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

I know I know opinions and all.. But I can't stress this enough: 'Wait until the damn game is out!!!'

You never know how diablo 3 (or poe) might turn out,
you can't judge the game just by the tiny beta.

Diablo 3 doesen't look has half as good as what i personally expected out of blizzard, especially it being in the making for 10 years. Ten long years!

I was expecting the graphics to upgrade and take a more realistic approach, though the graphics did upgrade its nowhere near a "realistic" approach to the game. Even diablo 2 had a better feel of realism to it(especially for its time), the scenery and even the spells. Where as diablo 3 has colorful cotton candy balls for the skill fx, and the scenery/general graphics Does take an animated approach. Also i assumed it would take a more interactive sandbox like approach but i guess breaking walls is as close as that will get, it all seams so guided and linear.

Though i cant completely judge the game on its Beta, to me(andmanyothers) it doesn't quite seem like the predecessor to DiabloII many of us fans had imagined. Who knows where it will end up in a year from now, but as for the time being ill save my 60 dollars for later. PoE seems like a better choice, but we will have to wait on that also.

to many poe fany sry but POE is shit . play D2 Better

and u faggats didnt ever see fully diablo 3 only Act 1 1/4 in beta

POE fully game almost 3/4 with all spells anything else

and compare both games . all u gonna play Diablo 3 after start
expect GGG admins too

What a waste of a beta key. For everyone posting here who doesn't have one and clearly wants one, I just want to say 'sorry'.

Agreed with charan on that.

Either that guy has an extra chromosome lying around or he's just a very obvious troll. Either way, shame for that beta key indeed.

"

Tagek wrote:

I know I know opinions and all.. But I can't stress this enough: 'Wait until the damn game is out!!!'

You never know how diablo 3 (or poe) might turn out,
you can't judge the game just by the tiny beta.

One can, however, generally infer if a game appeals to one's liking or not. I'm very much with CharanJaydemyr in his general assessment.

I loved the original Diablo. For me, it was the ultimate "exploration" game: Every time you started fresh, the game would present you with a fresh world where you were in the dark about just what was in it until finally discovered. For example, I'd already played through it with Warrior and Mage, and only with my Rogue did I meet the Skeleton King.
And that's what to this day keeps Diablo interesting for me. You never know what might lurk behind the next corner.
Furthermore, you had to utilize your surroundings (doors, traps, walls, etc.) in order to survive. This didn't mean your character was powerless: He never felt like it. Meant the world under Tristram was a scary place indeed.

Granted, the skill system was very basic, but even here random drops made it "explorational": Will you find a Book Of Chain Lightning? A Book of Stone Golem? Jehaw, I found Zhar! Two books! Come to Papa! etc.


Diablo II did away with LOT of that randomness (which is both good and bad): It became more "plan-able", less random in terms of player power. But at the same time, much of the former appeal (to me) of exploring went away. Areas stayed mostly the same, even with the ever-same-monsters in each area. Random quests vaporized. This took away from the "what will I find in this dungeon?" feeling. You would always find the same PoIs and named monsters in every game.
It didn't feel as immersive, as gloomy-doomy and gritty as the original.
But well, it gave something in return: Skill Trees to experiment on. Like the thread starter, I didn't bother with "end game" at all (which wasn't in until LoD, even. Remember the times when there was no itemisation beyond Nightmare?). I tried out many different builds, and that was the big thing in Diablo II for me.

Yes, for me, the original Diablo was the better game, all said and done. I'm all about the journey, and not at all about some meta-gaming-plateau where everything but my power-level stagnates. I play to explore, to have to cope with new situations. Not so my character gets +1 to Int. Except when this is what makes coping with a situation possible. I remember learning Fireball with my Warrior for one simple encounter: The "Spitter" boss in the Catacombs.


And now Diablo III: They're taking this "explore the game world, find treasures and lore and master your skills", and take you by the hand every single step of the way. You are not allowed to feel like you found a path yourself. And to know that, I need not play the beta. I only need read their official site.

In Diablo, you were an explorer. Nobody knew what happened in that Cathedral. People went in, but they didn't return. The player worked the story out mostly by himself. In Diablo II, the story was told to you through cutscenes. Thing is: People feel a LOT more invested if they can invest themselves by taking an active part. And this active part is usually one of the strongest points of a story told by a video game. Because the people playing WANT to be active.
But taking me by the hand insults me as a player: The Bioware-coined "players are idiots" is a dictum that seems to become more and more prevalent in today's developers.

And this is where I see D3's development headed: Rail-roaded gameplay with the illusion of choice/randomness. Everything I dearly loved about the Diablo series: Gone. You are no longer an explorer in over your head. You are the Master Chief: Bred and built for pwning them daemons, and the game isn't shy about massaging that message into your brain: YOU ARE A HERO.

Thing is: When I am something, I've stopped becoming something. There Is No Journey.


