Diablo 1 had a really cool interpretation of Hell.

Diablo 1 had a really cool interpretation of Hell. It's dark, creepy, the world itself is made of flesh and bone with pools of blood in the walls, almost as if Hell itself is almost a living thing, which makes it even creepier. It had a really good atmosphere. I'm honestly disappointed that Diablo 2 went with a generic fire and brimstone setting for hell, which is what you'd expect and can still be kind of cool, sure, but when the bar was set so high with Diablo 1, it feels like a downgrade in comparison

Schizophrenic Conspiracy Theorist Shirt $21.68

Homeless People Are Sexy Shirt $21.68

Schizophrenic Conspiracy Theorist Shirt $21.68

  1. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Nearly everything (meaning the development and subsequent success) about Diablo was about luck and random. Diablo 2 was a totally different matter in terms of goals and means.

  2. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    I like this about Doom as well. They also have metal bits included like it's Phyrexia

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Say, you guys wanna talk about retro games in general depicting hell, the underworld, and other particularly menacing and vile spirit worlds? There's a lot of different kinds, and while the classic burning hell sure has its appeal and plenty of mileage, the ones which do it at least a little bit different I think are super neat.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Ghouls & Ghosts is pretty hardcore. The worldbuilding is kind of not focused on because of the difficulty, but it would be horrifying.I was looking at those monsters and it's just one unspeakable grotesque after another. And with no rhyme or reason.
        What it made me think of was a dark world existing overlapped with the real world, and somehow it manifested everywhere all at once.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        I'm not 100% sure if it's supposed to be hell, but this spooky void you go into in Splatterhouse 2 to get your girlfriend back from the dead sure is something.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Hell being a cold void is a lot scarier than the fire and brimstone version imo

  3. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Hell is beyond mortal ken, it is impossible for a human mind to even conceive a mere inkling of its true nature.
    Repent anons. Repent and thou shalt be saved.

  4. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >bro in this game, hell is dark and creepy and there's bones and blood
    that's literally the most generic setting possible moron, and stop pretending there isn't muh fire and rocks in this game's hell too. what the frick is up with all these homosexuals suddenly pretending D1 is better than D2? D2 is the fricking king of ARPGs. has been since 2000, and always will be. D1 is a fine game but it does absolutely nothing better than D2 other than having an admittedly legit hub area.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Who shat in your bowl of Cheerios?

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        it was your choice to be insulted by my opinion

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Yet you're the one who sperged out because of my opinion

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            if any form of disagreement is "sperging out" to you, then you have aspergers.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >that's literally the most generic setting possible moron
      Fire and brimstone is more common. The depiction in 1 isn't 100% unique, but the walls being shaped from what appears to be large warped bone structures housing massive reservoirs of blood does stand out somewhat.

      >suddenly
      Not sudden, not unprecedented, not baseless, and your opinion is subjective. Plenty of people were arguing that the first game had various strengths over the second for more than two decades.

      I like this about Doom as well. They also have metal bits included like it's Phyrexia

      The living flesh textures in Doom are a treat, I need more such depictions.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >what the frick is up with all these homosexuals suddenly pretending D1 is better than D2?
      it really annoys me too. i was there, i played the shit out of Diablo, and the sequel was just insane, i no-lifed that and go back to it every few years for a replay.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >D2 is the fricking king of ARPGs
      The queen* since Torchlight 2 improved on it in most ways.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        which ways?

  5. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    You basically get that "fire and brimstone" as expected from D1 prior, and the initial hellish areas in D2 have more going on with them than expected themes.

  6. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    I really like the look of Diablo 1 and 2, that early Silicon Graphics workstation look. Silver is another game with that look

  7. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    diablo's atmosphere>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    -power gap->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    diablo 2's atmosphere
    this is fact and stating otherwise is outing yourself as a pleb

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      cringe

  8. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    no one played diablo because of its atmposhere. its literally a loot gambling simulator. instead of wasting your money you waste your time and you receive shiny loot. people always came back for that shit. also poe's atmosphere with all the space eldritch horror is way cooler than just "hell" but I understand I will alone here with this opionion, board is full of angry boomers who are scared to play anything remotely new.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >roguelikes are just gambling sims
      Boring opinion.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        you might find it boring but there is a reason diablo 2 was more successful than 1 and why real roguelikes have a hard time making money compared to stuff like path of exile or diablo 3/4. most of us are simple creatures and just want to do simple things.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          There's a lot I like about Diablo 2, I don't think it's a bad game, there's stuff which the second game does better, but there's stuff I don't like as much, things which the first game does better instead. It'd be neat to do a game somewhat like the first one, similar slowish pacing, with all the monsters hiding in the dark part, but with some of the added conveniences and some of the additional depth which 2 has, while not getting too much like the skinnerbox gameplay on the higher difficulties.

