[What If] Diablo 2 Expansion after the Remaster

[sirethas]

I would prefer some balance changes, rather than new content.

Remove immunities and make mobs/bosses tougher to compensate (increase hp, keep high resistance but not immune) this would unlock a lot of more builds which don't require to break immunity and this would already make game a lot more fresh because you can experience the game with builds you never could.
I would be careful with buffing and nerfing abilities, that could fuck up a lot , but I would welcome some rebalancing, just for the love of god, don't touch items.

Creating new content requires too much development time and it might be weird to do that since we already have a game for time between D2 and D3

[Triceron]

That would apply just as much to D2:R as it did to D3.

Why? It's being developed by Vicarious Visions, a new team that wasn't incorporated into Blizzard until recently. The plans to move from D3 to another project wouldn't apply to the team handling D2:R, otherwise D2:R wouldn't even exist, we'd only be talking about D4 or Immortal.

The arguments here don't actually apply to D2:R, even if the chances of an expansion are highly unlikely.

The idea being is if you are going to deliver new content to a Diablo game...you'd deliver it to the game with the largest target audience.

It depends on the content, it depends on the audience.

And while I agree what you are trying to say here makes sense, it's not a statement that exactly excludes D2:R from that conversation. Consider that the project itself contains new content to a Diablo game in the form of brand new visual customization options, fully 3D models, console support with future crossplay and more. It just doesn't contain balance updates or changes to the core systems or any new gameplay content. It's not that they can't add it, it's that they choose not to add it in this remaster.

Warcraft 3 Reforged was also planned to be a remaster with new content, but it F'd up so badly that it's contributing to the decision to keep things the same. It has no bearing on the success of D3 or the development of DI or D4.

[glowpipe]

what about no. Diablo 2 remastered won't have a large playerbase after some months. it will be a niche playerbase and it won't be worth releasing a expansion. Those resources should go to D4 instead

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

Why? It's being developed by Vicarious Visions, a new team that wasn't incorporated into Blizzard until recently. The plans to move from D3 to another project wouldn't apply to the team handling D2:R, otherwise D2:R wouldn't even exist, we'd only be talking about D4 or Immortal.

The arguments here don't actually apply to D2:R, even if the chances of an expansion are highly unlikely.

VV is a remaster team...not a development team. Development resources are going towards D:I and D4.

And while I agree what you are trying to say here makes sense, it's not a statement that exactly excludes D2:R from that conversation. Consider that the project itself contains new content to a Diablo game in the form of brand new visual customization options, fully 3D models, console support with future crossplay and more. It just doesn't contain balance updates or changes to the core systems or any new gameplay content. It's not that they can't add it, it's that they choose not to add it in this remaster.

I agree that it wouldn't apply to balance changes. It's debatable whether or not it would apply to changes to core systems. It would certainly apply to new content.

Warcraft 3 Reforged was also planned to be a remaster with new content, but it F'd up so badly that it's contributing to the decision to keep things the same. It has no bearing on the success of D3 or the development of DI or D4.

New content for WC3: RF wouldn't be competing for resources against it's successors.

[RobertoCarlos]

I would prefer some balance changes, rather than new content.

Remove immunities and make mobs/bosses tougher to compensate (increase hp, keep high resistance but not immune) this would unlock a lot of more builds which don't require to break immunity and this would already make game a lot more fresh because you can experience the game with builds you never could.
I would be careful with buffing and nerfing abilities, that could fuck up a lot , but I would welcome some rebalancing, just for the love of god, don't touch items.

Creating new content requires too much development time and it might be weird to do that since we already have a game for time between D2 and D3

You are right the game needs changes to immunities. Its such a downbuzz when you hit hell and realise you are stuck to farming 2 bosses or one or two mini bosses if you want to mix it up and do some pindleskin runs.

And theres no reason you wouldnt go cold sorc for free teleport and incredible ranged damage because you're not gonna start with an enigma.

[Triceron]

New content for WC3: RF wouldn't be competing for resources against it's successors.

I meant that WC3:R's rampant failure is likely the main reason why D2:R chooses to avoid any major changes, rather than this being a product of limited/competing resources.

I agree with most people that resources are better spent on D4/DI development for new content. I don't think that this necessarily means it competes with resources within itself though, since the majority of development of new art content for D2:R is still handled through outsourcing, and whatever balancing would have happened in D2:R (if they plan it at all) would continue as planned. They're delving so much into the original concepts to remaster this whole thing, I'm sure they're gonna be running into a whole slew of planned and cut-content like Diablo 2: Salvation.

I mean, there's also the question of what VV will be planning to move forward on after this remaster. While I don't think they should stay dedicated to D2 by any means, I'm simply pointing out that there aren't exactly a whole bunch of other in-house Classic titles to remaster. I kinda feel like Warcraft 1/2 or Diablo 1 are a bit of a reach, though still definite possibilities.

