In fact, I rather enjoyed the focus on potions and resource management. I know Diablo 2 by reputation and I have some idea of what end-game builds are capable of, so I'm not worried about mana constraints in the long-run. You have fewer abilities available to you and they're tied to two weapons that can be swapped on command, but the flow of combat is largely unchanged, with the notable exception that mana is a lot harder to come by in the early stages of the game. It took me about an hour to shake off my Diablo 3 muscle memory, but once I did, I felt right at home liquefying demons in Diablo 2. More surprising was how good it felt to play. Blizzard has (mostly) done a good job remastering things in the past, and Diablo 2: Resurrected always looked good from a distance. Any attempts at atmosphere or levity are wasted on my lizard brain.īut again, I expected that much. I remember paying attention during my first playthrough, but I have no concept of the story or stakes in that game anymore, and frankly I don't care. For me, every season I've played has been a race to make a broken build, stomp some rifts and bosses, and immediately forget about everything once the high wears off. Some two dozen seasons later, Diablo 3 has become this over-the-top carnival of numbers and loot. Diablo 2 definitely feels like a game ripped out of time, but that's honestly refreshing. And I meant that in a good way, to be clear.
I don't want to spend too much time preaching to the choir here, but I do want to share my reaction to playing Diablo 2 for the first time: "Damn, this is old school." That is a direct quote from yours truly on a Discord call with my Diablo 2-loving friends, who both shepherded me and played 'spot the differences' as I streamed my introduction to the remaster.
In my experience, a remaster like this can get by without nostalgia as long as it still feels distinct from the games that followed it, and Diablo 2 is wildly different from Diablo 3.
0 kommentar(er)
