Diablo II: Resurrected

"

Foreverhappychan wrote:

I dunno...I can't be the only person here old enough to remember a time when games were one time purchases and no one really cared about what the Devs did after that other than say keeping an eye out for future projects.

I remember. And I am soooo grateful that I have a library of old games that I can hop back into and nothing has changed. They are the same games that they were when they came out 30+ years ago. And I still have just as much fun with them today.

Then the dlc wave started. Somehow devs figured out that they could make a full game, and sell it to you in pieces and convince the player that it was BONUS levels.

"

Adrenicrome wrote:

Then the dlc wave started. Somehow devs figured out that they could make a full game, and sell it to you in pieces and convince the player that it was BONUS levels.

"Selling games in pieces" is substantially older than "the DLC wave". It was just called shareware back then.

I don't mind DLC that have full length , just like the old days standalone expansion, or the vanilla DLC of the Titan Quest and D2

The DLC of new game is the faction of a full game or standalone expansion, which sometimes it is skin , sometimes it is a single map (in Sniper Elite 2 case),

"

GusTheCrocodile wrote:

"Selling games in pieces" is substantially older than "the DLC wave". It was just called shareware back then.

Shareware and demo isn't the norm back then. NOW it is, unfinished beta, paid DLC, P2W, "pay for convenience", cosmetic skins. The difference is in its prominent.

"

Foreverhappychan wrote:

remember a time when games were one time purchases

I do.

I mean they have changed the promised TCP/IP to non-existent. What else are they going to change after enough purchases ?

It´s not like in the good old days where you bought a product and it was what it was.

Oh and you need the "service" of online only battle.net for multiplayer and probably for mods, if there will be mods at all. I guess also mandatory updates with the content they want or you cannot play.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zXxgomkQBlE

dude....almost every game has demo (talking about late 1990s)

And demo is free

Now you pay AAA price foe half of the game as demo and then DLCs worth a double for a "full" game

day 1 dlc says it all really. if you make a game, release it, then make an expansion, then release that... sure. when your expansion ships along side the game its just the game in 2 bits that youre selling separately because ur a scummy business.

"

Snorkle_uk wrote:

day 1 dlc says it all really.

"Day 1 DLC" says nothing, as far as I'm concerned. I've never understood why some wield the words as if they're something to be guilty about. Downloadable? Good. Extra content? You mean like if somehow Lord of Destruction had been available on the same launch day as Diablo 2? Hell yeah, no problem there. So the idea that "day 1 DLC" is inherently a bad thing has always struck me as most illogical.

I don't have a easy to remember catchphrase for what I think "says it all really." But I do have a kind of mental image for it.

There's a point in the early section of some very few games — the original Diablo 2 being one of them, Super Metroid for SNES being another — where the craftsmanship of EVERY facet of the experience is such that you begin to notice a conspicuous lack of flaws. Conspicuous, as in: while you can believe your eyes and ears that they don't exist now, you can't quite believe that the flaws never existed. So you begin to imagine parts of the game where you might have created flaws, flaws that DID, in your narrative, exist, but then were culled by a diligent game developer employee. You imagine this employee, quite visually despite having no idea what such employees actually look like, playing the game over and over to be irritated by the flaws, then removing them so they wouldn't irritate you, even though you can't quite know what those flaws were.

A truly great game is swimming with the ghosts of design mistakes. It doesn't feel inhabited, really — the dead do not inhabit — but neither does it feel like a place that has NEVER been inhabited. But you definitely get the feeling, from how things are arranged, that some intelligence had been here before you — and had loved the place very much. Perhaps dangerously too much. Enough to create a few ghosts. Enough to leave a piece of their soul behind.

A truly great game feels like trespassing, without ever setting eyes upon the owner — indeed, who knows if the owner will, or can, return? If I had to pick just one word for it, such a game feels haunted. Not in the nightmarish supernatural sense, but how it would feel to actually spend a night very much awake in a place local legend describes as haunted.

Ironically, it is the terrible game that feels like going where no man has gone before. If there is negative connotation to find in the phrase "day 1," it is in seeing a desperate last-minute scramble to first inhabit such places while you're first arriving in the game world. You simply know they won't be ready in time — not really ready. One does not simply haunt the new.

Or to put it another way, there's nothing wrong with your Day 1. But there's a lot wrong with playing a game during the development team's day 1. Or day 2. Or any day before you can feel the ghosts begin to swim.

Ooops. They broke shared stash somehow.

And some characters cant join games at all.

Oh well. Beta.

At least the lag is a lot better this time.

"

Snorkle_uk wrote:

day 1 dlc says it all really.

Yeah, people hate B4B for that

Also, most AAA game are expected to have DLC nowadays , Hitman 2 have the storyline gated behind DLC and then Hitman 3 basically a standalone expansion which moved to Epic so that Steam user does not have a chance to have a free upgrade on game engine