But again, I agree that this does bank on D2R's success, and even then it's unlikely to happen. I think D2:R lacks long-term playability without balance updates or content, and the current price point is too high for a remaster. It'll be hard for execs to greenlight any potential Expansion based on this.

[RobertoCarlos]

I meant that WC3:R's rampant failure is likely the main reason why D2:R chooses to avoid any major changes, rather than this being a product of resources.

I agree with most people that resources are better spent on D4/DI development for new content. I don't think that this necessarily means it competes with resources within itself though, since the majority of development of new art content for D2:R is still handled through outsourcing, and whatever balancing would have happened in D2:R (if they plan it at all) would continue as planned.

I mean, there's also the question of what VV will be planning to move forward on after this remaster. While I don't think they should stay dedicated to D2 by any means, I'm simply pointing out that there aren't exactly a whole bunch of other in-house Classic titles to remaster. I kinda feel like Warcraft 1/2 or Diablo 1 are a bit of a reach, though still definite possibilities.

WC3:R's failure has nothing to do with balance changes or adding content which im pretty sure they did niether of.

They got grilled for deleting the original game for it, Not having voice overs like they promised, and not adding more story content like they promised and in general just everything scaled back to everyones expectations. And then you add on battlenet issues and jank performance overall for the ultimate cluster fuck

[Triceron]

WC3:R's failure has nothing to do with balance changes or adding content which im pretty sure they did niether of.

They totally f'd with the balance over the course of the year that Reforged was in development. They did a poor job of it too, pushing PTR changes straight into live while they were still buggy.

And with those patches that contained balance updates, they also ended up screwing up a lot of the World Editor, and corrupted custom maps, and the eventual migration to Bnet proper also cut out ROC support entirely. Then there's the lack of ladder and lack of Custom Campaigns setting, which is still missing today.

Cut Campaign content was just a tip of the iceberg for the mess that was Reforged.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

I mean, there's also the question of what VV will be planning to move forward on after this remaster. While I don't think they should stay dedicated to D2 by any means, I'm simply pointing out that there aren't exactly a whole bunch of other in-house Classic titles to remaster. I kinda feel like Warcraft 1/2 or Diablo 1 are a bit of a reach, though still definite possibilities.

There's not a whole host of Blizzard classics to remaster...but they can move on to any Activision title as well.

[Triceron]

There's not a whole host of Blizzard classics to remaster...but they can move on to any Activision title as well.

I'm wondering what the implications of incorporating VV directly into Blizzard would actually be. I mean, it's true that Activision can still continue to dedicate VV to remastering other Activision products, but they're all going to be 'Developed by Blizzard' brand rather than 'Developed by VV'.

Like, I doubt VV would be able to touch on future Crash Bandicoot remakes now that it's formally under Blizzard's umbrella. Even though Activision is the overall publisher who owns these properties, we haven't seen them pass on any non-Blizzard projects to Blizzard themselves. Even adding CoD and Destiny to the Battle.net app is just a matter of housing games, not being directly developed or published by Blizzard. This will be interesting to see moving forward.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

I'm wondering what the implications of incorporating VV directly into Blizzard would actually be. I mean, it's true that Activision can still continue to dedicate VV to remastering other Activision products, but they're all going to be 'Developed by Blizzard' brand rather than 'Developed by VV'.

Like, I doubt VV would be able to touch on future Crash Bandicoot remakes now that it's formally under Blizzard's umbrella. Even though Activision is the overall publisher who owns these properties, we haven't seen them pass on any non-Blizzard projects to Blizzard themselves. Even adding CoD and Destiny to the Battle.net app is just a matter of housing games, not being directly developed or published by Blizzard. This will be interesting to see moving forward.

I think transferring VV directly to Blizzard was strictly for some kind of legal reason so they could work on D2...something about Blizzard technically having autonomy from Activision. That reason might only prevent Activision from handling Blizzard IP's and not vice versa...but I don't have any actual knowledge of that being the case.

[Triceron]

I think transferring VV directly to Blizzard was strictly for some kind of legal reason so they could work on D2...something about Blizzard technically having autonomy from Activision. That reason might only prevent Activision from handling Blizzard IP's and not vice versa...but I don't have any actual knowledge of that being the case.

The merger happened when I worked at Activision, and there was definitely talks (offhand) that Blizzard was allowed to run their business the way they chose to without direct interference from Activision.

However, times have definitely changed since then, considering Blizzard doesn't even formally have a CEO any more. It may all be bridged together under Activision, and this merger is just one step towards bringing the whole family closer together, who knows.

I'm not aware of how these IPs all work out, but I do think it odd if VV, as a part of Blizzard, continues to develop on non-Blizzard brand remakes in the future. Again, interesting things to see in the future.

