I had great memories with diablo 1, it was my first game online that i was in a guild named morraltach we even had meetings where we called eachother on hour char namewe had a blast playing in teams, there were 2 groups the nadir and the drenai one were the purist and the other used gear that they got from other players but then the fun stopped when there were char running around as lvl 1 and 100000000000 health and killed other players with hacked spells, i never see the people again tough even sometimes think how they are but oh well i will never know.

That's largely because Diablo had no plot and Diablo II hints at having a plot. Diablo II is just a much larger game in terms of scope.

Perhaps I should load up my copy of Diablo, but in general I don't feel much urge to play it again as there's very little variety to it.

titan quest lol i remembered installing that game and wanted to try the online part a player walked to me look i got this hacked blade that does 1000000 damage and i got an endless supply gold. I pushed the quit button got the dvd back in the case and threw it in a random corner its been on my shelf ever since.

Diablo 2 is much larger, but while that seemed like a plus at the time it spread itself too thin. I tried to go back to it. But the tedious environments, badly recoloured weapons and enemies just came across as taking a bare minimum of content and stretching it way too far.

The above ground sections were especially terrible. They should have abandoned the random environment thing if that was the best they could do with it. All they were was a collection of square environments anyway.

But yeah, maybe you're right. Maybe if I went back to the first game then I'd think no better of that one.

What I disliked the most about D2 was the implementation of save waypoints for the on-line players . . . LONG LIVE LAN . . . oh . . . really . . . ok . . . never mind . . . sorry . . =(

I actually had the opposite feeling. For an hack&slash Diablo had a hell (no pun intended) of a background by 90' standards, the NPCs had a distinct personality, and the side quests were both intresting and useful to uncover the story.

Couldn't agree more. In single it was fun to play once, after that it felt like a chore. Despite being eager to experience every class (like I did with D1), I just couldn't force myself to keep going.

I just picked it up a couple months ago, Diablo 2. Didn't bother with 1 since I couldn't find it. If you've played Sacred Gold or Sacred 2, or Titan Quest, you'll know what you're getting into with Diablo 2.

Graphics suck. Let me say that again, graphic suck compared to pretty much each of the games I've just mentioned, but since I'm not a graphics person, it really doesn't matter all that much to me. Since you're on GOG playing old school classics, I would assume you don't care that much about graphics either. Art direction is good though, very moody, and that goes much further in my book than raw graphical power.

You don't need Battle.net, but if you wind up picking up the Diablo 2 battlechest like I did, if you do battle.net and register your games, you get to download the game forever, much like if you'd bought it off GOG.com. Considering the game comes on CD-ROM which is already antiquated compared to DVD, let alone Blu-Ray, I opted for the battle.net.

I don't use it online though since I got the Plug-Y mod that gives infinite chest space, which for a click fest horde monster like me is way more important than playing with other people.

Regardless of graphics though, game is awesome, even when compared to newer more refined UI and animations in say Titan Quest. By like lvl 5-8 you will already have an AOE spell that knocks the crap outta the mobs of enemies surrounding you all the time.

Only thing that's annoying so far is the respawn every time I turn the game back on. Haven't played in a while though, got caught up in other more graphically intense games, but I don't regret buying it.

But it supposed to be random diablo was a game that had its ideas from rogue games. Games like nethack, rogue ect.

I disagree, one of the real problems that the original had was that there was no plot and because there was no plot there was very little reason to keep pushing other than finishing the game. At least with Diablo II there's the promise of something slightly new when you push to the next Act.

I've just tried playing Diablo again and so far it's extremely dull. Diablo II was somewhat dull early on, but leveling up and only getting 5 stat points to distribute and nothing else happening seems so flat. Especially when one has played games that have come since then.

All in all the game hasn't aged well at all as far as I can tell and at least with D2 there's a few classes to explore and one can make different choices with skills.

I know, but Blizzard won't count those events, and they won't have any effect on D3's story.

Technically that probably should be rogue, nethack etc., IIRC rogue begot nethack. But you're correct about the lineage. Diablo was a fun hack 'n' slash dungeon crawl, but it was never particularly deep and it's much more obvious now how incredibly shallow the gaming experience was when you compare it with the sequel.

Diablo 1 has some interesting lore, which you can select to read in the opening menu. At least check that out before starting Diablo 2. Or look it up in some gameguide.

LOL, I won't be buying D3 so . . .

Hellfire is still a fun game regardless of Blizzard not blessing it. To discount a good game simply because of a publishers point of view is sorta strange, anyway . . . I no longer kneel at the Blizzard altar . . . =)

I agree, still we had a blast with the game having exhausted D1, Hellfire was greatly appreciated when released . . . =)