Diablo 2: Resurrected remaster

[luj1]

The issues they could fix that both newcomers and pleistocene autsists would like:

• additional tab on character sheet showing all accumulated bonuses and FCR, FHR, FBR breakpoints
• shared stash space for multiplayer (everyone is using mules currently)

They did that already homie

[*]fix Act 2 merc crashing the game using Dellirium runeword (no one is using this awesome crowd-control tool because no one wants to bother with game crashes)
[*]fix claw vipers' poison stunlocking and delivering tremendous damage by constant reapplication
[*]get rid of Duriel's town portal scroll drops (outside of being a meme Duriel for this reason is atrocious boss to farm)
[*]fix mercs losing aggro when they rubberband teleport to you (if they get stuck somewhere they will warp to your character but the mobs will ignore them and focus you unless you re-log or your merc dies from AOE attacks)
[*]fix corpse-explosion & fire-enchanted explosions dealing double damage / applying damage twice on nightmare difficulty (as far as I remember both player and mobs are affected)
[*]fix Andariel loot drop-rate if you quest-bug her

Some were fixed already in previous versions, others are legit features

I would like to have dynamic drop-rates so people wouldn't farm AT, Meph, Pindle, Shenk and Pits ad infinitum

Guess you never played around with the legendary DropCalc, there is a right monster/pack for every item in the game

 

[coldcrow]

so they used a functionality PlugY code has been enabling for like 15 years and made it BEAUTIFUL. Good job.

 

[typical user]

Duriel needs to drop town scrolls because otherwise you are locked in the place, or i think that's the logic.

I was never a master looter but i was under the impression only Diablo and Baal are worth grinding.

You can save and exit and you will respawn in town. You can go to Tyrael - he always opens teleport in later patches. Devs could also attach 5th item drop to Duriel and make him always drop scroll of TP instead of flat % increase and still have the chance for him to drop no scrolls.

Diablo and Baal are both rather slow to farm and require developed character because monsters there can cast curses by default and you need to kill waves of them before you can fight mister D and B.

They did that already homie

I am not following thread, after Warcraft 3 disaster I'd rather wait for Dbrunski or LLamaSC opinions and be pleasantly surprised than watch some empty screenshots.

Guess you never played around with the legendary DropCalc, there is a right monster/pack for every item in the game

I did, it's pure madness to look at spreadsheets and do data analysis - I just want to play damn thing. Also I don't care if bosspack x has 0.000005% higher droprate of Fal Rune if I can kill Pindle/Shenk/Meph 2 times faster or TP around Lower Kurast if rune farming.

 

[ArchAngel]

so they used a functionality PlugY code has been enabling for like 15 years and made it BEAUTIFUL. Good job.

Inspired by Beamdog :D

 

[luj1]

They did that already homie

I am not following thread, after Warcraft 3 disaster I'd rather wait for Dbrunski or LLamaSC opinions and be pleasantly surprised than watch some empty screenshots.

This is way closer to SCR than WC3R, as it should be.

Guess you never played around with the legendary DropCalc, there is a right monster/pack for every item in the game

I did, it's pure madness to look at spreadsheets and do data analysis - I just want to play damn thing. Also I don't care if bosspack x has 0.000005% higher droprate of Fal Rune if I can kill Pindle/Shenk/Meph 2 times faster or TP around Lower Kurast if rune farming.

Yeah, then don't complain.

 

[typical user]

Ah classic Codex, the peak gaming community where the best games require you to not play at all and be a damn data analyst.

 

[A horse of course]

Ah classic Codex, the peak gaming community where the best games require you to not play at all and be a damn data analyst.

It's not really a Codex issue. After Diablo 2, the genre (ARPG Diablo clones) shifted away from singleplayer and campaign co-op experiences and moved towards autistic theorycrafters and boss runs (i.e. the ancestor of modern lootbox gambling). These days, western Diablo clones almost share the same space as Fighting Games, chasing a continually shrinking audience of die-hard multiplayer fans, whilst in the east the genre is basically a template for every mobile/MMOARPG sweatshop game developer who wants to make a quick turnaround on the Apple Store or Google Play.

 

[Malamert]

Ah classic Codex, the peak gaming community where the best games require you to not play at all and be a damn data analyst.

