[robohamburger]

edit: Didn't read the the "spiritual" part of the "spiritual successor". Though you could argue diablo 3 is, I would not be so bold. You should still try diablo 3 if you haven't.

Diablo 3 is actually pretty good now if you want a successor. If you just want something similar to diablo 2 I suggest torchlight or titan quest.

Diablo 1 is tricky because it was so much closer to rogue likes (probably because originally it was one). I would love to see a game that has a more subdued and methodical pacing but with less town hacks :)

[EpicEng]

>Diablo 3 is actually pretty good now if you want a successor.

Diablo 3 is in no way a spiritual successor to D1 and 2. Yes, it's much better than it was at release, but it is still very much a streamlined, mass market friendly ARPG. Modern Diablo gameplay consists of leveling (1-2 hours), finishing your season journey (another 2-3 hours, maybe), getting your free super-powerful six piece handed to you, and then grinding paragon levels and filling in a couple of gear spots here and there.

It in no significant way resembles the Diablo of old. If you want a true sequel try PoE or Grim Dawn.

[vkou]

To be fair, the only commonality between Diablo and Diablo 2 was in:

1. The Atmosphere. (Except for most of Act 1, and Acts 2 and 5.)

2. The Name.

Diablo was a slow, tile-based click-and-slash dungeon crawler. Diablo 2 was... Something else entirely. Blast/teleport[1] through everything at top speed to farm bosses. Non-linear power curves. Incredibly high emphasis on gear[2]. Far less tactical, and far more forgiving to mistakes.

In that sense, the gap between Diablo and Diablo 2 was probably bigger then the gap between Diablo 2 and Diablo 3. The core gameplay loop of Diablo 3 is the same as Diablo 2 - it's just that getting your first set of end-game gear is a bit faster, and there's less emphasis on farming bosses. And the ham-fisted story is in your face.

[1][2] Enigma... And the rest of the ladder-only rune-words are a game-breaking abomination. They were supposed to be balanced by the rarity of high-end runes, but in practice, those runes are plentiful, because of duping and botting.

[loosetypes]

There was (hopefully still is) a thriving community of D2 single player enthusiasts that had a very welcoming crowd and managed to avoid the craziness of battle.net[1] at the Single Player Forum of diabloii.net[2]. To this day, it's maybe my ideal of the internet done right (though its in-page ads seem a little more obnoxious now than I remember).

It had fairly strict rules w.r.t. documenting what mods you play with[3] but most folks used certain baseline tools such as infinite stashes[4] that greatly helped with playability.

The pace in single player is significantly slower without overpowered items, but also significantly more tactical. And there were often seemingly absurd self-imposed constraints imposed to make gameplay harder on yourself (no uniques, etc.). Here's one player who made it through hardcore in all difficulties (Guardian) doing full clears with a naked Amazon[5].

While not as extreme, and maybe it'd be insignificant on battle.net, I had some of my most satisfying D2 moments there[6].

[1] Good luck getting enigma and other overpowered runewords in single player.

[2] https://www.diabloii.net/forums/forums/single-player-forum.3...

[3] There was a vibrant trading scene but this helped discourage cross-contamination between, say, a vanilla player's items and those of a player who enabled ladder-only runewords.

[4] GoMule and ATMA may have been my first exposure to Java programs.

[5] https://www.diabloii.net/forums/threads/how-far-can-superdav...

[6] https://www.diabloii.net/forums/threads/finally-my-first-gua...

[vkou]

There were similar, but in my experience, more vibrant, communities for Diablo I (DSF, LurkerLounge, RBD). Variants (Self-imposed restrictions) were far more prominent in Diablo I [1]. Pretty much everyone in the DSF maintained at least one or two variant characters, even if it was just a naked mage or a SNOB.

Diablo II, especially after LOD, just didn't feel as fun with most self-imposed restrictions. Too much power creep came from gear and patches, enemy health and damage scaled too much, and due to immunities [2], too many strategies for dealing with problematic enemies involved running past or parking them. In Diablo I, with its tile-based movement system, this had to be done incredibly carefully. In Diablo II... It's much more difficult to be boxed in, and if things don't work out well, just save and exit, and reset the level.

[1] https://www.realmsbeyond.net/diablo/variants.html

[2] Immunities worked much better in Diablo I. Every character had a reasonable answer to immune enemies. In Diablo II, with its locked skill trees, there was much less headspace for dealing with them - unless you use overpowered gear!

[EpicEng]

Sure. When I (and others) think "spiritual successor to Diablo" we're almost certainly thinking of D2, not so much D1.

[Karrot_Kream]

I've noticed this in the fandom too, how come? Was D2 just much more popular than D1?

[EpicEng]

Yes. D1 was groundbreaking, but D2 was/is the most played by far (and was also groundbreaking, maybe moreso.) It's still played by many today, D1 not so much.

[mihaifm]

Enigma wasn't an abomination by itself, since the runes were incredibly hard to drop. It was the fact that they were easily accessible through trading from people exploiting dupe bugs and botting. These issues aren't fixed to this day in D2.

