Diablo 2 / Nethack Comparison

MattyBoy · October 7, 2001, 23:30

I've played much Nethack recently, but am having trouble finding the patience to play any other games at the moment.

I have Diablo I on my home machine, but haven't played it enough to give it a chance.

In this context,
Is Diablo 2 as deep a game as Nethack?
If you could set aside the graphics differences, which one is more enjoyable?
Must I get Diablo 2, or is the original really just as good?

Roman · October 8, 2001, 05:49

I have never played nethack, but Diablo II is a lot, a lot better than Diablo itself. I strongly recommend you get this game.

PS.
The expansion pack is also excellent.

General Ludd · October 8, 2001, 10:13

I haven't played nethack either, but in my opinion, diablo 2 is just as repetitious and empty as the original.

Diablo, Bro. of Mephisto · October 10, 2001, 21:57

I agree 100% with roman, I haven't played nethack, but d2 rules. I suggest buying it...and after you beat that game, get the expansion. If I were to rate d2 and its expansion from 1 to 10, I would give them a 12. btw, d2 and the original are different. d2 is much more in depth, but contains more of a "adventurous" feeling than the "dark" feeling that is in the original diablo.

and I also agree with osweld, the diablo series is empty with no meaning in real life...totally worthless (just like all the other pc games I've bought). however, as useless as it may be, its addictive as ever and I love it.

Roman · October 10, 2001, 22:03

Quote:

Originally posted by Diablo, Bro. of Mephisto
and I also agree with osweld, the diablo series is empty with no meaning in real life...totally worthless (just like all the other pc games I've bought). however, as useless as it may be, its addictive as ever and I love it.

My words exactly!

MattyBoy · October 10, 2001, 23:51

Thanks for the feedback.
D2 sounds like the go.

Diablo, Bro. of Mephisto · October 11, 2001, 00:12

Quote:

Originally posted by MattyBoy
Thanks for the feedback.
D2 sounds like the go.

no problem.

Felch · November 17, 2001, 23:54

If by nethack you mean the RPG where all the graphics are ASCII characters and what not, then yes, Diablo II is way better. Not just in graphics, but in depth of the game.

By the way, depth of game does not mean depth of plot. It just means that there is a great deal of replay value, with lots of shet to try out. Of course, Civers shouldn't have much problem with a weak plot.

MattyBoy · November 19, 2001, 19:38

Thanks, Felch X. I still haven't tried D2, but intend to.

Here is why I called nethack deep. I think it is a result of the game being developed in the public domain for over 15-20 years, so everything you could ever think of has already been handled well.

Also, there are so many ways to develop your character (perhaps 30 basic problems to safeguard yourself against). This makes for a constant juggling act with many monsters designed to damage your defenses against these basic problems.

Until defenses for those problems are resolved, you walk a tightrope act trying to survive. Also, the game now includes sokoban (another game) within it, which you play at the same time as standard nethack fighting etc.

Hardest to explain, if you try lateral thinking of any combination of actions/tools/clothes/items/altered character states, the game responds appropriately. (It is hard to imagine how complex this gets, but you can combine three kinds of telepathy/warning of surrounding creatures and different character states stun/confused/hallucinating and item effects which are different if the items are cursed/blessed or if a potion is quaffed/dipped/thrown/dropped when levitating). Every one of these wierd combinations gives different results, which can then be used in gameplay. If you are just trying to do something silly, you will usually get a smart comment from one of the programmers.