What sort of depraved human being would actually want to PLAY video games?

 

[tritosine2k]

Ah classic Codex, the peak gaming community where the best games require you to not play at all and be a damn data analyst.

It's not really a Codex issue. WITH Diablo 2, the genre (ARPG Diablo clones) shifted away from singleplayer and campaign co-op experiences and moved towards autistic theorycrafters and boss runs (i.e. the ancestor of modern lootbox gambling). (...)

FIX'd . That said, I'd welcome an "actual savegame" mod , that can even lead to branching narrative (and savescumming ) .

 

[Lyric Suite]

Ah classic Codex, the peak gaming community where the best games require you to not play at all and be a damn data analyst.

It's not really a Codex issue. After Diablo 2, the genre (ARPG Diablo clones) shifted away from singleplayer and campaign co-op experiences and moved towards autistic theorycrafters and boss runs (i.e. the ancestor of modern lootbox gambling). These days, western Diablo clones almost share the same space as Fighting Games, chasing a continually shrinking audience of die-hard multiplayer fans, whilst in the east the genre is basically a template for every mobile/MMOARPG sweatshop game developer who wants to make a quick turnaround on the Apple Store or Google Play.

Single player? Lmao what is this shit.

Diablo was ALWAYS multiplayer centric, including the first one where you couldn't access the higher difficulties in single player.

As great as the art and atmosphere is, the game is just too basic and barebone for single player. The generic writing and non-existent quests were always designed with multiplayer in mind from the get go.

Multiplayer was THE big thing Blizzard was interested in right with Warcraft 2 and Diablo 1. Those aren't as well played as their sequels only because multiplayer was still in its infancy at the time so they are too primitive compared to Starcraft/Warcraft 3 or Diablo 2 but that doesn't mean multiplayer wasn't a significant aspect of those earlier games or that they weren't designed with multiplayer in mind. Warcraft 2 was the biggest game after Doom and Quake in most of the LAN parties i went to.

If you wanted single player you went Fallout or Baldur's Gate there's no point in playing Diablo in single player unless it's a one time experience just to get a taste of the nice knewl art or music but that's it. Only multiplayer provides the incentive for repeated playthroughs or loot scavenging.

 

[tritosine2k]

Afaik Brevik even said D1 coop was added so late into dev cycle it's particularly hacky. Not to mention Blizzard wasn't even there from the get go. Don't ask where I read it tho.

And anyway if you make a half decent mapgen you'd want the better results saved anyhow. If it's even feeding a branching narrative that's for the better I'd say.

 

[Harthwain]

If you wanted single player you went Fallout or Baldur's Gate there's no point in playing Diablo in single player unless it's a one time experience just to get a taste of the nice knewl art or music but that's it. Only multiplayer provides the incentive for repeated playthroughs or loot scavenging.

You could play singleplayer for a variety of reasons:

• Hunting for items.
  
• To make the most efficient build (on higher difficulties).
  
• It's hack'n'slash - sometimes you want to do just that.

All of this (plus different classes) allowed for a lot of replayability.

 

[A horse of course]

Ah classic Codex, the peak gaming community where the best games require you to not play at all and be a damn data analyst.

It's not really a Codex issue. After Diablo 2, the genre (ARPG Diablo clones) shifted away from singleplayer and campaign co-op experiences and moved towards autistic theorycrafters and boss runs (i.e. the ancestor of modern lootbox gambling). These days, western Diablo clones almost share the same space as Fighting Games, chasing a continually shrinking audience of die-hard multiplayer fans, whilst in the east the genre is basically a template for every mobile/MMOARPG sweatshop game developer who wants to make a quick turnaround on the Apple Store or Google Play.

Single player? Lmao what is this shit.

Diablo was ALWAYS multiplayer centric, including the first one where you couldn't access the higher difficulties in single player.

As great as the art and atmosphere is, the game is just too basic and barebone for single player. The generic writing and non-existent quests were always designed with multiplayer in mind from the get go.

