Time Capsule from PoE Closed Beta -- a classic PoE vs D3 thread circa 2012

"

vidiotking wrote:

i've played both the DIII beta and the POE beta. I'm here to tell you, in this gamer's opinion, that POE is the true successor to DII.

DIII is like a theme park mmo, where ass POE/DII has more sandbox like qualities.

I'll leave it at that for now.

Sandbox? Every area in POE is closed off by a loading screen.. It's exactly the opposite of what diablo 2 was in that regard. I think diablo 3 might not be as open as d2 was, but you really can't say POE is sandbox-like at all.

Interesting and long story man ;)
True that new rune system in Diablo 3 looks disapointing (though i do not have beta access there), but i hope the game still will be playable.
But D3 and PoE are going to be very different games so why not choose both to play? Time will show, and well. Diablo 3 comes first ;)

i agree %200

Sticky this thread!

"

Tagek wrote:

I don't fear this [D3 degrading into runs] at all, because of the recently announced magic find system. Not sure if you've heard about it yet, but basically it encourages you a lot to go through the entire act instead of just rushing the boss a la diablo 2.

I think that will make the game alot more fun overall, especially with friends.

Also, the game (d2) was still ridiculously fun regardless of a lot of areas being untouched, so I don't see what the problem is there.

As for the story, I still very much remember it.
Maybe you apparently don't care about it as much, but I do, and I know a lot of other players do to. It's a very large part of the atmosphere in the game for me, because it makes the world believable.

I did hear about the changes to magic find, yes. Sort of surprises me that they didn't do something like this sooner, actually. How it goes in practice, naturally, remains to be seen. The degradation of D3 into 'runs' is far down my list of quibbles, as this thread has made quite clear. :)

Untouched areas of D2 were symptomatic of another issue: filler. 'The Swampy Pit' of Act 3 is a good example. It's a large, optional dungeon, three levels. There's no set boss and just a golden chest at the end. The problem with it is that it too closely resembled The Flayer Dungeon, which was not optional and not really that much fun. After slogging through that to get Khalim's Heart, the last thing you want to do is another dungeon just like it. And since you could just remake the game to respawn everything, there was no reason to use The Swampy Pit as an extra source of kills/exp/loot. On the other hand, Path of Exile needs *more* such filler zones in my opinion because of the 15 minute instance duration.

So it's not about how 'fun' Diablo 2 was, or indeed Path of Exile is. It's about a game that demands to be played in full rather than piecemeal.

Naturally I remember the story very well! I was, after all, chasing my former self across the world after said former me turned into the Big Bad D himself. It was a great premise! Unfortunately, it was also bloated and stretched across three acts (you really don't start dealing with things until act 4 -- acts 1-3 are all about roadblocks, some placed by the minions of the Prime Evil). I'm glad you remember it too, but I still think the *majority* of people who played Diablo 2 beyond its natural game life would not remember or did not care. After all, once Tyrael has done his little trick at the end of Act 5, that should be it. Narratively speaking, everything you play after that is what-if and alternate reality business. It's a form of stasis in which only the character grows stronger; the story itself is over, or doomed to repeat (how depressing!). It's the inevitable destination of any game that is designed to be replayed *by the same character*; 'now replay on a higher difficulty' is probably the oldest known, most proven method of extending a video game's longevity.

How game developers and designers adorn this meta-game phase is entirely their business, but I don't think it can be done without stepping beyond the core story. And that's why I say that the majority of compulsive end-game D2 players don't remember or don't care all that much about the story. They got over it years ago. Names like 'Baal,' 'Mephisto' and even 'Diablo' have been abstracted into little more than sources of treasure. I cannot think of a stance more contrary to the awe-inspiring power the Prime Evils were said to have during the Diablo 1 days through lore and tomes. I can't recall if Blizzard made it such that the incarnations of the Three were merely that, and that you, a lowly mortal, were only killing manifest avatars of the real thing...maybe I just told myself that to justify the fact that I, a lowly mortal, could tear them to shreds...

No doubt the same will happen with PoE eventually: the story will take a back-seat to the players' desire to keep playing over and over and over -- and I think the devs are aware of that, which is why acts 1 and 2 aren't crammed with epic narrative around the character. I'm not saying PoE won't have a story; that's silly. I am saying, however, that I am incredibly grateful that PoE puts the framework of a narrative second to what I think is central to a Diablo game: start from almost zero and pick it up as you go. Make mistakes. Get annoyed. Get frustrated. Learn. Grow. And this difficulty makes us care that little bit more about what otherwise could be just going through the motions as we tumble towards end-game.

At the risk of being obtuse, I'd say this can be applied to the game play as well.

Compared to PoE's complicated (but oh so rewarding) system, Diablo 3 is looking like spoon-fed, saccharine overkill. It doesn't even LET you learn because it doesn't let make mistakes with its 'builds'. This reflects *back* onto the narrative, too. You're not some desperate exile thrown into the thick of it, you're the star pupil of your given origin. You ARE going to learn incredible skills before long; the hordes will be like wheat before your scythe. I got a taste of this in the beta: wizard with spectral blades -- oh hey, I'm Alucard from Castlevania swinging Crissaegrim! Wicked! Or Monk with abilities straight out of a Wu Xia movie: mmmmfun! So it's delicious at first, but then you realise you're just munching on candy. That's not a meal.

If indeed Diablo 2 'started' to act like a Diablo game after level 80 as one person pointed out (and I strongly disagree with that!), if that is the sentiment of a long-time player, then I dread to think how long it will take Diablo 3 to 'start' acting like a Diablo game.

[EDIT: I just watched a video on youtube regarding D3's difficulty linked from another post on here. It was called "You Will Die. We Promise." One of the spokespeople from Blizzard said in this video, "For me, Diablo III begins at Nightmare." I guess THAT answers my implicit query above!]

I'll probably just read a synopsis of Diablo 3's story and watch all the cinematics. I do care about the story and the world of Sanctuary in general; I just don't care for how Actiblizzion have decided to portray it.

Amen - Great Post !

Great Post. I enjoyed reading them all!

"

Tagek wrote:

I'll probably just read a synopsis of Diablo 3's story and watch all the cinematics. I do care about the story and the world of Sanctuary in general; I just don't care for how Actiblizzion have decided to portray it.

Activision is known for pooping out games faster than Fat Bastard takes a dump. imo diablo 3 = fat bastard crap.

After trying both, I am more interested in this game, and I think the OP clarified why very well. Thanks for the insightful read.

...Uhm, I wrote that, Falls. Not Tagek. ;)

"

CharanJaydemyr wrote:

...Uhm, I wrote that, Falls. Not Tagek. ;)

lol my bad i digg the part about the melemancer do you still have the guide for that build?