Why you should play Torchlight II (and comparison with Diablo III)

[spyrochaete]

Originally Posted by Alavard

The real why is pretty obvious to me. Sure, it creates profit. But it does that because there is demand. People have been selling and buying Diablo 2 items for a long time. Clearly, people want to be able to do that.

You said this even better than I was about to. If people want to spend their money on virtual pants then surely they'd be more comfortable doing it through Blizzard's front door. It's right there for those who want it, and for those who don't it can be effortlessly ignored.

I have to admit that people's frustration toward the concept of an auction house has me thinking deeply on the topic. The first two games didn't need this at all, and manually trading with strangers played a great part in developing that community. Automating this procedure makes it more convenient and reliable but also dehumanizes it. I may disagree but I've been playing Diablo since the first game and I absolutely understand the perfectly valid argument against an auction house.

As I've been saying all along, when I inevitably find myself in the mood for a more hardcore ARPG experience I will grab Torchlight 2 in a heartbeat.

[Rahab_mx]

mmmmm... pay the publisher for uber-items and level up... doesn't that makes the game "pay 2 win"?

[wdroberts]

I think my personal displeasure regarding the lack of character attributes in Diablo III can be attributed (no pun intended) to the value a player puts in his or her character.

In Diablo II, players would spend a decent amount of time determining where to put skill points, turning the act of leveling up into more of an investment than a progression. Once you hit a high level with a build you planned out yourself, it was something you could be proud of in a sense.

In Diablo III, I'll have a hard time seeing any value in my characters. Sure, I'll have different items from everyone else (to some degree), but I'll feel more like every other character of the same class without that very personal differentiation.

I'm also not very convinced that item differentiation alone is enough to make characters truly unique. It changes your appearance, and your damage/defense/bonus stats are affected, but the real beauty of customized builds in every other game in the genre is that the character is uniquely yours, and the play style of that character has been molded by your choices.

[kisado87]

Originally Posted by spyrochaete

You said this even better than I was about to. If people want to spend their money on virtual pants then surely they'd be more comfortable doing it through Blizzard's front door. It's right there for those who want it, and for those who don't it can be effortlessly ignored.

I have to admit that people's frustration toward the concept of an auction house has me thinking deeply on the topic. The first two games didn't need this at all, and manually trading with strangers played a great part in developing that community. Automating this procedure makes it more convenient and reliable but also dehumanizes it. I may disagree but I've been playing Diablo since the first game and I absolutely understand the perfectly valid argument against an auction house.

As I've been saying all along, when I inevitably find myself in the mood for a more hardcore ARPG experience I will grab Torchlight 2 in a heartbeat.

The frustration comes from the fact that Diablo 1 and 2 both thrive on one aspect - the loot. Sure, in D2 there were people who bought items, but they were an extreme minority and it was definitely frowned upon. The loot is half the reason to play the game and paying for items is just silly. Blizzard introducing a method to buy it directly in-game is just... jarateing on everything Diablo was supposed to be. And they have their foot in the profits.

This is just greed on Blizzard's part, make no mistake. They're not trying to put an end to it, they want to be a part of it.

[ozbaab]

Im gonna try not to sound like a teenage Hammer Legion Member here,

Originally Posted by wdroberts

In Diablo II, players would spend a decent amount of time determining where to put skill points, turning the act of leveling up into more of an investment than a progression. Once you hit a high level with a build you planned out yourself, it was something you could be proud of in a sense.

Honestly, you made a copy + paste of another players build. Was that really something to be proud of? I mean in the end, how many builds worked? How many builds was considered good?
It is indeed, a much smaller differentiation between characters in D3 och D2, but there won't be any builds that isn't viable in the end.

Originally Posted by kisado87

The frustration comes from the fact that Diablo 1 and 2 both thrive on one aspect - the loot. Sure, in D2 there were people who bought items, but they were an extreme minority and it was definitely frowned upon. The loot is half the reason to play the game and paying for items is just silly. Blizzard introducing a method to buy it directly in-game is just... jarateing on everything Diablo was supposed to be. And they have their foot in the profits.

This is just greed on Blizzard's part, make no mistake. They're not trying to put an end to it, they want to be a part of it.

You do know that it is the players who sells the items? Yes, Blizzard gets a cut, but they're taking less then 15% if the money from your sold auction transfers to your battle.net balance. (And 15% if you want the money to your Paypal account)

There was tons of sellers, illegally selling Diablo 2 items for real money, why not put this power in the players hands from the start?
The thing is, they can't stop it, so they try to go around it. Online gaming, as it is now, has evolved into this, with buying MMO currency and items from thousands of sites, why not encourage this, in a FAIR way, WITHOUT the risk of getting yourself hacked?

And if you don't want it - don't use the RMAH. In the end, it's all your choice.

[Jderz]

Cracks me up the op didn't include Hellgate: London in the "glorious timeline". That wouldn't be a supporting point now would it?

Either way I don't get all these rivalry threads. I'm just happy we have more than one arpg to choose from this year. Grimdawn is closing in as well, can't wait to hear about the bickering on that one too.

Edit: I just saw the hellgate reference. My bad!

[spyrochaete]

Originally Posted by Rahab_mx

mmmmm... pay the publisher for uber-items and level up... doesn't that makes the game "pay 2 win"?

Win what? The only thing you ever win in Diablo is more loot. All these people will pay for is to make the game shorter and more expensive and that doesn't take anything away from my personal game experience.

Originally Posted by wdroberts

In Diablo II, players would spend a decent amount of time determining where to put skill points, turning the act of leveling up into more of an investment than a progression. Once you hit a high level with a build you planned out yourself, it was something you could be proud of in a sense.

I thought D2 did this terribly. The only viable late-game builds relied on the player knowing that they should not spend points as soon as they get them. This is the mistake I made and I didn't learn this until I had played a very long time. For example, I spent 6 or 7 points on early game pets that became completely useless before long, but the only solution was to delete my character and start again. To expect players to ignore the "Spend points" dialog stuck on the screen for 8 levels is totally counter-intuitive and the only way to learn is by wasting your time failing or by reading external websites.

Maybe there's a happy medium (allowing respecs, or rebalancing the talent trees) but personally I'm satisfied with Blizzard's current proposed solution. I really hate breaking characters - all I want to do is have a good time throughout.

Originally Posted by kisado87

The frustration comes from the fact that Diablo 1 and 2 both thrive on one aspect - the loot. Sure, in D2 there were people who bought items, but they were an extreme minority and it was definitely frowned upon. The loot is half the reason to play the game and paying for items is just silly. Blizzard introducing a method to buy it directly in-game is just... jarateing on everything Diablo was supposed to be. And they have their foot in the profits.

This is just greed on Blizzard's part, make no mistake. They're not trying to put an end to it, they want to be a part of it.

Okay, but how does it affect you if two people agree to trade loot for money? How does it change your gameplay experience in any way whatsoever? How will you even know whether someone bought or earned a piece of gear?

I'm willing to take Blizzard at their word that their motive is not primarily profit. That's what WoW's $25 mounts and $10 non-combat pets are for - Blizzard is very clear about their intentions there and that doesn't stop their customers from buying that suckerbait. I play WoW but I would never pay so much money for virtual goods.

Blizzard's cut of the auction fees is meant to pay for the related support costs that they are accepting by bringing these activities under its own roof. They will handle disputes and complaints instead of turning away people who have been scammed as they did in D1 and D2. Battle.net has always been a cesspit of cheaters and item duplicators so I have very little nostalgia for those bad old days. If you don't use the auction house then you don't need those support services and you don't pay the support fees.

[Neriot]

Originally Posted by ozbaab

Honestly, you made a copy + paste of another players build. Was that really something to be proud of? I mean in the end, how many builds worked? How many builds was considered good?

Your argument is based on false assumptions.

Some of the most fun I had in Diablo 2 was realising I wanted a character for a very specific task and building around it. Even then there were several viable approaches to it. Nearly all builds are Hell viable and as long as you have a vague idea of what you're doing, most odd/unique hybrids can either compete or pull ahead of the cookie cutters.

