Armengar wrote on Sep 23, 2012, 10:19: D3 isn't poor. IMHO it is an ok game. The long awaited Duke nukem sequel was poor. sword of the stars 2 on release was poor. And so far on every d3 topic on blues there have been d3 haters jumping on d2 is better so I'm just adding a bit of variation.
I feel that d3 was supposed to have the spirit of d2 but have enough difference to stand apart. I obviously say this as my opinion and everyone has their own. Perhaps I have been luckier than others or my expectations of a good game are lower.
Not trying to start a flame war, I'm just musing.
I'm thinking that if they have to go back and make it more like D2 anyway, why didn't they just go with that from the start? That's probably what makes people roll their eyes.
When they come back and say: 'Now we see that people like this aspect of the game and not this other one so much. So we're patching it in.'
And everyone is scratching their heads because this is exactly what was done in D2 a decade ago. You don't think it's crazy to have to do over so much of the game you had 10 years to get right from the start?