Multiplayer was THE big thing Blizzard was interested in right with Warcraft 2 and Diablo 1. Those aren't as well played as their sequels only because multiplayer was still in its infancy at the time so they are too primitive compared to Starcraft/Warcraft 3 or Diablo 2 but that doesn't mean multiplayer wasn't a significant aspect of those earlier games or that they weren't designed with multiplayer in mind. Warcraft 2 was the biggest game after Doom and Quake in most of the LAN parties i went to.

If you wanted single player you went Fallout or Baldur's Gate there's no point in playing Diablo in single player unless it's a one time experience just to get a taste of the nice knewl art or music but that's it. Only multiplayer provides the incentive for repeated playthroughs or loot scavenging.

Afaik Brevik even said D1 coop was added so late into dev cycle it's particularly hacky. Not to mention Blizzard wasn't even there from the get go. Don't ask where I read it tho.

And anyway if you make a half decent mapgen you'd want the better results saved anyhow. If it's even feeding a branching narrative that's for the better I'd say.

https://www.gamasutra.com/view/news..._Brevik_shares_the_story_of_making_Diablo.php

Brevik also remembers that the decision to make Diablo real-time, rather than turn-based, as a controversial one. He said that, despite rumors to the contrary, it's not true that when Condor first pitched the game as a turn-based game, Blizzard said it was great -- but that it had to be real-time and multiplayer. That came later, after development of the game had begun in earnest.

On the plus side, developing Diablo gave rise to Blizzard’s Battle.net, which was borne out of Blizzard North but primarily developed at Blizzard South. But Diablo didn’t have multiplayer modes - or code -- for most of development, so in the last months of development a team from Blizzard North had to actually move down south to work with Blizzard South on getting Battle.net support built into Diablo, and Brevik says the studio was completely unprepared for how quickly -- and badly -- cheating became a problem in the game.

I see retarded oldfags repeat this drivel all the time. Diablo's multiplayer mode was added very late and was a complete hackjob.

 

[jackofshadows]

You could play singleplayer for a variety of reasons:

• Hunting for items.
  
• To make the most efficient build (on higher difficulties).
  
• It's hack'n'slash - sometimes you want to do just that.

All of this (plus different classes) allowed for a lot of replayability.

Diablo 1 singleplayer mode was restricted by easy difficulty only. There's no point in hunting anything there or tune 'build', all you could do is to kill Diablo or Lazarus more and more times for no reason. 3 classes with basically no development options, yeah - what a replayability. That said, I remember a friend of mine leveled up all spells up to 15 in a SP mode but that's just autistic stuff, nothing unusual.

In case you were talking about hack'n'slash in general - sure you can play SP all you want but then again all games of this genre at least that I know of are more suited for MP because guess what - the original game was.

I see retarded oldfags repeat this drivel all the time. Diablo's multiplayer mode was added very late and was a complete hackjob.

So what if it was added later, what matter is the final product where SP is essentially a big tutorial with a tiny bit of loot, easy difficulty only and an odd system for SP where your char is unbound to a current game's world. They were creating something brand new and your own quote which tells us that rise of Battle.net was directly related to Diablo's development represent that. They were ahead of their time with MP design and boy they were ahead of their time with the sequel. I cannot imagine anyone who played both D2 modes and then saying that SP is the 'main' one.

 

[tritosine2k]

They were ahead of their time with MP design and boy they were ahead of their time with the sequel. .

lmao

Let me repeat this: no actual savegames but a sole character sheet masquareding as save game = Dumbing Down

Even starcraft:BW has a working save function where you save a progressing 4v4 , and by loading savefile as a MAP , it allows rejoins .

We saw where this online charsheet stuff leads, Path of Exile, eg. nowhere outside garbage "maps" and empty promises.

 

[Harthwain]

Diablo 1 singleplayer mode was restricted by easy difficulty only. There's no point in hunting anything there or tune 'build', all you could do is to kill Diablo or Lazarus more and more times for no reason. 3 classes with basically no development options, yeah - what a replayability.

I was talking with Diablo 2 in mind. That said, I did go through Diablo 1 with all classes. They offer different starting points, making it easier to focus on different playstyles, and have their own hidden advantages:

Also, the characters have hidden differences in their in-game performance. The Warrior has an innately higher chance to hit in melee combat, a chance to cause a critical hit (causing twice the original damage; other characters lack this), as well as the best chance to block with a shield. Also there are fewer frames per swing with melee weapons. The Rogue calculates not only her strength but her dexterity as well when determining the damage she can deal with a bow and also has a faster rate of fire similar to the warrior with melee weapons. The Sorcerer has the highest chance to hit with a magical spell and faster cast rate, as well as gaining more mana than any other class from items that improve Magic.

Source: https://diablo-archive.fandom.com/wiki/Diablo_I#Differences_between_Classes

In addition to the above, you can get a different set of the in-game lore books and some of the quests are randomized. Quests don't depend on the chosen class, I am not sure about the books though. My impression was that the lore tomes are tied to chosen class, but I could be wrong.

So, yeah, there is more replayability even to Diablo 1, which is quite nice.

 

[jackofshadows]

Let me repeat this: no actual savegames but a sole character sheet masquareding as save game = Dumbing Down

Even starcraft:BW has a working save function where you save a progressing 4v4 , and by loading savefile as a MAP , it allows rejoins .

We saw where this online charsheet stuff leads, Path of Exile, eg. nowhere outside garbage "maps" and empty promises.

For someone who wants to play in SP or with a couple of friends - maybe it's dumbling down (although SC:BW is a very odd comparison to me). But I was talking about the big picture. The fact that lots of people are still playing MP Diablo 2 speaks for itself.

In addition to the above, each class gets a different set of the in-game lore books (depending on class you get a different set) and some of the quests are randomized (does not depend on class).

So, yeah, there is more replayability even to Diablo 1, which is quite nice.

It's nothing compare to D2 MP madness though, isn't it? And personally I don't see a point to grind anything w/o potential interactions with other players.

 

[A horse of course]

You could play singleplayer for a variety of reasons:

• Hunting for items.
  
• To make the most efficient build (on higher difficulties).
  
• It's hack'n'slash - sometimes you want to do just that.

All of this (plus different classes) allowed for a lot of replayability.

Diablo 1 singleplayer mode was restricted by easy difficulty only. There's no point in hunting anything there or tune 'build', all you could do is to kill Diablo or Lazarus more and more times for no reason. 3 classes with basically no development options, yeah - what a replayability. That said, I remember a friend of mine leveled up all spells up to 15 in a SP mode but that's just autistic stuff, nothing unusual.

In case you were talking about hack'n'slash in general - sure you can play SP all you want but then again all games of this genre at least that I know of are more suited for MP because guess what - the original game was.

I see retarded oldfags repeat this drivel all the time. Diablo's multiplayer mode was added very late and was a complete hackjob.

So what if it was added later, what matter is the final product where SP is essentially a big tutorial with a tiny bit of loot, easy difficulty only and an odd system for SP where your char is unbound to a current game's world. They were creating something brand new and your own quote which tells us that rise of Battle.net was directly related to Diablo's development represent that. They were ahead of their time with MP design and boy they were ahead of their time with the sequel. I cannot imagine anyone who played both D2 modes and then saying that SP is the 'main' one.

Diablo was primarily intended as a singleplayer game, and was marketed and reviewed as such. The multiplayer features were an afterthought that were added much later in development, and were considered a "bonus" or "additional feature" to the core singleplayer experience. I checked the big, multi-page preview of Diablo by Scorpia in CGW, and multiplayer isn't even mentioned until the very last page of the preview, where it's portrayed as an exciting new feature, not part of the core design. I also checked CGW's 1997 Game of the Year feature, where the Diablo page, again, listed multiplayer at the very end, after everything else. And here's the actual review from CGW 152, where, again, multiplayer is merely an addition to the overall game, which is clearly being reviewed first and foremost as a singleplayer game:

 

[Harthwain]

It's nothing compare to D2 MP madness though, isn't it? And personally I don't see a point to grind anything w/o potential interactions with other players.

I was a singleplayer type of person. I didn't like other people rushing through the levels, because they were farming or whatever. It took out more from my experience than the possibility to fight together or trade items added. And just because you play alone it doesn't mean you are less curious what kind of items you are going to get after killing a mob. While leveling up was the highlight of an RPG for me, in case of hack'n'slashes it was always loot. I really liked item sets in particular, as a concept.