[TheRainman]

Nah, leave resurrected as it is with the QOL they've done. I prefer it not be ruined with modernization in mind. I

If they want to change shit, relegate that to a different version separate from this. Or just don't. It's a masterpiece game for a reason

What about a Diablo 2.5? New game with modern features that follows the story of D2 but before the lore abortion of D3?

Because I agree, leave D2 as a D2 remaster. Nothing new. But honestly I think a stand alone expansion or game (though nothing that tries to re-invent the wheel) taking place after would be awesome.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

What about a Diablo 2.5? New game with modern features that follows the story of D2 but before the lore abortion of D3?

That's pretty much what Diablo Immortal is supposed to be.

- - - Updated - - -

The merger happened when I worked at Activision, and there was definitely talks (offhand) that Blizzard was allowed to run their business the way they chose to without direct interference from Activision.

However, times have definitely changed since then, considering Blizzard doesn't even formally have a CEO any more. It may all be bridged together under Activision, and this merger is just one step towards bringing the whole family closer together, who knows.

I'm not aware of how these IPs all work out, but I do think it odd if VV, as a part of Blizzard, continues to develop on non-Blizzard brand remakes in the future. Again, interesting things to see in the future.

I just don't see why Activision would transfer VV directly over to Blizzard if they were completely bridged. It only makes sense if Blizzard still has that same degree of autonomy.

Of course, it could be it's all just a small part of a larger shell game to move things around to take advantage of tax loopholes and shit like that. Or maybe Blizzard wants VV to work on remasters of Lost Vikings, Blackthorne, and/or, Rock n' Roll racing. Or it might just be a kick the can down the road kind of thing and deal with the logistics of what to do with VV after D2:R is finished. Guess it doesn't really matter for now.

[brandonf]

That's pretty much what Diablo Immortal is supposed to be.

- - - Updated - - -



I just don't see why Activision would transfer VV directly over to Blizzard if they were completely bridged. It only makes sense if Blizzard still has that same degree of autonomy.

Of course, it could be it's all just a small part of a larger shell game to move things around to take advantage of tax loopholes and shit like that. Or maybe Blizzard wants VV to work on remasters of Lost Vikings, Blackthorne, and/or, Rock n' Roll racing. Or it might just be a kick the can down the road kind of thing and deal with the logistics of what to do with VV after D2:R is finished. Guess it doesn't really matter for now.

Diablo immortal is far far far closer to d3 than d2. Even down to the art style

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

Diablo immortal is far far far closer to d3 than d2. Even down to the art style

And it also fills in the story between Diablo 2 and 3.

[Kaleredar]

What about a Diablo 2.5? New game with modern features that follows the story of D2 but before the lore abortion of D3?

Because I agree, leave D2 as a D2 remaster. Nothing new. But honestly I think a stand alone expansion or game (though nothing that tries to re-invent the wheel) taking place after would be awesome.

Well you can go about hoping that Diablo 4 is more up your alley than 3 was.

Outside of... maybe the Snyder Cut, people's wishes to "do a proper, fan-sanctioned remake/continuation of a BOTCHED film/game/whatever" have never amounted to anything.

And I'll conflate this to the thread overall... sometimes, people, you just gotta move on. All of this "go back into the past and make something different and better, but not too different, and not better the way you thought you were making it better when you made the sequel game/film/whatever we didn't like, but better in the ways enumerated by random internet people" isn't going to go anywhere.

Same with the people wanting Vanilla WoW to have its own, new expansion separate from the continuity of WoW "made with Vanilla in mind." It's not going to happen, because we got that 14 years ago and it was called Burning Crusade.

[Dreyen]

I'd be a bit worried an expansion could change the game too much, but if the original pre-expenasion game is always available, why not?

Personally I just want them to spice the game up by buffing weak/unused skills so more skill combos become a thing. Probably some endgame content stuff that could be a progressive challenge. Not like rifts in D3 though, something like "kill diablo clone, unlocks killing uber tristram" kind of challenge that require skill/gear farming

[Triceron]

Outside of... maybe the Snyder Cut, people's wishes to "do a proper, fan-sanctioned remake/continuation of a BOTCHED film/game/whatever" have never amounted to anything.

Harmy's despecialized Star Wars cuts, Maple Film's 4-hour Hobbit cut. A2MR Metroid 2 Remake (before C&D). I think fans can prove themselves capable of holding true to certain visions, and improving upon the originals.

And if you're interested, check out the project I'm working on, Chronicles of the Second War for WC3 Reforged. Our team is remaking Warcraft 2 in a more modern Warcraft lore setting (with plenty of creative liberties). Each kingdom with their own represented visuals, each clan with their own looks, every hero tailored to be as iconic as we remembered them to be.

[Nymfomania]

1.09 was my jam. Anything past that just made it stupid hard.