is there a Western ARPG better than Diablo 2?

Is there a single Western Action Roleplaying Game even remotely as good as Diablo 2: Lord of Destruction? With its impressive matchmaking, complexity (for an ARPG), item incentive and grimdarkness, do you think we will ever see a better WARPG than this completely 100% PC-centric Blizzard top-down ARPG game?

Try to name one. Protip: You can't.

I'm playing Diablo 3 atm, and that shit is addictive. Why is Diablo 2 better?

Mind you, this is my first Diablo experience.

Understandable.

Diablo 3 has undergone what I can only describe as "WoWification."

WoWification?

It's not better but Torchlight 2 is almost as good as Diablo 2. When Diablo 3 launched it was pretty disappointing (not a bad game but disappointing) and Torchlight 2 was the game that made me feel like I was playing a real Diablo 2's sequel. Now Diablo 3's current state is great. But yeah,,, Torchlight 2... 10/10.

Explanation:

>Picture WC3 Dota

>Now picture Heroes of The Storm.

Diablo 2 is to Diablo 3 as Dota is to Heroes of The Storm.

I can respect the effort Diablo 2 gives the lore and setting, but the gameplay is boring as sin. Loot games are inherently doo-doo.

That said I'm willing to meet Path of Exile halfway, that skill tree goes for days.

As a massive Diablo 2 fan, I would say no. But I'm one of the people who like D3. I prefer Diablo2 overall, but I still very much enjoyed D3....I should point out though that I played D3 on consoles.

I do remember though vaguely years ago people comparing Runescape(I think that's what it was called) to Diablo 2? Perhaps I'm utterly confused, buy I seem to remember comparisons between that and Diablo 2.

According the critics across the world, Skyrim.

I actually like Titan Quest + Immortal Throne better. Main reason being is the mutli-mastery system was much more interesting and being a newer game the graphics/physics/etc were much better.

I've also been playing Grim Dawn lately, and while still being developed it's fantastic. It's by some of the same folks that developed TQ, and has many similarities (multi-mastery, engine, etc). With that said they've really expanded on the gameplay systems and is shaping up to be my next favorite ARPG.

Before you make the mistake of assumption, yes, I've played D2. I played it for 100's of hours in fact. Awesome game, and certainly one that deserves the accolades it gets. To be fair, there's a ton of stuff that I think Diablo 2 does better:

-I do like the dark art style better

-Closed online vs only open for TQ

-Blizzard cinematics are some of the best in the business

@skelly34: I don't know any of that. I'm legitimately lost.

Robocop 3

Torchlight 2, The Incredible Van Helsing, Diablo 3. All better than Diablo 2 in SP.

Diablo 2 was amazing at the time. This is no longer 'the time'.

@skelly34: Yeah, that wasn't brilliant.

Path of Exile isn't too bad. DIII might be better and in its golden age next patch, dat' cube.

I heard Grim Dawn is good.

It's definitely not Diablo 3.

Diablo 3 has significantly improved since release. Even before I thought it was a pretty fun game even if it wasn't anywhere near as good as D2.

diablo 2 was made during the PC golden age

starcraft / diablo 2 / counterstrike / everquest / ultima online / team fortress / tribes

we call that golden age of pc gaming

we call this age "the casual age" where its all like loot and being casual and like meh its just not for me its too casual

You're actually right this time. Except I'd call this the Moba age.

I can only say Destiny, as probably the last action RPG I played since was the original Borderlands (which I didn't think was all that), yeah, and I haven't played Diablo 3 yet (never played Diablo 2 for that matter). I played it on my friends PS3 while visiting and didn't think much of it, though I heard the PS4/XBO port was supposed to improve on it a lot, maybe I'll give it a shot sometime.

Yeah quite a few are as good or better.

Lol no, not even close. Diablo 2 is by far the best online action RPG ever made. This stuffs more addictive than cocaine. I played this game nearly every day from 2001 all the way to 2009. 8 fucking years. I believe there were still 50-60,000 concurrent online players at any given time when I retired. I clocked 10,000 hours into that game, which is 30 times more than my 2nd most played game. So fun to grind, find items and not to mention the best and most competitive PVP of its kind. WoW PVP is absolutely terrible in comparison.

Shame D3 was so bad.. hardly played 200 hours of it >:(

@skelly34: good action game, horribly lacking rpg elements and content compared to the previous entry in the series, the quests sucked, has abysmal replay value, in term of being an rpg it terrible, skyrim is boring bland dull and genericly vikings and celtic themed

is there a WESTERNARPG better than Diablo 2?

