Diablo II: Resurrected

"

Sadaukar wrote:

"

TreeOfDead wrote:

Their source code became corrupted and they have no backup??? how its possible? lol wtf blizz?

That happened back at Blizzard North when D2 was about to release.
That's why D2R isn't a real remaster, just a "skin" that's slapped on top of the original game still running in the background.

They can't really change the core game, because they don't have the source code anymore.
David Brevik said so some years ago, so he thought a remaster was basically impossible.

holy... ic now why they didnt make anyth up until now

"

TreeOfDead wrote:

"

Sadaukar wrote:

"

TreeOfDead wrote:

Their source code became corrupted and they have no backup??? how its possible? lol wtf blizz?

That happened back at Blizzard North when D2 was about to release.
That's why D2R isn't a real remaster, just a "skin" that's slapped on top of the original game still running in the background.

They can't really change the core game, because they don't have the source code anymore.
David Brevik said so some years ago, so he thought a remaster was basically impossible.

holy... ic now why they didnt make anyth up until now

Time for devilution2, then. :D

If you don't know, devilution is the decompiled source code of Diablo 1 and spawned devilutionX, a version of Diablo 1 that will run on modern computers with modern OSes.

"

Foreverhappychan wrote:

Re Charms and inventory space: do not confuse a deliberate mechanic that forces meaningful tradeoff with a broken system.

One could easily implement a system like in Project Diablo 2 where you can still have some space despite having trade off, as charms only work in the lower part of inventory.

No one ever liked to do the whole open inventory-drag things to cube deal, or having to equip and remove charms from char as you switch from PvP to PvM. Nevermind some rarer builds who want to carry some weapons around and have to juggle with items on ground and in cube.

EDIT: lol forgot the rubberband. You have fun with that. If one were to talk about all the problems they would be here all day. I remember ages ago some people compiled bug issues and how to fix them in the official forums, boy that was a looooong list.

"

Disrupted wrote:

No one ever liked

Famous last words.

Still, charms are legit a bad mechanic. The people who created them were no doubt thinking what Charan is thinking — a mechanic with meaningful tradeoff. But when you have a tradeoff, you draw the player's attention to what's being traded. Maybe you don't draw that attention hard enough to, say, sunder a thick armor of self-denial, but probably enough to at least irritate. So maybe, just maybe, it's a horrible idea to create a mechanic that reminds ARPG players that they are compulsive packrats.

I'm not in love with D2's charms. If anything I try not to use them to increase the challenge. But a small charm here and there is sort of like a bonus. Good for that stat boost to equip something a little game breaking early on.

To date I've not run into any content that outright demands them but then again I lost interest well before the so called uber content. I play games to have fun, not to compensate.

Unrelated note: it's astounding how many people on arpg reddits admit they quit Poe because it got too complicated. I mean, don't these people have any PRIDE as gamers!? Okay not that unrelated.

Anyway charms are there. If you are facing content to get through it rather than acquire all the gear I imagine they provide a decent kick. If not, they're just as easily ignored or at least used very sparingly.

I guess the people who don't want to deal with that or want more flexibility (and I should think play a harder version of the game to offset that) can play mods made by people who don't want to deal with that. In glorious 800x600.

To be clear: I don't hate mods. I just dislike the implications of them. If a game NEEDS them to perform as intended, then that's a failing of the devs. But the vast majority are the expression of an opinion, which to me is a take it or leave it situation. Sometimes a mod can change the gaming world. Sometimes it can make water a bit prettier. And sometimes it turns NPCs into wheels of cheese.

Here's a noodle twister for you: if a player made tool changes the gameplay experience entirely and people use it incessantly, if the devs themselves build their game around it but isn't actually changing the game code, is it just a different sort of mod? It's "modifying" the game experience. It seems to me these tools occupy an unfairly protected, sanctified space simply because they don't modify the code of the game. What's going to modify the game experience more, a shader that makes water prettier or a trade indexer that keeps track of all in game market movements? So there are mods...and then there are mods...and then there are 'tools'...but only the latter isn't frowned up by most devs because it doesn't fuck with their core code. And even if they don't like it, what can they do? These are external tools. Might as well just throw in the towel and embrace them. (Or do what Squeenix does with XIV and just shoot first if someone even hints at using a tool like a dps monitor to judge other players. So much easier to enforce the rules when the punishment actually hurts.)

---

Another legit d2r complaint from a console perspective: that drag and drop. There were commands to instantly shift items between windows but they weren't working so I'm hoping that was a beta thing. Dropping three gems into the cube got old pretty quick. Didn't mind it with a mouse but with a controller with no real cursor speed control it's a pain and then some.

Anyway. It won't be perfect. But it will be as good as it was. Probably better. And that suffices right now. Some exiles can't see what sort of demand there is for a pick up and play arpg on multiple platforms that doesn't demand seasonal play, won't be volatile in terms of balance and has a solid reputation spanning decades. Which I find a little odd given so many of them bitch about game changes. D2R is about as reliable as an arpg gets in terms of what worked yesterday will work tomorrow. There is a comfort in that, and it's very welcome when you have other games that constantly change in the spirit of growth and evolution.

Sometimes you just want mac n cheese, and you want it just how you remember it. But since your palate has changed, so too must the nostalgia-evoking product. That's the challenge of the remaster. Of the remake. To return to something that cannot be returned exactly as it was.

And it only really works when the original product was a Mac n cheese. Was inimitable and unique, but absolutely not without its flaws or drawbacks. On that we all agreed as well even as we shoveled in another mouthful.

