|
-
Hammerhead Shark
Also since D3 isn't going to be released until 2011, you have plenty of time to replay D2, plus play Sacred 1/2, Dungeon Siege 1/2, Torchlight, etc
Phenom II 550BE . Biostar TA-785G3. 512MB HD4850 . 2 GB DDR3 . WD 250 GB Sata . Razer AC1 . 500W psu. Win 7 Home
-
I don't roll on Shabbos!
Eh, Torchlight is okay. It is very simple and gets repetitive after a few hours. I would say it is good for one play through which takes around 8-10 hours.
I'm surprised no one said Dungeon Siege. DS1 and 2 are pretty fun games although you command an entire party instead of a single guy. I thought they were fun at the time.
PC: Corsair 550D
4280k | Asus Rampage Gene | Mushkin 4x4GB | EVGA 780
Intel 120GB SSD + 2TB Seagate | Seasonic 660 Plat
2x Alphacool XT45 | Laing DDC | Bitspower
Currently playing: Civ 5
Last Game Beaten: Walking Dead
-
Mako Shark
 Originally Posted by vrao81
Those graphics look really dated - they would be fine for 2001/02, but in 2010 they are really lacking, especially compared to the modern games such as Crysis.
True, diablo 2 was like that too, by the time it came out the graphics were dated. The res was 640 X 480 and the game still had glidegl support when 3dfx was on its way down, it actually ran better under glide than d3d. Then the expansion upped the res to 800X600 which is still small. I guess that's what you get when it takes forever to release a game. Hopefully d3 has higher resolutions
Last edited by PriMaTe; 03-10-2010 at 07:54 PM.
Corsair 550vx
GIGABYTE GA-EP45-UD3L
C2D e6750 @ 2.66
2 gig ram
Asus Radeon 4850
Audigy 2
-
Mako Shark
 Originally Posted by vrao81
Those graphics look really dated - they would be fine for 2001/02, but in 2010 they are really lacking, especially compared to the modern games such as Crysis.
Blizzard never tried to use cutting-edge graphics in their games, and it has worked for them. When you use cutting-edge graphics, then your only customers are people with cutting-edge hardware.
This is why games like World of Warcraft and Starcraft can be run on every internet cafe computer across the entire world, on launch day. When those two games came out in 2004 and 1999 respectively, they could be run on machines with integrated graphics. Granted, integrated graphics required you to run on low detail. But it ran, and you could have an enjoyable gaming experience.
Every single game Blizzard has released has been an absolute blockbuster smash since the release of Warcraft 1/2 in 1994/1995. I think they know what they are doing.
-
Mako Shark
 Originally Posted by Timman_24
Eh, Torchlight is okay. It is very simple and gets repetitive after a few hours. I would say it is good for one play through which takes around 8-10 hours.
Actually, if people are in the mood for being a loot whore, check out Borderlands.
It's 1st person sci-fi shooter instead of 3rd person isometric fantasy game. But they totally nailed the loot whore game mechanic, if that is what people are in the mood for.
-
Great White Shark
 Originally Posted by vrao81
Those graphics look really dated - they would be fine for 2001/02, but in 2010 they are really lacking, especially compared to the modern games such as Crysis.
God no. Diablo is meant to have top down graphics. There is no comparison nor should there be.
War... War never changes.
-
Awesome.
 Originally Posted by Timman_24
Eh, Torchlight is okay. It is very simple and gets repetitive after a few hours. I would say it is good for one play through which takes around 8-10 hours.
I'm surprised no one said Dungeon Siege. DS1 and 2 are pretty fun games although you command an entire party instead of a single guy. I thought they were fun at the time.
I didn't get into the second one as much, but Dungeon Siege 1 was an excellent game and extremely fun in multiplayer.
-
Hammerhead Shark
 Originally Posted by Wurm
God no. Diablo is meant to have top down graphics. There is no comparison nor should there be.
I agree. Comparing Diablo 3 to Crysis in terms of graphics is dumb.
As for it looking bad, I think it looks great. Best of all I'm not going to need 15 video cards and 45 cpus to play it. Hell I'm about the content more then anything anyways. So much so that I actually jumped on an emulated EQ server that runs True classic EQ, pre-exapnsions of any kind. I'm talking 1999 baby . Graphics and all. The game looks terrible but the memories it brings are timeless.
Anyways, most companies today focus too much on the Graphical aspect of games and don't do enough gameplay wise. Blizzard has always been the opposite. I'm sure if you asked any video game developing companies out there they would tell you that they would give almost anything to own any number of blizzards franchises.
Antec Three Hundred Two | Intel DP67BA | Intel 2600k | Corsair CWCH60 | CORSAIR Vengeance 16GB (PC3-12800) | PNY GTX 580 | Samsung 830 256GB SSD | WD RE4 2TB (WD2002FYPS) | Asus Xonar DG Sound | LG Blu-Ray Burner | Windows 7 Ultimate x64
Work:
Macbook Pro 15" Retina Display | 8GB Ram | 256GB SSD | Mac OS 10.8
-
Into the Wasteland
+1 for Torchlight! great little game. Having a spellcasting pet who sells junk for you is great.