Yeah.

The console version of Diablo 3.

Because It's not an RSI simulator like the rest

@Mozelleple112: "Lol no", lol yes actually. I love Diablo II as well but people need to stop pretending that games from 20 years ago are perfect and will never be surpassed, it's like film fans who claim everything after the 70s was shit and that film is dead. You can appreciate the classics without demanding that everything following them sucks forever.

Yes.

Heh. We'll see about that. Actually name one.

If you can stomach some of these news Western ARPGs you must have extremely low standards.

exactly . I loved Titan quest immortal throne. On top of what you mentioned i actually liked the level design more than Diablo 2

@skelly34 said:

@illmatic87 said:

Yeah.

The console version of Diablo 3.

Because It's not an RSI simulator like the rest

@blueinheaven said:

Torchlight 2, The Incredible Van Helsing, Diablo 3. All better than Diablo 2 in SP.

Diablo 2 was amazing at the time. This is no longer 'the time'.

You're calling them peasants, while gassing up a loot rpg, the slavery gameplay genre. Perspective bro.

Yeah Diablo 3 has REALLY come along way in improving, got to hand it to Blizzard they released a absolute dud and stuck with it.. Now the biggest problem imo compared to the original is the requiring to be max level or level cap to do anything worth a damn.. This would be fine if the game had a huge pvp scene, which it is criminal it hasn't yet (the game begs for a arena mode with brackets), but in the pve environment it gets bland.. Basically all the items are worthless in less it is a weapon you find at level 60.. In Diablo 2 some of the best items in the game required only level 29 or 42, with the cap being level 99.. Something very few ever got to.

@skelly34 said:

@illmatic87 said:

Yeah.

The console version of Diablo 3.

Because It's not an RSI simulator like the rest

@blueinheaven said:

Torchlight 2, The Incredible Van Helsing, Diablo 3. All better than Diablo 2 in SP.

Diablo 2 was amazing at the time. This is no longer 'the time'.

Nobleman , please have a pedacure and chill.

Them clammy small baby hands can't handle hard work lol.

Diablo 3 is better in every way but the main 2 things that is gamebreaking for diablo2 vs diablo 3 is;

• Diablo 2 have very low and few options for resolutions, highest is800x600 (or was it 1024x768?) in 2015 no thx looks like shit on my 1200p monitor
• In Diablo 3 you have your own loot and dont have to fight over items that drops

Blizzard loves its games. Even when the game has smooth launch, they support it for years. In the case of Diablo 3, they did complete 180. Great job I'd say.

@jg4xchamp said:

@skelly34 said:

You're calling them peasants, while gassing up a loot rpg, the slavery gameplay genre. Perspective bro.

I called them peasants for liking an inferior loot RPG with inferior slavery gameplay. Not for liking other games.

Needless to say I was morally justified in doing so.

@skelly34 said:

@jg4xchamp said:

@skelly34 said:

You're calling them peasants, while gassing up a loot rpg, the slavery gameplay genre. Perspective bro.

I called them peasants for liking an inferior loot RPG with inferior slavery gameplay. Not for liking other games.

Needless to say I was morally justified in doing so.

True, willingly picking a gamepad version of a mouse and keyboard game. That is disgusting.

@skelly34 said:

@illmatic87 said:

Yeah.

The console version of Diablo 3.

Because It's not an RSI simulator like the rest

@blueinheaven said:

Torchlight 2, The Incredible Van Helsing, Diablo 3. All better than Diablo 2 in SP.

Diablo 2 was amazing at the time. This is no longer 'the time'.

Most random, pointless 'peasant' insult ever. People who prefer modern vastly improved and more EXPENSIVE version of an archaic incredibly simplistic game are peasants? Yeah, peasant, you need to look the word up I'm pretty sure you have absolutely no idea what it means.

In the gaming world, peasants are not referred to as peasants for being financially poor, but instead peasants are referred to as peasants for being intellectually poor.

-A college-educated man.

Diablo 2, at the time, was an example of both impressive setting/lore, combat and matchmaking. With an online that lasted literally 10 years, whose PC version currently has more players online than its Diablo 3 successor, whose combat was as addictive as crack and whose grimdarkyness was cringed at by all. It also had an impressive combat system at the time coming from Diablo 1. However, it was its expansion that really made the game take off by adding a shit ton of content for players to do. Diablo 2 undeniable set things in stone for future MMORPGS and PC ARPGS.