          Some mods for D1 add the LoD style quick weapon set swapping, and I really like that feature a lot, makes some weapon types more usable.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          As a simple man myself I've found it hard to choose one over the other. My only reservation is the musical style change that they did for the expansion. That "epic" orchestral style is fine but it's been the biggest departure in tone and style for both Diablo 1 and 2.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        It's a stretch to describe Diablo as a roguelike. Diablo has more in common with Gauntlet than Rogue, Nethack, ADOM, etc.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Completely agree except for the atmosphere bit. Diablo is one of the most overrated, mindless clickfests ever designed but the one thing it has is great atmosphere.

  9. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Sounds like a Hellraiser variation of Hell without the Cenobites.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      From what I remember of Hellraiser II wasn't the part of their world shown just a big stone maze with a their "god" floating above it all?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      I remember that as more stony.

      >>(all quests in D2 are marked out in advance)
      This is the only thing I felt was a step-down, simple lists that grew as you uncovered them would've been preferred. Everything else feels like it's bordering personal preference to even hairsplitting, as it's otherwise what I wanted out of a Diablo sequel.

      >personal preference
      Well, obviously. Again, I like Diablo 2, but it feels strongly different in style and tone.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >Again, I like Diablo 2, but it feels strongly different in style and tone.
        In so much that one is more expansive than the other, that's been the biggest difference for me besides loot being more of a pinata. I felt it expanded on the setting wonderfully, capturing the same kind of aesthetics and tone.

  10. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    There's absolutely appealing atmosphere in the first game, by the way, and in great part thanks to the sound design and music by Matt Uelmen. Even without it though, you're exploring these deep dark fantasy dungeons crawling with menacing horrors, it's not too harsh at first, but as you get deeper the opposition gets more oppressive. This isn't something Diablo 2 lacks, obviously, but there's substantial changes.
    >levels aren't actually generated fully procedurally anymore, instead each area for randomizing has one or two variants which is rotated and flipped randomly, with some entity placement being shuffled around in the spaces, this still works, but doesn't give you as much mileage, and it gets recognizable
    >music feels toned down, it's not as imposing or moody, and the sound design largely feels less punchy and memorable
    >voice acting feels toned down overall, any banter with the townsfolk or any quest dialogue in D1 is a treat, but in D2 it's usually understated
    >the aesthetic is just a lot less grounded, D2 starts on Blizzard's increasingly exaggerated aesthetic, it's not even close to as bad as WoW, but it's still a step down
    >at the same time, D2 feels a lot more grey, in dungeons at least, not that D1 was strongly vibrant or anything, but the way dungeon levels are color tinted really aids its look
    >the inventory art is mostly just passable, compare to how in D1, every single item is gorgeously detailed, colored, and shaded
    >being that it's not just one longass dungeon now, there's a bunch of outdoor areas and mini dungeons, which rules, but there's also a genuine appeal in a long as frick dungeon trek where you keep going deeper and deeper, and even stumble upon undisclosed opportunities, D2 doesn't deliver as much on this (all quests in D2 are marked out in advance)

    i will never call Diablo 2 a bad game, because it's good, but it has a number of flaws, and in various aspects it's just not as strong as its predecessor.

  11. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >>(all quests in D2 are marked out in advance)
    This is the only thing I felt was a step-down, simple lists that grew as you uncovered them would've been preferred. Everything else feels like it's bordering personal preference to even hairsplitting, as it's otherwise what I wanted out of a Diablo sequel.

  12. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    D2 should have incorporated Diablo 1 style Hell for perhaps the Chaos Sanctuary, especially with how short Act 4 is. Say once you activate the 3 seals, instead of spawning Diablo, you get a red portal on the center pentagram that takes you to a 3 floor Diablo 1 style Labyrinth that's really dark and has all sorts of gruesome bits and things.

    I still prefer Diablo 1 to Diablo 2 thanks to how gutted the balance for 2 has been. Melee classes are still completely impotent while your basic b***h Sorc can speedrun the game with ease. I'll never understand why Blizzard decided to just crank up monster health and armor rather than nerf the OP bullshit like Hammerdins and Sorcs.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *