"Seems to me as if half the folks there did not play through the first dungeon.
The nuances of are just amazing! Your character can be standing there watching a skeleton tap his mace against it's hand bones. It does not attack you untill it sees you or you make a sound. Or how about when fighting a skeletal archer and you are to close to it for it to pull it's bow, so it starts kicking you! LOL! How could anyone compair that to Diablo? Where monsters just attack you willy nilly from all directions without provication?
To me there is just no contest. I admit I have not played Lionheart. For some reason it just doesn't appeal to me. So I cannot speak of Lionheart. Maybe I will download the demo then come back and give MHO. So, IMHO rules! BBFN! Myslynx"
Gasp, a tragedy when one speaks so low of Diablo, whether it was the classic original, or the sequels expansion. Perhaps Diablo does not have a 24 hour day where the sun will fall and rise. Maybe it doesn't go into as much detail as Divine Divinity in parts. In Diablo you can not enters ones house. Divine Divinity does have better graphics, and more quests. However, I can honestly say, in my opinion, I don't believe Divine Divinity would be around if Diablo had never been created. Divine Divinity almost 100% copied the stat level upgrade from the orignal Diablo. They are almost identical, even the names of the categories. The skill system in DD is rather weak, and inferior compared to the masterful one in that of Diablo II's. Diablo's / II's characters may not have had the AI of the enemies in DD, however, I've never been as challanged in DD as I have been in Diablo, regardless of how smart the enemies are. Does DD have free internet play? Well, Diablo / Diablo II both had a successful, which still remains running well today, where 50K - 60K players log on each day. When we talk about lasting appeal, I don't think you can even compare the two. When I beat DD I am not going to play through it a second time, and there is no internet play. When I finished playing Diablo as a Necromancer, I signed onto Battle.net and literally devoted probably 500 - 600 hours of gameplay into that title. The cinamatics in DD also look weak compared to that of both Diablo's, even the original. Diablo II didn't sell over 5 million copies for no reason, lets not forget that. Diablo was the popular, innovative title that mostly started it all. Hence the reason why so many titles are called Diablo Clones. Diablo revolutionized that section of the industry in which all games would be compared against it. Even Divine Divinity. If Divine Divinity II comes out, and earns that right to set the new benchmark for action RPG games, than I will find it reasonable to speak of Diablo as inferior. None the less, you have your opinion. Obviously I am a Diablo fan, and the fact I enjoyed Diablo, Diablo II, Lord Of Destruction, so much, influenced me to buy Divine Divinity. It also influence me to buy Record Of Lodoss war on Dreamcast, and Baldur's Gate Dark Alliance on PS2. It is also the reason why I will most likely buy Baldur's Gate Dark Alliance 2 and Riftrunner come this holiday season. It influence me to buy other action RPG games, as I am sure it influenced thousands of others to buy these titles. Not to say Diablo is the only game that set a new bench mark in the pc RPG game industry, Baldurs Gate did as well. Most titles, like Never Winter Nights, or Icewind Dale is compared to Baldurs Gate. Titles like Dungeon Siege become compared against Diablo. Titles that share Baldurs Gate / Diablo elements, like Divine Divinity, and Prince Of Qin for example are measured up to both those titles. I am also sure, if a Diablo III ever comes out, it will be the next action rpg in which all games in that genre are compared against.