Now, there were plenty of criticisms for Diablo 2 coming out of the first one, but that pales in comparison to the criticism Diablo 3 receives coming out of Diablo 2. Diablo 3: was dumbed down, kiddyfied from the original's dark setting, had its economy ruined by an in-game real money auction house (this was important for Diablo 2), became a huge ham-fest where all the antagonists try to out yell each other much like WoW villains, and otherwise had many key features of Diablo 2 either poorly or never implemented like clans, PvP, hardcore, ladders and proper itemization. Lastly, Diablo 3 was just fucking broken on release and it took them years to fix it, the difficulty and scaling made absolutely no sense, and between one difficulty and the next the game was either far too easy or utterly impossible (talking about endgame, not normal/nightmare/hell/etc,) Diablo 3 really was/is a peace of shit in comparison to Diablo 2.

To its credit, Diablo 3 has recently managed to pull itself out of the gutter, but by now it's too little too late. The game might as well be dead.

That's why I called you a peasant. For prefering a much shittier sequel to a game I like. You might argue that Diablo 2 was only good for its time, but then why was it played for 10 years while its successor was almost dead on release? The other person I called a peasant for liking the console version, which is... slightly more idiotic.

In the gaming world, PC gamers refer to console gamers as peasants because they play games on inferior hardware. You know this already, it's nothing to do with being intellectually poor.

I would consider intellectually poor to be someone who says 'Diablo 2, at the time, was an example of both impressive setting/lore, combat and matchmaking'. This comment does not come from an individual who qualifies for higher education. Diablo 2 had a setting that was anything but impressive. You spend your whole time in a fucking dungeon. The lore was pretty much non existent (are you really talking about Diablo 2 here or are you confusing it with a completely different game that actually has lore?). The combat was great for an ARPG and the matchmaking well anyone who devotes years of their life playing an incredibly dumb ARPG online I think you need to reconsider your stance on calling anyone else a 'peasant'.

The trials and tribulations of Diablo 3 are well documented that's why I avoided it completely for the longest time. The AH fiasco alone was enough to guarantee I wouldn't go anywhere near it. I tried it recently on PS4 and thought it was a much better experience than Diablo 2 though of course back in the day D2 was a big deal as the genre was still fresh at that time and that's based on SP I absolutely can not imagine anything more boring than Diablo Online.

By the way your cheap jibes at console players say much, much more about you than it will ever say about them and that's coming from a VETERAN PC gamer of many years.

That's the true definition, my new friend.

Sadly, this is just the kind of response I would expect from a console only gamer who has never/barely played PC games and believes Diablo 3 to be not shit.

In comparison to other games around that time, it was objectively all of those things, this is not up for debate my console-only gaming friend, this is factual fact made a fact by other facts.

• Matchmaking: Barely any games had a steady or even respectable online. Console online was either nonexistent or a pitiful joke. You're comment seems more like deflection and ad hominem more than an actual acknowledgment on how great D2's matchmaking was.
• Setting: That was more or less what every setting was at the time (see "dungeon crawler"), Dark Souls also has a very bleak and minimalist setting and it's considered one of the best atmospheric games of all time.
• I'd like you to name another game that came out between 1998-2000 aside from (obviously) Deus Ex and Half Life that has a better story than Diablo 2. Granted I don't think Diablo 2, or any video game for that matter, achieves something as "having a good story."

You pretty much agreed with everything I said about Diablo 3 before saying "I like it anyway" so I've gathered enough evidence to judge just how high (low) your standards are. You're comment also seethes with insults and rage, perhaps you should calm down before posting again.

"Veteran" that's a neat word. I think I'd like to be a veteran juggler today, maybe a veteran banjo player tomorrow. Maybe I'll buy a Xbox1 next week and qualify myself a veteran console gamer. The possibilities are endless.

Well, I'm a bit taken aback. I had previously thought you to be a poisonous but fairly intelligent poster but you have cheerfully thrown all that overboard with this post. You are spending all your time talking about what Diablo 2 WAS at the time. Do you realise it is 2015 or are you still stuck in a world where Diablo 2 rules and playing anything at all online is an incredible new experience and dungeon crawlers are still amazingly new?

And let's cut the bullshit here, Diablo 2 had NO story outside of do this to defeat all evil because let's face it that's what heroes do.