Besides, who really gives a crap what other people consider to be good?
People have done some crazy stuff with Diablo 2 and they continue to do so, just because they can.

[edit] When did having to learn about the game you're playing become an issue. Isn't that half the fun?
[edit2] This is pretty funny: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6d8wUvIXBPw

[angrytigerp]

Originally Posted by Neriot

Your argument is based on false assumptions.

Some of the most fun I had in Diablo 2 was realising I wanted a character for a very specific task and building around it. Even then there were several viable approaches to it. Nearly all builds are Hell viable and as long as you have a vague idea of what you're doing, most odd/unique hybrids can either compete or pull ahead of the cookie cutters.

Besides, who really gives a crap what other people consider to be good?
People have done some crazy stuff with Diablo 2 and they continue to do so, just because they can.

[edit] When did having to learn about the game you're playing become an issue. Isn't that half the fun?
[edit2] This is pretty funny: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6d8wUvIXBPw

(To add to your rebuttal against him)

Too many times when on an unnamed imageboard's video game board I find people arguing that Diablo 3 forcing your skill choices is fine because each class has an optimum build or set of builds anyways. In fact, this argument crops up in all major ARPG discussions (Titan Quest, D2, Sacred, etc.) The problem is that this assumes that everyone (else) is playing as competitively as possible and wants to min/max their stats and skills to be top of the ladder, when in reality many people are just playing for fun. I know I'm one such.

I don't care if my Magic-only Titan Quest character is useless on higher levels, I still have a blast playing him at lower levels. I don't care if my Summon Necro in D2 is useless in tunnel areas or at the highest levels, it's still loads of fun to have an army of Skeletons rampaging across the screen.

So TL;DR, it's not just wrong to assume that a person is copying someone else's build guide for min/maxing, it's also wrong to assume that a person is always and only ever building to be the fastest Baal-runner this side of the US server.

[wdroberts]

Originally Posted by ozbaab

Honestly, you made a copy + paste of another players build. Was that really something to be proud of? I mean in the end, how many builds worked? How many builds was considered good? It is indeed, a much smaller differentiation between characters in D3 och D2, but there won't be any builds that isn't viable in the end.

I'm with Neriot and angrytigerp on this one. I've never even seen someone else's build for any character in the decade that I've played Diablo II, unless it was a close friend who was excited to share, and I've never copied someone else's build. I built characters for fun based on my playstyle. For example, I love to move quickly, so one of my favorite characters was a 'Holy Shock Paladin' that killed most enemies by simply walking by them. There was also the 'Hurricane Druid' build who had a pet bear and also turned into a bear (probably the most hilarious build I've seen). Sure, this isn't a viable build for the end of Hell mode, but I never enjoyed the end of Hell mode anyway. I loved playing through the game and rushing people for fun. After all, games are for fun.

Originally Posted by spyrochaete

The only viable late-game builds relied on the player knowing that they should not spend points as soon as they get them. This is the mistake I made and I didn't learn this until I had played a very long time. For example, I spent 6 or 7 points on early game pets that became completely useless before long, but the only solution was to delete my character and start again. To expect players to ignore the "Spend points" dialog stuck on the screen for 8 levels is totally counter-intuitive and the only way to learn is by wasting your time failing or by reading external websites. Maybe there's a happy medium (allowing respecs, or rebalancing the talent trees) but personally I'm satisfied with Blizzard's current proposed solution. I really hate breaking characters - all I want to do is have a good time throughout.

You probably fall under the "casual" market that Blizzard is aiming for in Diablo III, which is fine. I wouldn't say Diablo II handled character builds terribly, though. There was one free respec in the game through the witch in Act 1, and you could save it for use at any time, so that helps. I never had problems with ruining characters by spending points incorrectly, but I do admit that the system can be unforgiving for newcomers.

[angrytigerp]

Originally Posted by wdroberts

You probably fall under the "casual" market that Blizzard is aiming for in Diablo III, which is fine. I wouldn't say Diablo II handled character builds terribly, though. There was one free respec in the game through the witch in Act 1, and you could save it for use at any time, so that helps. I never had problems with ruining characters by spending points incorrectly, but I do admit that the system can be unforgiving for newcomers.

