I loved Diablo 2 and the original Guild Wars, spent YEARS playing both........but for your money, if you had to choose the better game, which would it be?
This topic is locked from further discussion.
You will probably get many more hours out of GW2, so that's what I recommend, even though Diablo 3 in it's current state is pretty awesome.
Diablo III is an addicting but very average action roleplaying game. When I quit playing Dibalo 2 I thought to myself "yeah that game was awesome but time to move on". When I finished playing DIablo III I figured I had wasted my time on the product. The combat is good (good enough to keep people playing until they gear up). But everything else about the game is the epitome of medicore or average.
Haven't played GW2 so can't comment on that.
GW2. A good, free to play MMO trumps D3 easily. Unless you love "lootz", then maybe D3 but it is very grindy to get the good stuff.
[QUOTE="DanielDust"]The graphics are good, but it runs terribly bad for how it looks. i was going to say "don't feed the troll". but then i saw who i was quoting. It runs worse than BF 3, that is in no way, shape or form acceptable by any stretch of the imagination. It's the only thing that kept me from joining day one, waiting for areas to clear a bit, hopefully next week. It's a decent looking game, not more not less.[QUOTE="jakes456"]Awful graphics for 2012.
BrunoBRS
[QUOTE="BrunoBRS"][QUOTE="DanielDust"] The graphics are good, but it runs terribly bad for how it looks.DanielDusti was going to say "don't feed the troll". but then i saw who i was quoting. It runs worse than BF 3, that is in no way, shape or form acceptable by any stretch of the imagination. It's the only thing that kept me from joining day one, waiting for areas to clear a bit, hopefully next week. It's a decent looking game, not more not less. kevin was right. too many PC gamers worry more about the game's performance than how much fun it is.
[QUOTE="DanielDust"][QUOTE="BrunoBRS"] i was going to say "don't feed the troll". but then i saw who i was quoting.BrunoBRSIt runs worse than BF 3, that is in no way, shape or form acceptable by any stretch of the imagination. It's the only thing that kept me from joining day one, waiting for areas to clear a bit, hopefully next week. It's a decent looking game, not more not less. kevin was right. too many PC gamers worry more about the game's performance than how much fun it is. I'd say I have good reasons to worry when I can't even get 30 frames in zones with a lot of action on a GTX670 at just 1680x1050.
Yes, when games run bad, so bad it takes the fun away, people worry about it and hope it'll get better, they don't go "it's okay man, because it's fun".
Not sure why you're suddently trying to hide all this, now that it launched, everyone knows the worst problem of GW 2 is optimization, the rest of the problems being irrelevant, since overall it's a great game, or what, you're going against "game runs bad" because it somehow sounds like the game is bad or what?
[QUOTE="AjaxNeron"]
For a single-player experience, Diablo III. If you've got online, which I'm assuming you do, then Guild Wars 2.
jakes456
because Diablo 3 can be played offline... /facepalm
No need to be rude. I meant if you want to play multiplayer, then play Guild Wars 2. Diablo III's multiplayer pales in comparison.
[QUOTE="jakes456"]
[QUOTE="AjaxNeron"]
For a single-player experience, Diablo III. If you've got online, which I'm assuming you do, then Guild Wars 2.
AjaxNeron
because Diablo 3 can be played offline... /facepalm
No need to be rude. I meant if you want to play multiplayer, then play Guild Wars 2. Diablo III's multiplayer pales in comparison.
He's pointing out that you need an online connection to play both.Diablo 3 is pretty dang fun as long as you don't expect the replay value to be in the 300+ hours unless you are very hardcore. And replay it is, literally.
GW2 looks great but I hear many people say the PVE becomes really boring really fast. I havn't played it myself yet so wouldn't know.
You deceide.
kevin was right. too many PC gamers worry more about the game's performance than how much fun it is. I'd say I have good reasons to worry when I can't even get 30 frames in zones with a lot of action on a GTX670 at just 1680x1050.[QUOTE="BrunoBRS"][QUOTE="DanielDust"] It runs worse than BF 3, that is in no way, shape or form acceptable by any stretch of the imagination. It's the only thing that kept me from joining day one, waiting for areas to clear a bit, hopefully next week. It's a decent looking game, not more not less.DanielDust
Yes, when games run bad, so bad it takes the fun away, people worry about it and hope it'll get better, they don't go "it's okay man, because it's fun".
Not sure why you're suddently trying to hide all this, now that it launched, everyone knows the worst problem of GW 2 is optimization, the rest of the problems being irrelevant, since overall it's a great game, or what, you're going against "game runs bad" because it somehow sounds like the game is bad or what?
funny, i have a worse card, and run the game maxed on 1080p at 50-60fps.I am actually kind of shocked that your asking this question.. Weren't you the biggest fan of Guild Wars in this forum if memory serves? Would think Guild Wars 2 would be the obvious pick.. As for D3... Its ok to good.. To me it feels alot like Diablo 2 was at release.. Amazing at first but just wore down after awhile.. It was really only after the expansion and numerous patches that it really became amazingly addictive.. Diablo 3 is on the right steps but I honestly think it has a long ways to go before it can get any where close to the kind of level D2 got to.sSubZerOo
Yes, a big fan, I suppose I was less vocal of my love for Diablo 2
kevin was right. too many PC gamers worry more about the game's performance than how much fun it is. I'd say I have good reasons to worry when I can't even get 30 frames in zones with a lot of action on a GTX670 at just 1680x1050.[QUOTE="BrunoBRS"][QUOTE="DanielDust"] It runs worse than BF 3, that is in no way, shape or form acceptable by any stretch of the imagination. It's the only thing that kept me from joining day one, waiting for areas to clear a bit, hopefully next week. It's a decent looking game, not more not less.DanielDust
Yes, when games run bad, so bad it takes the fun away, people worry about it and hope it'll get better, they don't go "it's okay man, because it's fun".
Not sure why you're suddently trying to hide all this, now that it launched, everyone knows the worst problem of GW 2 is optimization, the rest of the problems being irrelevant, since overall it's a great game, or what, you're going against "game runs bad" because it somehow sounds like the game is bad or what?
Somethings wrong then.. Because I play on my 7850 at 1080p, everything max oued, fxaa AA.. And it bounces from 40 to 80 fps.. It usually hovers in the high 40s to mid 50s..
[QUOTE="RoccoHout"]Both games are a dissapointment.GW2 by far. Diablo 3 is imo a dissapointment,-Unreal-
Not sure about Diablo but you could see what you would get with GW2 a mile off so don't pretend to act disappointed about it.... Not that you should be, it's a good MMO in its own right I'd say.
Huh what? You don't like GW2 because it looks dated graphically, but you think Diablo 3 looks great? This makes no fvcking sense what so ever, especially when GW2 is technically more advanced graphically than Diablo 2 by a long way..I liked GW1 and am not that impressed with GW2, mostly due to the graphics being so dated looking. I can't get over that. Diablo 3 looks great and has been a lot of fun for me.
fib112
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment