Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
Comments
People loved that shit, man. That was like the best shit ever.
The tone in the original Diablo's actually fitted the game quite well. They weren't just about, like, clicking and looting, which is what a lot of people think Diablo is about.
Torchlight made the same mistake; it concerned itself with nothing but clicking and looting, and forgot to give itself anything beyond that that wasn't extremey bareboned.
The first game I might have agreed. But the second game made a concerted effort into replicating what people liked about Diablo II (with more color) while changing a lot of the outdated mechanics and other annoying things about Diablo II.
Yes, there is clicking and looting, but it's nowhere near as mindless as you guys are making it seem.
I can't comment about the second game. The first game, barring some massive change in core mechanics partway through, was one of the most mindless things I have ever played.
I believe Torchlight 2 is an improvement over Torchlight, but it's still not as up to snuff as I'd like, and there's still too much of a focus on the progression of combat over the gameworld, the atmosphere, and the like.
That is to say; in Diablo, the whole clicking and looting thing served two purposes; it was the primary way you experienced the game, and it established a rythm of gameplay- a simple progression, wherein you would enter a room, kill a mob spawn, get some loot, go into the next room.
Torchlight 2 has the same thing, but it focuses on the rythm of gameplay, rather than using it to get the player to experience of the game.
Is it a bad game? Well, I don't really think so. However, it's not an excellent game, either. It's just enjoyable.
I...don't understand what you're trying to say here.
There's not many other ways I can say it.
In Diablo, the constant clicking and looting is used to get you to progress through the game. It is also a progression in itself; however, the primary purpose of it is like... turning the pages of a book; it's used to get you through one part of the game and onto the next.
In Torchlight (and, for that matter, Diablo 3), the constant clicking and looting is the game. It's not used to get you to progress through the game, moving from one area to the next; rather, moving from one area to the next is how you get to the next bit of loot. The atmosphere is there to keep you mildly entertained, rather than being used as a draw to reel the player in.
It's like treating turning pages in a novel as an experience in itself.
Only turning pages is a lot less fun, I guess. Maybe it's like those little cartoons people draw on the corner of pages, and you can watch through them as you flip through the pages.
I can say for certain Torchlight II never felt like this for me. Yes, loot was a big part of the game but it always felt like a means to an end. To me, the skill system was more directly tied to progression, I think of my characters based on their builds (Dualzerker, Flame or Storm Mage, Tank or Cannongineer etc.) and gauge progress by how that build grows (How many levels until skill X? How does skill Y change at tier 2? What does skill Z do, and is is it good? etc.)
But that's just another symptom of what I'm saying.
Imagine if, let's say Dark Souls, dropped everything but its gameplay and difficulty.
Yes, you'd still have a game with a decent gameplay. But you'd be missing out on many of the actual draws of the game- the cold, empty atmosphere, the quiet story in the background, the oppression against you, the feeling that the world simply doesn't give a shit. You'd miss out on all the boss fights, you'd miss out on seeing the NPC's live and die, you'd miss out on the tone of the story.
That's what Torchlight 2 is missing; all the little touches that make the gameplay something besides an end in itself.
When you put it like that, I don't see what's wrong with gameplay being an end in itself.
And this isn't Dark Souls. It's not trying to be atmospheric, or deep, it's an ever increasing snowball going through hordes of enemies and forgive me for finding a visceral joy in that.
I'm just glad I'm not the only one who has cutscenes with skipping sound in every other game I ever play anymore.
A visceral joy is fine, but...there are games that provide that, and have stuff other than that as well.
^Yeah, but there are few games that hit a sweet spot like Diablo-likes, or certain Beat-Em-Ups.
Yeah.
I understand why people like it, but I can't call it good. Much like how I love TES even though it's kind of shit.
There's nothing wrong with gameplay being an end in itself.
It's just shallow. Shallow? It's the closest word I can think of to fit it.
Gameplay can carry a game on its own, the same way a story can carry a novel on its own. However, without anything else to it- tone, atmosphere, or prose in a novel's case- it ends up feeling shallow.
That is; there is more to a game than gameplay. There are certainly games that carry themselves on nothing but gameplay- the various Wii Sports games come to mind- but I'll never be able to hold them up as shining examples of all that is good with video games.
Compare that to Diablo or Dark Souls, which have both engaging gameplay and tone, atmosphere, and the like to support it.
The result is that Torchlight ends up feeling very, very shallow in comparison, which makes comparing them seem kind of silly.
Lacking might be a better word to use than 'shallow', there.
What I'm trying to say is that between a game with engaging gameplay, and a host of other things such as tone, atmosphere, and design, and a game which supports itself with just engaging gameplay, the first is going to at least seem better to my mind.
I think Diablo's doppelganger games suffer from WoW imitation syndrome -- they're built as imitations of other gameplay experiences rather than as new games in their own right, making them the game equivalent of fan fiction. Games that are great in their own right tend to be pioneers in certain respects, at least in the context of their release.
For instance, Metal Gear Solid hasn't aged as poorly as it could have, but it's not up to snuff with modern game design by a long shot. All the same, it's easy to see why it's so beloved, as it used the limitations of PS1-era game technology as a means of occasional post-modern storytelling. Ocarina of Time introduced a lock-on system, making 3D combat much more intuitive through relational movement. Demon's Souls used a combination of consistent gamestate post-failure with a singular, universal currency. Once upon a time, Call of Duty was innovative, turning weapon sighting into a universal gameplay mechanic, plus the introduction of a regenerative health bar (for better or worse -- probably for the better back in the CoD2 days).
There are other factors to take into consideration, naturally, such as tone, atmosphere, characterisation and so on. But the common factor that characterises the most excellent, memorable and relevant games to my mind is the introduction of something new, and often that new thing becomes a standard feature of games in its genre. There's certainly good sense in using established mechanics and narrative techniques well, of course, but that's not mutually exclusive with introducing new factors for the player to take into consideration and thereby delivering a unique experience anyway.
Things I've bought through the sale. Trine collection and Psychonauts. Enjoying Trine 1 so far, but that survivalist achievement is ticking me off. Guess I'll wait till I've beaten the game to go for that. Even though I only bought 2 games, I know my wallet is gonna take a huge hit on the last day.
I will give you that the cartoony graphics rather clash with the gameplay, but I'm really not sure why this matters in the long run.
The Diablo series has a very intricate and involved plot that almost no one cares about. Torchlight seems to just do away with something they assumed most people would ignore anyway, and they're probably right.
And honestly? It's far more Diablo like than Diablo III. That game is a clusterfuck of copying games that were copying things from the first two games. It's like an Inception of bad ideas. Without its ridiculous DRM it would've been simply bland, but with it the game is nigh unplayable.
There will never be another Diablo II. But, Torchlight II is a very good game, and I don't see a point in ragging on it for being "only enjoyable" rather than "excellent". In fact, doing so sounds incredibly snobby, to be totally honest with you.
It's kind of like ragging on the first Conduit game for not being Halo (we will ignore the existence of the second Conduit game entirely).
Well, here's the thing. When I play a game that only delivers on good mechanics, there's a reminder in the back of my head going "you know, I have games that have good mechanics and other good qualities."
Well, CU kind of summed up what I was going to say.
The only other entry in the Diablo clone genre right now (as far as I know, anyway) other than Torchlight II is Diablo III itself, which is horribly bland even without its hair-ripping online-only issues.
Now don't get me wrong, if you wanted to go back and play the absolute best of the best, you'd probably play Diablo II or one of its mods. But after awhile, playing the same game over and over again gets a bit boring, even if it is a genre built on repetition.
Yes. But Diablo 2 has everything Torchlight does. If I'm sick of playing Diablo 2, the only reason I'd have to play Torchlight is the cartoony feel of the game- and there are many better games than Torchlight 2 for that.
It's a difference between being a fan of the genre and being a fan of a specific game.
You, evidently, quite like the Diablo series.
That's fine, and you're entitled to.
I like the (first two entries of) The Diablo series, and most of their "clones". Because it's a kind of gameplay I enjoy. I do not need anything else. Anything on top of that is merely icing on an already delicious cake to me.
I sincerely hope you can understand that.
Well...there's a difference between understanding someone likes a game and thinking the game is good.
Like I said earlier, I love TES, but it's not very good.
I've played like, an hour of Diablo 2, total. I'm not a fan of Diablo; I'm a fan of what Diablo did.
As CU says; I love The Elder Scrolls, but I'd be hard-pressed to call them good. I can play games purely for their entertainment value.
You do realize that's my entire criticism, right?
That's a really, really nitpicky thing to say.
Do I think Torchlight is going to win any awards for game of the year? Probably not, unless there's a hack-n'-slash category. But it's fun, and generally speaking when I am playing a game I like to have fun.
There are many different ways to have fun, mind you--I find Yume Nikki fun too. But I am not sure, really, what the problem here is. Unless there isn't one and you're both just being argumentative, but I really don't have any interest in carrying on this conversation if that's the case.
Back up for a moment here.
You're criticizing a game for not being as good as a game that you played an hour of.
Once.
Seriously?
Like, that's not a joke?
How would you even know, then, if Torchlight 2 is better or worse, if you have so little to compare it to?
Yes! And I'm saying it doesn't really make a whole lot of sense. What is the critique here? Who's saying that Torchlight 2 is an objective masterpiece that you need to provide a counterpoint? Even Crimson was just arguing that it has a plot--and it does, just not one I'm particularly involved in.
It's about as nitpicky as criticizing MMO's for acting like operant conditioning chambers. It might not seem particularly bad to you, but it's a stupid way to design a game.
Being able to have fun with a game doesn't mean that the game isn't badly designed, after all, and that shouldn't stop people from criticizing it.
Nobody.
Who's saying that you didn't find it fun that you need to provide a counterpoint?
Nova, have you played Torchlight 2?
Well you two certainly seem to be implying that there's something wrong with me finding it fun, beause it's not "good". I've repeatedly asked why this is an issue and not been given a response.
I have.