The giant Elephant in the room currently (Expros take on meta)
" what do I get for 90 ssfhc?? a diamond encrusted juicer for my flashy vegan lifestyle? |
|
" Yeah, blessed by RnGEsus himself, 100% garanteed divine god tiers carott juice inside your quintuple corrupted implicits glass. |
|
|
multiple bugs and incomplete Heist league is whats killed the fun for me in PoE.... Losing respect fast for a company that will allow itself to release a beta-version of the league and call it a "success". Reality check required.
|
|
" RNJuiceus |
|
" Nothing wrong with liking Diablo 1 over Diablo 2. I just haven't really heard any arguments as to why you think the atmosphere in 1 is better than 2.. "Path of Exile's engine is currently modern, lean and fast." - Chris Wilson, September 19th, 2019
"It looks like we broke something with 3.10.0. We don't know what it is yet." - Bex, March 16th, 2020 |
|
" I already stated a couple, but I'll say it again. Here's why I prefer the D1 atmosphere - The graphics are more sombre. Sure D2 is still a dark game, but there's a lot more colour in it than in the original, which detracts somewhat from the gothic horror feel. The D1 soundtrack seems more harrowing. Again, D2 still has a great soundtrack, but it doesn't doesn't seem to capture that same essence of being alone in the dark, not knowing what's coming for you. Characters seem less powerful when you start in D1 than D2, which again adds to the sense or foreboding. This could all be entirely subjective, and you might find the opposite to be true for yourself, but that was my experience of the two games. The culmination of those factors (and probably more that I'm forgetting since this was a long time ago) made Diablo 1 a far more immersive game experience for me. It's one of a very small number of games where I actually forgot that I was sitting at a computer and playing a game. |
|
" The difference between Diablo 1 and 2 in terms of aesthetics, and in a way even genre, can be found in a few notable cinematic examples: Alien vs Aliens The Terminator vs Terminator 2: Judgment Day In both cases, the first movie was absolutely horror despite a sci-fi conceit. Lower budget meant smarter usage of resources to create dread through the unseen horror lurking just off-screen. The scores for each were disturbing. Both had clear examples of body horror, be it Arnie's flesh peeling away to reveal a metal skeleton beneath, or John Hurt's gut exploding with what was apparently the film's scriptwriter Dan O'Bannon's way of portraying the agony of Crohn's. And neither was distinctly set up for a clear sequel, although both did initiate much bigger worlds to explore. And in both cases, the second movie was an action blockbuster. Aliens took the lone terror and turned it into an army for a band of gung-ho heroes to go fuck up; Terminator 2 took the former bad guy and made it heroic, and explored a lot more of the world's future mythology. They were both excellent sequels in that they took fairly small scale movies and exploded them into all sorts of memorable quotes, scenes and images. Would it be fair to call Diablo 2 a blockbuster compared to Diablo 1's more self-contained horror experience? I think so. Diablo 1 was entirely subterranean. It was literally a katabasis inspired by any number of 'descents to the underworld'. It was claustrophobic; it was a constant game of light and shadow. The music was distant drums and discordant strings, with just the one memorable theme of Tristram providing refuge. The lore of the Sin War, as with Terminator's future apocalypse and Alien's sinister 'company', was everywhere but in a background sense. And the ending, again as with Alien and Terminator, was a minor victory presaging a much bigger problem, should a sequel be greenlit. And it was, almost inevitably, and so we get Diablo 2. Welcome to the larger world of Sanctuary! Welcome to flashier skills, more impressive magic, larger hordes. No longer choked by the impending terror below sleepy Tristram, the plot drives us across diverse biomes, through rainy plains and desert and jungle...and, of course, into Hell itself (with a quick jaunt to the outreaches of Heaven). Diablo 2 was heroic and epic; if Diablo 1 was a katabasis, then Diablo 2 was Iliad, replete with a who's who of legendary enemies so far only mentioned in Diablo 1's lore and, eventually, a literal siege to deal with. And, appropriately, the score for Diablo 2 was a little more diverse than D1's, although Uelmen's contribution really did peak with D1 imo. The most memorable track from Diablo 2 is the most memorable track from Diablo 1: Tristram. Diablo 2 did not forget its horrific Diablo 1 roots; it simply outgrew them. So that's how I look at Diablo 2 vs Diablo 1. Just like Alien or Terminator -- bigger budget, bigger scope, more intent towards the spectacle of what is seen than the psychological terror of what is not. In essence, action vs horror. Neither better than the other, although in all three cases cited here, the action made a heck of a lot more money and in all three cases the result was a disappointing legacy. If I like a game, it'll either be amazing later or awful forever. There's no in-between. I am Path of Exile's biggest whale. Period. Last edited by Foreverhappychan#4626 on Oct 18, 2020, 10:19:31 PM
|
|
|
Does this make Diablo 3 the Terminator 3 of the franchise.
|
|
" I thought I made that pretty clear. The similarities are quite interesting -- but my favourite is the fact that the big bad in both is a terribly ham-fisted female version of the series' traditional antagonist. If I like a game, it'll either be amazing later or awful forever. There's no in-between.
I am Path of Exile's biggest whale. Period. |
|
" Sure. A new team, missing a lot of the brains behind 1 and 2, with a "director" at the top with a lack of understanding of what made 1 and 2 great, trying to continue the IP/franchise. We have seen it before, and we will see it again. Bring me some coffee and I'll bring you a smile.
|
|