I am very disappointed you resort to 'console only gamer' as a puerile juvenile insult I expected a bit more than that from you and as my games of the year include Divinity OS and Pillars of Eternity even you could have ascertained from that I am not a console only gamer.

I think you are worthy of Veteran status. Veteran Troll will suffice. Hey, don't feel bad, embittered and twisted PC gamer who cries every day because things just aren't how they used to be would make you look fucking pitiful but it's okay we are nice people on here and will spare you the horrible truth.

@blueinheaven:

I'm aware of what I'm comparing it to. Diablo 3 is a worse game back then than Diablo 2 is now. The only thing Diablo 3 does better is graphics, that doesn't make a game. You still haven't done anything to refute anything I've said aside from the story, I agree, it did have a shit story, but it's much better than anything else back then. You've more or less just spent this entire time spitting insults and you have the gall to call me poisonous?

I am very disappointed you resort to 'console only gamer' as a puerile juvenile insult.

I think you are worthy of Veteran status. Veteran Troll will suffice. Hey, don't feel bad, embittered and twisted PC gamer who cries every day because things just aren't how they used to be would make you look fucking pitiful but it's okay we are nice people on here and will spare you the horrible truth.

lol

It's been said many times in this thread but torchlight II is amazing.

I have refuted everything you've said every step of the way you just won't acknowledge it. Diablo 3 now is what Diablo 2 was then. Incredibly flimsy story that doesn't even attempt to justify what the game actually is i.e. kill, loot, keep killing keep looting get better stuff better skills that's all both of them are.

The only difference is D3 got off to a terrible start but that's okay I can read as well as anyone and avoided it completely till the version I thought I could live with finally went on sale.

You still haven't said what D2 did better back then or since than what D3 does now because you can't. It's the same game because Blizzard did pretty much sod all to it apart from taking years to make D3 a game people might want to buy.

D3 looks better than D2 and plays the same. You hate that, specially now that console gamers are playing it too that's possibly your worst nightmare as you live in this really weird world where a game can only be good if it's played on PC.

Of all the games you could have picked as legendary PC titles you pick not Planescape Torment not Ultima Underworld not UFO Enemy Unknown you pick fucking Diablo 2 lmao!

If something were to beat Diablo 2, it would probably be Torchlight 2.

They're both made by the same team after all.

Edit: that or System Shock and Bloodlines

Hmm...

1. Diablo 1
2. Gothic 1 and 2
3. Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines
4. Morrowind
5. Fallout New Vegas
6. Deus Ex
7. Ultima Underworld 1 and 2
8. System Shock 2
9. Arx Fatalis
10. Divine Divinity
11. Mount and Blade: Warband

Where? I provided MUCH more explanation as to why Diablo 3 is nothing compared to Diablo 2. All you did was make singular statements without any substance or explanation: Literally "because I said so" reasoning.

It got off to a terrible start, and then everyone abandoned it to never comeback. It killed the fucking game from the start. Barely any people play the PC version now, I don't know about the console version.

D3 looks better (factually true)than D2 and plays the same (factually wrong)." It's dumbed down and doesn't have any of the initial features that made people like Diablo 2. Hah, I don't give two shits if it's on consoles. I gave up on it a year before I even realized it was going to consoles.

Lol, as an ARPG, yeah. Those games you mentioned are much better than Diablo 2.

We wouldn't be having this conversation if you were to actually name games better than Diablo 2. Diablo 3 is in no fucking way better than Diablo 2.

I was only joking when I said "protip: you can't." Why don't you change your answer to Deus Ex or fallback onto Torchlight 2?

You gave no explanation as to why D2 is better. You spouted nonsense about setting and lore which is actually lies. D2 has neither, not a grain of it, not even a hint of either. D3 is the same game it just took them longer to get it right because they were too busy trying to screw stupid people over for money because that's what Blizzard do. And D3 looks better so therefore the same game that looks better = better game. Even you can see how this works.

I have to give you props though for suggesting that Diablo 2 could be 'dumbed down' LOL.

I know the games I mentioned are not ARPG's but they are classic, legendary PC games from back when PC games were actually amazing and not just another fucking multiplat that looks better in higher resolution. You wouldn't understand. My point is D2 is a hilarious example for anyone to uphold of PC gaming excellence but you wouldn't know that as you have no history with the platform.

Anyway, I am off to bed. It's late here in the UK. Feel free to insult me and expand upon D2's amazing setting and deep lore (LOL).