I think you know very well what was meant. There is a reason why D2R is scoring below D2. It's because it's a game trapped 20 years in the past. Which is fine. That's what it was intended to be.

- - - Updated - - -

The reason d2 was a wild success was it was on bnet 1.0, which was the pinnacle of blizzard social play. The remaster is a mere shadow of what made d2 fun because the bnet ecosystem was destroyed by blizz.

You could try to add QoL but thats the wrong path and will fail. The social play must be brought back which blizz refuses to do.

Without bnet 1.0 propping up d2,you might as well play torchlight 2. Better graphics and gameplay in an ARPG.

Not really. By most estimates less than 10% ever ve turned online if you go off the 4M sold number, significantly less if you go on the 12-17M estimate. Take out online players, it still would have been one of the fastest a d best selling PC games of that time. Socialization had nothing to do with it.

[kenn9530]

? What is pinnacle then? The final game in a genre to make that game? D2 was the pinnacle of ARPG for over a decade, no game since can make the the claim of being the best since (unless you want to insert your own opinion). More so it was completely undisputed, which again no current game can make.



See I would 100% disagree, I think even D1 was better designed than PoE.

It wasnt the pinnacle of anything and thats a simple fact, and it has never once been aclaimed that D2 is the best aRPG because its just the opinion on hardcore D2 fans and thats it.

If you think D1 is better designed than PoE then you are just lying for the sake of trying to back your point up, even someone that hates PoE can clearly see its better made, games get better as time goes by thats just what happens.

[bledgor]

It wasnt the pinnacle of anything and thats a simple fact, and it has never once been aclaimed that D2 is the best aRPG because its just the opinion on hardcore D2 fans and thats it.

If you think D1 is better designed than PoE then you are just lying for the sake of trying to back your point up, even someone that hates PoE can clearly see its better made, games get better as time goes by thats just what happens.

ummm no. It is a simple fact that when D2 was released it was acclaimed as the best ARPG ever. It held that title for over a decade without contention.

I have 25 hours in PoE trying to enjoy it, I couldn't, not even a little. The combat was boring at best, the skills/talent tree is the most convulted abomination every created, it is a needlessly large micro gain mess that is fucking trash design. I have yet to meet a PoE player that could explain the story, as it barely exists. I COULD NOT be paid to play that game again, its fucking awful.

[kenn9530]

ummm no. It is a simple fact that when D2 was released it was acclaimed as the best ARPG ever. It held that title for over a decade without contention.

I have 25 hours in PoE trying to enjoy it, I couldn't, not even a little. The combat was boring at best, the skills/talent tree is the most convulted abomination every created, it is a needlessly large micro gain mess that is fucking trash design. I have yet to meet a PoE player that could explain the story, as it barely exists. I COULD NOT be paid to play that game again, its fucking awful.

Being the best for a while and being the pinnacle of a genre is two completely different things.

The combat is an evolved form of other aRPGs so you are just insulting D2 gameplay because all hack and slash games play the same at the core, what makes them different is the choices available to the player.

Story ingames means nothing, diablo is just the standard angel and demon stuff nothing special and the games dont really tell that much of a story to begin with, its just to fill the game out a little more.

[Necromantic]

So let's say in an ideal world, the Remaster does gangbusters sales and they dedicate a dev team to making a new expansion for D2, kinda like how Age of Empires 2 has had a modern resurgence with their modern expansion packs.

What content would you like to see in a theoretical post-Worldstone shattering expansion?

Which new continent would you like to explore? What new enemies or bosses would you like to see? New features? New Classes?

That would be awesome. If they added a new expansion like LoD with a new act and even ONE new class, I'd be on cloud nine.

[chiddie]

Being the best for a while and being the pinnacle of a genre is two completely different things.

The combat is an evolved form of other aRPGs so you are just insulting D2 gameplay because all hack and slash games play the same at the core, what makes them different is the choices available to the player.

Story ingames means nothing, diablo is just the standard angel and demon stuff nothing special and the games dont really tell that much of a story to begin with, its just to fill the game out a little more.

Every great game is the pinnacle of “something” when it releases, it becomes the new “paragon” for a while and then time passes by and something similar but newer and with coolest graphics/ideas/mechanics/gameplay/whatever takes its place.

First Doom was a pinnacle at that time, today is ridiculous, but when it came out was a pinnacle nonetheless. You can substitute Doom with whatever iconic title of the past.

[Triceron]

It wasnt the pinnacle of anything and thats a simple fact

It's kinda funny how you're trying to state that as fact, yet no one has agreed with you on this point whatsoever.

So far 4 different people have pointed out what pinnacle means and how it can be applied to anything simply being the best of the best at any given time. So far, no one has agreed with your assessment that a pinnacle can not exist. And I've even pointed out how Oxford dictionary contradicts your own statement, which you just snipped and ignored and continued with the same bogus definition as though repeating it would somehow make it more true.

I mean, who exactly agrees with your statement here? You can believe it all you want, but frankly whatever definition you are choosing to stand by is only defined by you alone. No one else recognizes your 'facts' as being valid whatsoever.