And PoE stands up to those "old, cherished ideals of mine" a lot more than D3 does: It gives me real choices instead of just saying "You WILL take Firefart at Level 4 because you're playing a Flaming Monkey". And it lets me make interesting ("dumb" or "gimped" for power gamers) choices (like building a dual-dagger witch). Because choices are only meaningful if they matter and have an impact.


edit: Way too many spelling/grammar mistakes. Me sad panda.

"

Avireyn wrote:

"

Tagek wrote:

I know I know opinions and all.. But I can't stress this enough: 'Wait until the damn game is out!!!'

You never know how diablo 3 (or poe) might turn out,
you can't judge the game just by the tiny beta.

One can, however, generally infer if a game appeals to one's liking or not. I'm very much with CharanJaydemyr in his general assessment.

I loved the original Diablo. For me, it was the ultimate "exploration" game: Every time you started fresh, the game would present you with a fresh world where you were in the dark about just what was in it until finally discovered. For example, I'd already played through it with warrior and Mage, and only with my rogue did I meet the Skeleton King.
And that's what to this day keeps Diablo interesting for me. You never now what might lurk behind the next corner.
Furthermore, you had to utilize your surroundings (doors, traps, walls, etc.) in order to survive. This didn't mean your character was powerless: He never felt like it. Meant the world under Tristram was a scary place indeed.

Granted, the skill system was very basic, but even here random drops made it "explorational": Will you find a Book Of Chain Lightning? A Book of Stone Golem? Jehaw, I found Zhar! Two books! Come to Papa! etc.


Diablo II did away with LOT of that randomness (which is both good and bad): It became more "plan-able", less random in terms of player power. But at the same time, much of the former appeal (to me) of exploring went away. Areas stayed mostly the same, even with the ever-same-monsters in each area. Random quests vaporized. This took away from the "what will I find in this dungeon?" feeling. You would always find the same PoIs and named monsters in every game.
It didn't feel as immersive, as gloomy-doomy and gritty as the original.
But well, it gave something in return: Skill Trees to experiment on. Like the thread starter, I didn't bother with "end game" at all (which wasn't in until LoD, even. Remember the times when there was no itemisation beyond Nightmare?). I tried out many different builds, and that was the big thing in Diablo II for me.

Yes, for me, the original Diablo was the better game, all said and done. I'm all about the journey, and not at all about some meta-gaming-plateau where everything but my power-level stagnates. I play to explore, to have to cope with new situations. Not so my character gets +1 to Int. (except when this is what makes coping with a situation possible. I remember learning Fireball with my Warrior for one simple encounter: The "Spitter" boss in the Catacombs.


And now Diablo III: They're taking this "explore the game world, find treasures and lore and master your skills", and take you by the hand every single step of the way. You are not allowed to feel like you found a path yourself. And to know that, I need not play the beta. I only need read their official site.

In Diablo, you were an explorer. Nobody knew what happened in that Cathedral. People went in, but they didn't return. The player worked the story out mostly by himself. In Diablo II, the story was told to you through cutscenes. Thing is: People feel a LOT more invested if the can invest themselves by taking an active part. And this active part is usually one of the strongest points of a story told by a video game. Because the people playing WANT to be active.
But taking me by the hand insults me as a player: The Bioware-coined "players are idiots" is a dictum that seems to become more and more prevalent in today's developers.

And this is where I see D3's development headed: Rail-roaded gameplay with the illusion of choice/randomness. Everything I dearly loved about the Diablo series: Gone.


And PoE stand up to those "old, cherished ideals of mine" a lot more than D3 does: It gives me real choices instead of just saying "You WILL take Firefart at Level 4 because you're playing a Flaming Monkey". And it lets me make interesting ("dumb" or "gimped" for power gamers) choices (like building a dual-dagger witch). Because choices are only meaningful if they matter and have an impact.

Sure, by now we're all preaching to our own choir, but everyone has their own way of expressing the sentiments. This is by far the most enjoyable I've read. Someone needs to make the class 'Flaming Monkey' because 'Firefart' sounds wicked.

The quoted post also gets +10 to all attributes for mentioning Zhar the Mad *and* those horrid spitters of the catacombs. (Yes, it is now wearing a 'Kudos of the Stars' -- well done!)

Did you know there's an homage to Zhar in the D3 Beta? One of the random encounters in the catacombs is some wizard dude who feels very misunderstood and gets a bit annoyed if you try to read his book. He offers you one gold to bugger off. Kinda funny but pointless, really.

^ Well aren't all eastereggs pointless?
They are meant to be fun. :)

There are actually hopes that this one will become a more prominent part of the game, so while the concept of 'easter eggs' might seem pointless, I think that doesn't preclude them from being meaningful to the fan -- for whom easter eggs are implemented. I could cite numerous examples, but let's use DVDs as a starting point. People scour those menus for easter eggs, which are often short clips not found anywhere else. To a fan, that's pure gold!

I've only read OP's post and not the rest but i'm agreeing with what he writes. I'm no Diablo veteran, i haven't played any beta (yet) but what i like (want) in a RPG/Hack'n'Slay is the freedom to design my character however i want to and after reading the infomations on the skill system and the passive tree i can't wait to play this game. Even if it has half the possibilities it has now at the end of the beta it's still huge.