Poll: So... Diablo 3 or Torchlight 2?

[WoW Killer]

I was already told all of what you said earlier, you don't have to try again.

And I'm still sticking by anything you say is now worthless because your first instinct was to facepalm because someone was incorrect, not even largely, but just incorrect.

You're getting me and another poster confused. VladG posted "facepalm". I posted "".

 

[Aprilgold]

I was already told all of what you said earlier, you don't have to try again.

And I'm still sticking by anything you say is now worthless because your first instinct was to facepalm because someone was incorrect, not even largely, but just incorrect.

You're getting me and another poster confused. VladG posted "facepalm". I posted "".

Crap, your right, still though, I was told the same thing earlier.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

All loot is instanced to each player. What appears for Player X does not appear for Player Y, and vice versa. Whoever kills a mob, whoever got the first, last or 37th hit in, makes no difference. All players in the game get their own loot that drops. There is no loot stealing.

Can I ask you a question? How well does the game scale to multiple players? I'm planning on co-oping this with my girlfriend, but she was out last night so I messed around in solo and found it almost painfully easy. I'm sure it'll still be fun enough even then but I'm really hoping it kicks it up a notch as more people join.

 

[DingoDoom]

As for me, I am completely satisfied with what Blizzard have cooked up I use wireless internet and have no issues they said they were not going for the single player aspect with Diablo III this was said years months before.

So if it doesn't bother you, why should you care correct? If Blizzard did say that, why did they not just call this an MMO? What if your power goes out? There is no offline feature like Steam, it is not classified or labeled as an MMO. There are many people who lose internet for multiple random reasons, to say that you have no issue is a moot point, especially true if the SINGLE player aspect cannot be enjoyed by itself without Blizzards say so.

It is not a single player game, you have the option to play alone (God knows why you would want to) it is focused around working in a party of two or more people.]

Why would one want to play alone? Their preference, just like it is yours to play with others. The game is not focused on a party of two or more, it just has a party if you choose to play with friends.

Like everyone else mentioned, what if your internet goes down? The internet is not the same for everyone (ISP etc) so what do they do then? They can not enjoy the single-player for fun and they cannot even play with friends. Sure you can say go play other games, so why buy D3? It would be a completely useless game in the future then.

So be it if you don't have the internet you can't read this probably don't care about Diablo III unless you only played it via LAN with your close friends (again, if that was your choice I do not know why/if/how you're reading this and still not content with the current state of the game)

The stupidity of this argument is beyond stupid. You mean the people too poor to afford internet? They probably have other things to worry about other than a silly computer game. Like it has been said a hundred times before, Always online is a bad thing because it is a major problem if the internet goes down for any reason. "Oh but my internet rarely does that" Well la dee fucking da, there are many other people who doesn't have that luxury.

"I've been a Blizzard fan since 2004 and then on they've only ever faulted for me on two real points and that's they're too damn popular and servers can't handle their beef and secondly release times.

Well goodie, irrelevant and only applies to you just like the internet one.

Diablo III is perfectly fine as is I don't see your quarrels as anything but minor quibbles, back to the topic at hand

Your opinion. The people who cannot log in right now probably realize just how stupid always online is.

I can afford to buy both, I will buy both I do not see them as competitors.

Well good for you.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

So if it doesn't bother you, why should you care correct? If Blizzard did say that, why did they not just call this an MMO?

It's not an MMO. It is a multiplayer-required game though. They were pretty frank about that long before the game was available for pre-purchasing. People had lots of time to back out.

The servers taking a bath on the first day was pretty unfortunate though. Not SURPRISING necessarily. But unfortunate. I can understand being pissed. I would've been pretty pissed too.

 

[LiftYourSkinnyFists]

-snip-

I don't see your points, you've just gone off on a rant and incoherently dissected my previous post I do not quite follow where you're coming from.

 

[Admiral Stukov]

I would like to point out that when Ubisoft did their always online for singleplayer people was up in arms.

Give me one valid reason to have queuing in singleplayer and I will buy a physical copy of D3 and eat it.

So yeah tl;dr Torchlight 2.

 

[hino77]

Yeah,the whole always online thing is really retarded.Its so fun to have lags in a singleplayer mode... But besides the stupid always online thingy, the game is a blast.

 

[Vigormortis]

Easy one for me, Diablo 3. Torchlight 1 was a terrible hack and slash and there's nothing to lead me to believe its sequel will be any better. Diablo 3 on the other hand has a backing of a great series and everything I've seen only makes me want it even more.

Thing is, Torchlight 2 is made by the people responsible for that "backing of a great series". The team making TL2 comprised the majority of the team behind Diablo 2.