 

[jackofshadows]

which is clearly being reviewed first and foremost as a singleplayer game

Yeah like everyone around the world had a great internet connection back then even if we assume it's been developed as mostly a MP game. In any case, since when review is any argument here? Let me dig some Fallout 3 review which will tell us what a great RPG it is, right?

Look, I'm not denying that MP mode was underdeveloped in Diablo 1, it's obvious to anyone who played it, the mob who permanently reducing char's hp per hit alone worth a lot. What I'm saying is that thanks to or despite creator's intention the game's design suits MP mode perfectly: general roguelike structure with ability to save char and randomized yet streamlined loot system which encourage playing more and more. Also IIRC it were possible to trade loot which again is alone worth a lot.

I was a singleplayer type of person. I didn't like other people rushing through the levels, because they were farming or whatever. It took out more from my experience than the possibility to fight together or trade items added. And just because you play alone it doesn't mean you are less curious what kind of items you are going to get after killing a mob. While leveling up was the highlight of an RPG for me, in case of hack'n'slashes it was always loot. I really liked item sets in particular, as a concept.

As a concept 'good luck completing the set because loot is random and I mean it' I'd say it's hideous if it weren't a such fun process to begin with, at least for a while. To me it was much more joy playing with others and to rush as much as possible but to each their own. But if D2 would've been SP game only I'd prefer that loot wasn't randomized and set pieces were some specific awards etc.

 

[tritosine2k]

Diablo MP was never really a thing because Starcraft and SC:BW . If you were on battle.net playing D1 (anyone could there was no CD-key) , you got invited to play SC MP instead, they even gave me SC CD key on chat window. Then "fsgs" bypassed battle.net so that wasn't even needed. And locally, it outnumbered battle.net by >10x , probably similar worldwide , people just don't seem to get how huge SC was. If anything D2 fueled it more.

This installer will allow you to create your own private FSGS (Free Standard Game Server)

 

[Lyric Suite]

Multiplayer was a new thing back then and Blizzard were among the pioneers of online gaming. It's not that the MP of Diablo was some added bonus it's that back then MP wasn't so widespread yet as to be seen as a core feature of any game and it was Blizzard themselves who made it an established fact, at least among certain genres. Diablo 1 couldn't have been as multiplayer centric as Diablo 2 because that style of multiplayer centric RPG came into being with Diablo 2 in the first place, but i think it's a bit of a mistake not to see that a certain idea was "in the air" with Diablo 1.

Essentially, what you guys see as a minor addition was actually something that just happened to be in a stage of infancy. By Diablo 2 they had a fully mature understanding of the possibilities of online play and that's why they made it an extended feature of that game. Diablo 2 was to Diablo 1 what Starcraft was to Warcraft 2.

As a rogue-like, Diablo 1 suffers from being too simple and easy, and primitive or not multiplayer was already the only way to add value to the game.

 

[Ismaul]

Online multiplayer wasn't the focus for D1 in part because the most widespread type of connection was 56k Dial-up. And that used your phone line. Not every kid could hog the phone line or convince his parents to upgrade plans and have two lines.

For me anyways, that's the main reason I rarely played online. By D2 things were different. You could argue you needed internet for school.

 

[luj1]

Few years back I played D2 with running off (HC run)

it felt 10x better and not unlike D1

 

[J1M]

Because yes, the original Diablo 2 had it, not so much in the black Paladin but in that more than half of masculine roles for NPCs are fulfilled by women. The rogues in the first act with the female blacksmith, the Paladin blacksmith in the second act, the mercenary and mage hunter whatever the fuck in the third act. Wombyn warrior, strong wombyn, proud wombyn. They plastered that shit everywhere

I'm not the one to sperg about "over-representation of women", but women-blacksmith bullshit triggers me just fine. Blacksmith is the profession that requires good amounts of physical strength and endurance; female blacksmiths make absolutely no sense and it's the clear sign of them being created by some wussy who hasn't lifted anything heavier than the computer mouse in his life. And to make things worse, this is not only Diablo - Tyranny has female blacksmiths as well, and most likely even more games.

She is the blacksmith in what is basically a nun cloister where there are no men. And from a tribe of barbarians. The town she is servicing in Act I is where they were displaced to. Game was 20 years ago so it had to make some sense.