PoE will never be mac n cheese. It never established a single classic, beloved flavour. Everyone has their own idea of it and that's a big part of why we argue about it all the time. It's a shame because I think GGG had the chops to make a classic. Instead they opted for the hipster's idea of classic: ever changing and ever contentious, and frequently insufferable in its inarticulate intentions.

Oh well. At least it made a lot of money.

"

Foreverhappychan wrote:

Some exiles can't see what sort of demand there is for a pick up and play arpg on multiple platforms that doesn't demand seasonal play, won't be volatile in terms of balance and has a solid reputation spanning decades. Which I find a little odd given so many of them bitch about game changes. D2R is about as reliable as an arpg gets in terms of what worked yesterday will work tomorrow. There is a comfort in that, and it's very welcome when you have other games that constantly change in the spirit of growth and evolution.

Sometimes you just want mac n cheese, and you want it just how you remember it.

That's been my biggest gripe with PoE since forever and maybe also the reason why I never really put effort into trying Last Epoch (the latter because it is not finished, yet, so stability is not to be expected).
And standard is not really an option - or rather, doesn't make a difference because it too will change every 3 months -, so I play each league, get one or two characters into the 80s and yellow maps and then the new league comes. Rinse and repeat.

"

Foreverhappychan wrote:

D2R is about as reliable as an arpg gets in terms of what worked yesterday will work tomorrow. There is a comfort in that, and it's very welcome when you have other games that constantly change in the spirit of growth and evolution.

Sometimes you just want mac n cheese, and you want it just how you remember it. But since your palate has changed, so too must the nostalgia-evoking product. That's the challenge of the remaster.

My prediction, which I hold with great conviction, is: this challenge is insurmountable. The mass reception to the game will turn sour.

Why? You can't have what the players call "balance" — or perhaps more accurately, the illusion thereof — and have this "mac and cheese" at the same time. I'm not saying that Diablo 2 had no illusion of balance, but it was the equivalent of Santa Claus — the type of illusion that can only fool a child. Yet that illusion is critical to, say, how people perceive D2's PvP. Heck, there are going to be lots who don't remember the balance of PvE because they underestimate just how much they cheated with third party programs back in the day.

Actually, mac and cheese isn't nearly the appropriate analogy. Plenty of grownups like mac and cheese. What Diablo 2 really was, was cotton candy. Sugar and fluff.

Well, sugar, fluff, and a damn good story. And by story, I don't just mean the excellent Marius cinematics, but music, bosses, level design — well, for the most part. Heck, if you're only going through it once, the sadism of the Chaos Sanctuary feels almost appropriate. If I am wrong about my little prediction and D2R ends up being relatively well received, it will be because it is received in spite of, rather than for, its potentially glaring lack of replayability. I think this is one of the reasons Final Fantasy 7 Remake was not merely accepted but adored — there were many places in that game that were genuinely beautiful to see — once. If the trip from the Rogue Encampment to, well, the Rogue Encampment again-but-Nightmare-this-time is good enough, then maybe, just maybe, people will find sufficient value in THAT journey to feel more than good about their purchase.

But if you think they're going to find it going from level 60 to level 80, I think you're kidding yourself.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Well, sugar, fluff, and a damn good story. And by story, I don't just mean the excellent Marius cinematics, but music, bosses, level design — well, for the most part. Heck, if you're only going through it once, the sadism of the Chaos Sanctuary feels almost appropriate. If I am wrong about my little prediction and D2R ends up being relatively well received, it will be because it is received in spite of, rather than for, its potentially glaring lack of replayability. I think this is one of the reasons Final Fantasy 7 Remake was not merely accepted but adored — there were many places in that game that were genuinely beautiful to see — once. If the trip from the Rogue Encampment to, well, the Rogue Encampment again-but-Nightmare-this-time is good enough, then maybe, just maybe, people will find sufficient value in THAT journey to feel more than good about their purchase.

But if you think they're going to find it going from level 60 to level 80, I think you're kidding yourself.

Back in the days when winning mean beating the end game boss then watching the awesome credit roll and you know it is time to stop? When Does people find sufficient value for their purchase?

Too much "Replayability" can be a bad thing. Especially When it is build-in intentionally. The problem with "infinite" replayability games is you know sure as hell it doesn't have infinite content, it just run in a loop. It is a good thing the casuals are easily bored.

FF7 remake is decent and acceptable. Adored? Not really.

Adjacent update: per my current signature which will no doubt not be current forever, I'm utterly in love with Titan Quest Legendary Edition, the hand-crafted mobile version...and pairing a PS4 controller just makes it feel like the proper, lovingly made console version that never happened.

So I just put my tablet into stand mode on the coffee table, pair the controller and enjoy hours of the best TQ outside of the PC version.

Sadly there is too much lag when I try to cast it to the tv but that's just icing and I've always been content with muffins rather than cake.

"

Sadaukar wrote:

"

MagosX wrote:

They lost the assets, the 3d models that were used to generate the 2d sprites. They never lost the source code.

D2R recreated new models from scratch, so it wasn't much of a problem.

after a quick google search:

https://www.gamebyte.com/file-corruption-is-the-reason-well-likely-never-get-a-diablo-2-remaster/

"

"According to the creators, the entire backup of the game’s source code and assets was lost during the final stages of development thanks to a file corruption."
...
"However, there’s still no root code or assets to build from, meaning that if Blizzard ever decided to reboot the game in the form of a remaster, it would be a pretty massive task."

https://www.pcgamer.com/diablo-2s-lost-assets-werent-really-a-problem-for-diablo-2-resurrected/

"

according to Diablo lead Rod Fergusson and principal designer Rob Gallerani, the code and asset loss wasn't really as bad as the Schaefers remembered.