Torchlight 1, while I still loved it, was definitely flawed. However, this wasn't due to a lack of talent. It was due to a lack of funds and an eight month development window. (this even included building the game engine)

Frankly, I'm amazed they cracked out the game as it was in that amount of time; and with such a small budget.

But now, with the somewhat substantial funds they made off of the first Torchlight, and the extensive time they've had to develop, I'm completely psyched for Torchlight 2. I've heard Runic claim that they, from the onset, have set out to make Torchlight 2 the true spiritual successor to Diablo 2. Something I honestly can't say I see in Diablo 3.

So, yeah. Take all of that and add in no Always-On DRM, mod support, on-and-offline co-op and solo play, and a main story that's many, many times longer than Torchlight 1, and I'm sold. Plus, you know, it's only twenty bucks.

I may eventually get Diablo 3, but it'll have to drop down to at least the Torchlight 2 price range. There's no way in hell I'm paying more than thirty bucks for it.

 

[Vigormortis]

I would like to point out that when Ubisoft did their always online for singleplayer people was up in arms.

Give me one valid reason to have queuing in singleplayer and I will buy a physical copy of D3 and eat it.

So yeah tl;dr Torchlight 2.

But it's Blizzard!! They can do no wrong! Always-Online is only reprehensible if other companies do it.

This whole mess reminds me of the Mass Effect 3 fiasco.

On this very forum, prior to ME3's release, you'd see a set group of people constantly whine, *****, and complain about Day-1 DLC and on-disc DLC. Then, suddenly, the moment Bioware does it, these same exact people would start posting excuses on behalf of Bioware; claiming it's "not that bad" and that it's "necessary in todays game design" (no it isn't).

The hypocrisy that has flooded into this forum the past year or so has been so bad I'm nearly drowning in it.

[edit]
Do you know what's even more hilarious? Some of the posters I've seen defending and excusing this Always-On DRM for Diablo 3 are the same posters I regularly see start entire threads to ***** about Steam and it's (comparatively) milder DRM. As if Steam is the blight of the gaming industry and Battle.net is the God-sent savior.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go laugh at the incredible lunacy of it all.

 

[Axyun]

All loot is instanced to each player. What appears for Player X does not appear for Player Y, and vice versa. Whoever kills a mob, whoever got the first, last or 37th hit in, makes no difference. All players in the game get their own loot that drops. There is no loot stealing.

Can I ask you a question? How well does the game scale to multiple players? I'm planning on co-oping this with my girlfriend, but she was out last night so I messed around in solo and found it almost painfully easy. I'm sure it'll still be fun enough even then but I'm really hoping it kicks it up a notch as more people join.

Normal difficulty is pretty easy however there are people in the Battle.net forums stating that the difficulty begins to ramp up in act 2, with several people dying in act 2 itself. Seasoned Diablo players have claimed that as of act 2 they've had to stop dicking around and start putting thought into their builds to balance damage vs. suvivability.

The beta was awfully misleading for gauging difficulty as it only finished about a third of the way in to act 1.

As for mosnter scaling, it something like this:

Normal: +75% Health per additional player
Hell: +85% Health + 5% Damage per additional player
Nightmare: +95% Health + 10% Damage per additional player
Inferno: +110% Health + 15% Damage

So a party of 4 in Inferno will have monsters that have 430% health and deal 45% more damage.

 

[Admiral Stukov]

-snip-

But it's Blizzard!! They can do no wrong! Always-Online is only reprehensible if other companies do it.

This whole mess reminds me of the Mass Effect 3 fiasco.

Oh this very forum, prior to ME3's release, you'd see a set group of people constantly whine, *****, and complain about Day-1 DLC and on-disc DLC. Then, suddenly, the moment Bioware does it, these same exact people would start posting excuses on behalf of Bioware; decrying it's "not that bad" and that it's "necessary in todays game design".

The hypocrisy that has flooded into this forum the past year or so has been so bad I'm nearly drowning in it.

Such delicious hypocrisy, fanboys will be fanboys, etc.

Truth be told, at this date there's currently only two game developers who's games I'm likely to buy without first thoroughly checking for DRM, on-disc DLC (which isn't DLC at all), those being Obsidian, and CD Project Red. That list of "trustworthy" game developers used to be a lot longer just a year or two back.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Normal difficulty is pretty easy however there are people in the Battle.net forums stating that the difficulty begins to ramp up in act 2, with several people dying in act 2 itself. Seasoned Diablo players have claimed that as of act 2 they've had to stop dicking around and start putting thought into their builds to balance damage vs. suvivability.

The beta was awfully misleading for gauging difficulty as it only finished about a third of the way in to act 1.