[what-the-grump]

You mean we have equivalents of the following:

TPPK ggnore Trust drop tests for joining clans? Griefing with no admins with slow? Buying a zephy on eBay for 600$ Team VIP custom imported items? Going legit on east and wtf pwning kids in bugged gear because you understand mechanics? Having a perfect defense Shako Dropping a full inventory on someone that died in cow level to pop them Having a second account to bot on because everyone and I mean everyone is botting A game made playable and enjoyable by map hack MF stacking and having zero resistance as a result and dying cuz lag DCing while muling Rust storm and logging on to find that everything on your zon was duped and she is naked.

I can go on, Diablo 2 was much more than most remember it, and much more than it is today.

Diablo 3 is a fun game for laid back grinder with some fun mechanics. You feel powerful but dear god it’s not diablo 2, it never will be and shouldn’t be compared.

[robohamburger]

I guess I didn't read spiritual in the successor part though I am not sure what that means. I can see how they games are different enough that saying diablo 3 is a spirital successor is probably not useful. I don't think arguing about what it means would be fruitful, so I concede the point.

> Yes, it's much better than it was at release, but it is still very much a streamlined, mass market friendly ARPG.

How is this bad? It seems like you are implying it is. Also how is diablo 3 mass-market and diablo 2 not?

> Modern Diablo gameplay consists of leveling (1-2 hours), finishing your season journey (another 2-3 hours, maybe), getting your free super-powerful six piece handed to you, and then grinding paragon levels and filling in a couple of gear spots here and there.

Agree, that is how I play it. This is slightly hyperbolic but not that far off. It took me about 2 days of playing to get to T13 (the hardest difficulty). This could be made more interesting but I kind of enjoy tweaking my build and min-maxing :)

> It in no significant way resembles the Diablo of old. If you want a true sequel try PoE or Grim Dawn.

Which diablo? Diablo 3 is a true sequel, you just don't like it, which is fine.

[EpicEng]

> How is this bad? It seems like you are implying it is. Also how is diablo 3 mass-market and diablo 2 not?

It's not, it's just a different approach than what most ARPGs (including D1 & 2) take. ARPGs tend to be information heavy, customization heavy, and hard to get into as a result. That's not the way blizz went, which is fine, but it turns off the hardcore ARPG fans.

>Agree, that is how I play it. This is slightly hyperbolic but not that far off. It took me about 2 days of playing to get to T13 (the hardest difficulty). This could be made more interesting but I kind of enjoy tweaking my build and min-maxing :)

Which is perfectly fine :)

Sure, I was simplifying things a bit, but the fact that you (or anyone else) can get to ROFLSTOMP levels of power in a couple of days is a departure from most ARPGs. Min-maxing in D3 is essentially "Is the tooltip green?" You have a handful of stats you care about, defined by your 6 piece (which you were handed) the vast majority of the time, and all you're doing is making incremental improvements to those few stats as you grind rifts. Not much depth there. Paragon levels are too strong and should just go away IMO.

>Which diablo? Diablo 3 is a true sequel, you just don't like it, which is fine.

We're talking about a "spiritual successor" here. In other words, a game that builds upon the core gameplay concepts introduced by Diablo. Diablo 3 is not that. It does not resemble D1 or 2 in tone, setting, or gameplay (aside from running around and killing stuff obviously.)

I have yet to find a single person who would argue that D3 is an evolution of the original design as opposed to a complete re-imagining of the genre. Hell, it's not even a loot focused grind any longer.

[Ataraxy]

To be fair, OP was looking for a modern spiritual successor (not sequel) of which D3 is not.

[robohamburger]

Agreed, which is my bad. Though spiritual successor is kind of squishy idea it's probably obvious they were not considering diablo 3 as being in the running.

[klibertp]

...what, exactly, do you see in PoE that resembles Diablo 1? I can't think of much beyond the camera view angle.

[EpicEng]

Primarily tone, aesthetic, and depth. Of course they didn't copy the systems 1:1, but it _feels_ more like diablo than diablo 3 ever did. I realize that I'm using vague terminology, but you'd be hard pressed to find fans that don't agree.

We're talking about a "spiritual successor" here, not "add up how many aspects of PoE are identical to D2." I know you said D1, but few people make or care about that comparison. D2 is the most popular and the latest entry in the series that people who were turned off by D3 care about.

[duskwuff]

I'd describe PoE as more of a spiritual successor to Diablo 2. There's a lot of weird aspects of D1 which were removed in D2 and later games -- for instance, spellbooks, elixirs, and randomly generated quests.

As a concrete example: PoE's schema for items (normal/magic/rare/unique, maximum of 3 prefixes and 3 suffixes) is almost a carbon copy of Diablo 2's item system.

[poisonarena]

I couldnt get into D3 because there is too much focus on the items, I think the items should compliment the character, not the reverse

[EpicEng]

Then you simply don't like ARPGs, period. ARPGs are loot games. The entire point of these games is literally grinding for loot. Loot makes you strong, not levels. You want a different genre, which is fine, but change the loot part of an ARPG and you're left with an RPG.

[jarcane]

Agreed. This game gets a lot of hate left over from its rubbish launch state, but the game as it exists now is easily my favorite game in the genre since the original. They've very much done what Blizzard has always done best: take a great game and make it accessible but without losing the depth. It's actually the first game that really got me to even give a shit about the high-level buildcrafting. Best 20€ I've spent on a game in a long time.