Is it still worth buying Diablo 2?

"
kaarelo wrote:
Iwould suggest playing Diablo I first. It takes maybe few hours to complete


Absolutely true. D1 sets a tone for the series which can't be beat. It may be a more dated game, but it is still worth playing first. =^[.]^=
=^[.]^= basic (happy/amused) cheetahmoticon: Whiskers/eye/tear-streak/nose/tear-streak/eye/
whiskers =@[.]@= boggled / =>[.]<= annoyed or angry / ='[.]'= concerned / =0[.]o= confuzzled /
=-[.]-= sad or sleepy / =*[.]*= dazzled / =^[.]~= wink / =~[.]^= naughty wink / =9[.]9= rolleyes #FourYearLie
Of course its being botted to hell especially in open B Net. I think Closed B Net is still up and there was a new patch 1.14 actually. So its still being maintained.

Get it for 5 bucks, its a gift. You wouldnt say no to a gift, would you?

I recommend getting Median Ultimative mod in case the base game gets boring.
If only Blizzard is smart enough to think of Diablo 2 HD Remastered...
"
Deadpeng wrote:
If only Blizzard is smart enough to think of Diablo 2 HD Remastered...


That's actually on its way. They've also started hiring for a new diablo project that is unrelated to the d2 remaster.


D2 Remaster
http://ca.ign.com/articles/2015/11/04/blizzard-hiring-to-restore-warcraft-3-diablo-2-and-starcraft-to-glory

Diablo (4?)
http://www.polygon.com/2016/7/1/12083496/unannounced-diablo-4-blizzard-hiring-new-game-director
Don't forget to drink your milk 👌
Last edited by TheWretch on Jul 6, 2016, 2:36:11 AM
I wish they'd remaster Diablo I too (with its expansion if possible).
"
I wish they'd remaster Diablo I too (with its expansion if possible).


While im not a fan of simply slapping new graphics onto old games, i think it would be great to have D1 in the D2 graphics at least.

I hope they dont do a D4. Can only get worse from here. GAH or not, BOA or not, weapon damage for every skill or not, the 3rd one ruined the franchise.

Hell, i rather have them make another D2 expansion than focusing on new D3 stuff or even a D4.
play diablo 1 first , that game is a timeless classic and can be finished rather quickly. as for diablo 2 it is a classic but to be honest it is a time vampire like poe is.
Well, if d4 comes out with the same speed as 3 we're looking at what? 2030? 2035?

First diablo might be hard to play now. Very primitive by modern standards. Not that the 2nd one isn't as well.
Censored.
I thought original D2 without the LoD expansion was garbage tbo. I remember quitting playing it until the expansion came out before I really got into it.

There are better ARPGs out there than D2 like D3 RoS. Lets face it, you luddites with your rose covered glasses don't want to admit the new game is better.
Last edited by MrSmiley21 on Jul 13, 2016, 10:30:55 PM
"
MrSmiley21 wrote:
I thought original D2 without the LoD expansion was garbage tbo. I remember quitting playing it until the expansion came out before I really got into it.

There are better ARPGs out there than D2 like D3 RoS. Lets face it, you luddites with your rose covered glasses don't want to admit the new game is better.


but it isnt better.... its different. there are areas i liked in d3 and areas i hated . there were areas i liked in d2 and areas i hated. pluses and minues.

and considering how much money blizzard has , the amount they poured into d3 and the amount of time they give their dev cycles.. being merely comparable to a 15 year old game is kind of a fail in my book.

That i feel is why alot of people think d2 is better. it is not that it is better or worse than d3. it is just that d3 was not the massive improvement over d2 everyone wanted. it failed to live up to admittedly insanely high expectations.

they made wierd design choices , their launch was bad and it took them a while to really fix some of the really really bone headed follys of the game's launch.
Last edited by Saltychipmunk on Jul 14, 2016, 8:51:23 AM

Report Forum Post

Report Account:

Report Type

Additional Info