I think the solution is just to make sure a respec option is available for players that will allow you to look back and say "Wow, that skill didn't pan out" and respec to focus on higher-level skills. Coupled with a system that allows for reasonable cost to consequence ratio (I liked the respec in Titan Quest, as you refunded more skill points you had to pay more and more gold to the NPC), and it becomes a way to allow you to refund those very same handful of points that spyrochaete is talking about while also preventing you from paying a low price and basically rerolling your character with a completely new build.

The solution is NOT, as Blizzard has done, to remove the player's ability to choose. Some may argue otherwise, but I'll point out that Grim Dawn has a refund system (or rather, will, according to devs), TL2 will IIRC, Titan Quest is the most recent successful D2-esque game that had such a system, and so on.

[wdroberts]

angrytigerp: Definitely! Allowing respec is a much better solution in my opinion than removing the system entirely. Also, I'm very much looking forward to Grim Dawn myself.

[Antonin Artaud]

Originally Posted by wdroberts

Sure, this isn't a viable build for the end of Hell mode, but I never enjoyed the end of Hell mode anyway.

That's a very common argument, and probably the weakest one used by the freespecers (only a few builds are viable at the endiest of the end games). I think that doing the same game at higher difficulty with the same character (1000 game hours later) is, by definition, not going to appeal to much more than a loud but very small minority of players. A group which is definitely a smaller one than those that want PVP, or the ability to play offline.

[angrytigerp]

As an addendum to my post, it's also reasonable for synergies (e.g. points in X skill available from Level 1 will boost damage to Y skill available Level 20) and long-term viability (Skill X is just as valid as Skill Y, Skill Y isn't a direct upgrade of Skill X [If you've played a Bowazon or Sorc in D2, you know what I mean because the basic elemental missile skills were better and better with no reason to use the last one]) are good ideas. Diablo 3, to concede a point, does this to some extent, in that you can use an early-acquired skill at higher levels, especially with Runes, but the problem is that while it solves that problem, it also takes away all sense of progression -- a new player knows that every level brings a new skill no matter what they do, there isn't the question of "Hmm, do I add a point to this passive skill to make it better? Will this attack skill still be effective, or should I unlock the new skill even though it will be weaker at first?" Some welcome this change, but I feel that the majority of ARPG players do NOT welcome a system where there is no question of what to do with your skilling.

To use a buzzword, it's turning the genre casual. RPGers are used to and WANT games where they have to plan out skills, choose to invest now or sit on points for later, and have CHOICES.

Originally Posted by Antonin Artaud

That's a very common argument, and probably the weakest one used by the freespecers (only a few builds are viable at the endiest of the end games). I think that doing the same game at higher difficulty with the same character (1000 game hours later) is, by definition, not going to appeal to much more than a loud but very small minority of players. A group which is definitely a smaller one than those that want PVP, or the ability to play offline.

Weakest? No, it's the strongest. If Diablo 3's direction is any indication, the market of players who don't care for min/maxing are the biggest. Even the fact that you've got a derogatory title for such people, who would dare to play for fun rather than to grind bosses -- "Freespeccers" -- is indicative that yours' is a far more niche position.

There's no denying, though, that there are plenty of people who focus on the best builds, and that's their (and your) prerogative. However, to use that as an excuse to get rid of the system is unfair to people who like the idea of experimentation -- a crowd I imagine is much bigger than you imagine.

It's like the classic argument of competitive vs for-fun FPS and Fighting Game players -- I don't doubt that you believe only the former exist, but I know MANY who don't care for K/D, don't play to win, they just play to have fun -- and unless they're matched up against a team of try-hards who spend their every free moment practicing their 1337 pr0 MLG skillz, they do indeed have fun, read "Even if they aren't top of the scoreboard or they 'lose', it's just a game"

[spyrochaete]

Originally Posted by wdroberts

You probably fall under the "casual" market that Blizzard is aiming for in Diablo III

I definitely do, and since you put it that way it makes me realize I'm not aware of the finer details that are so important to the hardcore players. I guess the sad truth is that it's very difficult to make a game that appeals to both casual and hardcore players.