As for mosnter scaling, it something like this:

Normal: +75% Health per additional player
Hell: +85% Health + 5% Damage per additional player
Nightmare: +95% Health + 10% Damage per additional player
Inferno: +110% Health + 15% Damage

So a party of 4 in Inferno will have monsters that have 430% health and deal 45% more damage.

Well that was a wealth of information, thank you.

My girlfriend can be a bit of a dope sometimes when it comes to online gaming and is content to let me do all the heavy lifting, so it sounds like it'll marginally harder instead of marginally easier, which is a relief.

 

[The Pinray]

There's been an influx of new Torchlight 2 footage on YouTube and I must say it's shaping up to be a great title.

 

[DingoDoom]

-snip-

I don't see your points, you've just gone off on a rant and incoherently dissected my previous post I do not quite follow where you're coming from.

What is so incoherent about it? Surely you do know how to read correct? Want me to summarize my points?

1) This is a single player game if there is a single player option. Battle.net, just like in previous Diablo games, supplement the core game, not carry it.
2) Playing alone and playing with friends is a preference
3) Not everybody has perfect internet like you. Just because YOU don't have problems does not mean others don't either.
4) Bad servers, ISP problems etc. does not mean someone does not have internet
5) Likewise, equating bad service to having no internet is pure stupidity.
6) There are major problems with always online

Edit: @BloatedGuppy
No, D3 is not an MMO but it is also not a multiplayer game. Multiplayer is an option, not a requirement. D3 is not a multiplayer centric game like say TF2, it should and is perfectly viable to play it single-player much like Dungeon Siege 2. You CAN have your friends join and have some co-op fun, but it is not required to beat the game. The reason I bring up Dungeon Siege 2 is because it is very similar in genre and it has a similar co-op system with either friends or with NPC controlled characters.

 

[LiftYourSkinnyFists]

-snip-

I don't see your points, you've just gone off on a rant and incoherently dissected my previous post I do not quite follow where you're coming from.

What is so incoherent about it? Surely you do know how to read correct? Want me to summarize my points?

1) This is a single player game if there is a single player option. Battle.net, just like in previous Diablo games, supplement the core game, not carry it.
2) Playing alone and playing with friends is a preference
3) Not everybody has perfect internet like you. Just because YOU don't have problems does not mean others don't either.
4) Bad servers, ISP problems etc. does not mean someone does not have internet
5) Likewise, equating bad service to having no internet is pure stupidity.
6) There are major problems with always online

Edit: @BloatedGuppy
No, D3 is not an MMO but it is also not a multiplayer game. Multiplayer is an option, not a requirement. D3 is not a multiplayer centric game like say TF2, it should and is perfectly viable to play it single-player much like Dungeon Siege 2. You CAN have your friends join and have some co-op fun, but it is not required to beat the game. The reason I bring up Dungeon Siege 2 is because it is very similar in genre and it has a similar co-op system with either friends or with NPC controlled characters.

Blizzard stated long ago they were dropping the core single player element.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Edit: @BloatedGuppy
No, D3 is not an MMO but it is also not a multiplayer game. Multiplayer is an option, not a requirement. D3 is not a multiplayer centric game like say TF2, it should and is perfectly viable to play it single-player much like Dungeon Siege 2. You CAN have your friends join and have some co-op fun, but it is not required to beat the game. The reason I bring up Dungeon Siege 2 is because it is very similar in genre and it has a similar co-op system with either friends or with NPC controlled characters.

But it is. Because they changed it so you need to be online to play it.

I understand what you're saying, and we can sit around and discuss all day long whether or not they should have done what they did, but they did, and Diablo III is now by definition a multiplayer game that you can choose to solo in.

Once that "always online" business is in there, and your friends can drop in and out of your game at any time, you cease to be a single player title in any meaningful sense of the term.

 

[DingoDoom]

But it is. Because they changed it so you need to be online to play it.

I understand what you're saying, and we can sit around and discuss all day long whether or not they should have done what they did, but they did, and Diablo III is now by definition a multiplayer game that you can choose to solo in.

Once that "always online" business is in there, and your friends can drop in and out of your game at any time, you cease to be a single player title in any meaningful sense of the term.

I agree it is pointless to argue it further but that brings back the question of why didn't they just advertise it as an MMO? There is literally nothing resembling a single player experience. Like you said, it is essentially a multiplayer game with the always online yet it is still advertised as a action RPG last time I checked.

As far as I know, the multiplayer aspect, barring the coop, is from the retarded auction house and possibly pvp. The latter which D2 also had but was separate from the singleplayer. Always online is NOT necessary for coop at all as there is also not enough 'multiplayer' aspects to justify this game AS a multiplayer game in my opinion.