Xbox gamertag: oWastelander
Laptop: ASUS ROG Strix G15 AMD Advantage Ryzen 9 5980HX Radeon RX6800M
ASUS 27 QHD 2K External Display
Xbox Series X
-
 Originally Posted by kent1146
No, seriously, look into Torchlight. Here is why:
Torchlight is a game made by Runic Games. Runic Games was founded by Travis Baldree, Max Schaefer, Eric Schaefer, Bill Roper, and David Brevik. Max and Eric Shaefer, Roper, and Brevik were all from Blizzard North, the division of Blizzard that creates the Diablo franchise. Torchlight is as close to a “Diablo clone” as you can get.
And BTW – Diablo 3 will have a “Nintendo” look, or “World of Warcraft” art style.
I respectfully disagree.
D3 just doesn't have the same out-of-proportioned bodies with huge bobble-heads and massive feet.
Nevertheless I do take the point, there certainly IS something of a corrupting influence of WoW in there alright. Albeit toned-down a notch or three.
-
Hammerhead Shark
 Originally Posted by vrao81
Those graphics look really dated - they would be fine for 2001/02, but in 2010 they are really lacking, especially compared to the modern games such as Crysis.
The graphics are actually quite good. They have gone for a "Cartoon" look to the game rather than photo-realism, but textures, lighting and what have you are all well done.
For the record, I don't like the cartoon look, but they achieved what they aimed for.
RIG:
XCLIO 2000 Black & Titanium Case
KingWin Gold Certified 80+ 1000 Watt PS
Asus P8Z77-V Premium Motherboard
Intel Core I7 3770K @ 5.0 gHz
Corsair CWCH70 Hydro Series H80 CPU Liquid Cooler
CORSAIR Vengence 16GB
PowerColor Radeon 7990 6GB
OCZ Vertex 3 SATA 3 SSD
1TB WD Black Edition SATA 3 + 3TB Seagate SATA 3
Panasonic DVD
Windows 7 Ultimate - 64 bit
-
Mako Shark
 Originally Posted by PriMaTe
True, diablo 2 was like that too, by the time it came out the graphics were dated. The res was 640 X 480 and the game still had glidegl support when 3dfx was on its way down, it actually ran better under glide than d3d. Then the expansion upped the res to 800X600 which is still small. I guess that's what you get when it takes forever to release a game. Hopefully d3 has higher resolutions 
The real problem is with replayability these days...640x480 on a 15 inch monitor was ok when Diablo was released...but if you get nostalgic and want to replay the original Diablo you are looking at 640x480 on a 19-30 inch monitor...UGLY
A64 3700+ (San Diego)
ABIT KN8 SLI
2x512MB PC 3200 DDR
BFG GTS 250 1 GB
SB Audigy
250gig Maxtor Maxline Plus II SATA HD
Viewsonic VA1912wb
-
Master of the obvious
Please Blizzard - no more WoW graphics. The look is done.
-
Mako Shark
 Originally Posted by kent1146
Torchlight is as close to a “Diablo clone” as you can get.
I'll check it out but right now that crown belongs to NOX.
 Originally Posted by BoaConstrictor
I dunno. I only enjoyed Diablo II because of the trading/item hoarding in multiplayer. Single Player did not hold my interest, so these Diablo clones really cant hold my attention for long since there's no "Battle.net" for them.
Titan Quest was unique enough and I got it for $20 but still have not finished it because its just hard to hold my interest unless Im looking for rare items in these types of games...
Ever since the first Tomb Raider game the moment I start to get bored or frustrated I go for the guide and then the cheats. Grinding levels was just no fun with Titan Quest so I cheated and just played the game all the way through with max gold and some creative use of the skill points. Thus I finish games I otherwise would not. On Tomb Raider I burned myself out on the first levels by refusing to use a guide and never finished the game.
__________________
"So, Lone Star, now you see that evil will always triumph because good is dumb." - Dark Helmet
100% Green Poster. ZERO Carbon Emissions.
Demetrius I of Macedon was offended when the Spartans sent his court a single envoy, and exclaimed angrily, "What! Have the Lacedaemonians sent no more than one ambassador?" The Spartan responded, "Aye, one ambassador to one king."
-
Mako Shark
Are torchlight and NOX multiplayer at all or just single? The main reason I loved Diablo so much was going around with friends to level and loot. A nice fill in would be very nice until D3. Borderlands is close but just not the same.
Currently playing: Destiny. NHL 15. (ONE) Stronghold Crusader 2. KF2 (PC).
Gamer Tag: MajorPayne189 Steam ID: MajorPayne
I7 930, Gigabyte x58a, 6 GB DDR3, 1 TB Black, Radeon 5850, Corsair 750W, Win 7 x64
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|