Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
[nL] Reux

Is DD2 shaping to be a good sequel?

Recommended Posts

Or is the direction Trendy going lacking much needed features from it's original predecessor?

I would really like to know how others feel on this topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@batoutofhe11 quote:

DD2 will die in alpha or beta

We will all die in alpha or beta.

I think its too early to say if the game will be a good sequel or not.  I don't think the game has the potential to be a smash hit (I think the game is advanced enough so that we'd feel the greatness in it if there was any).

But it may still be good if the game balance is improved and many maps added . And an incentive to play it other than the daily missions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's going okay, just about every game has people complaining about it so all the complaints going on right now aren't anything shocking.

I do feel that the game will feel a lot better when the build & combo systems get polished up along with more maps & multiple weapon types, then I can see myself playing dd2 just that much more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it will be a good game when it's finished. Personally, it does not feel like a sequel to me though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Omm quote:

I think it will be a good game when it's finished. Personally, it does not feel like a sequel to me though.

Yeah, it doesn't feel like it's going in the direction of being a sequel to me either.


@topler quote:

I think it's going okay, just about every game has people complaining about it so all the complaints going on right now aren't anything shocking.

I do feel that the game will feel a lot better when the build & combo systems get polished up along with more maps & multiple weapon types, then I can see myself playing dd2 just that much more.

I just kinda expected DD2 to be DD1 on a whole new level of greatness. So far it's no where near that. It doesn't even look (to me) like it is headed in that direction either. I gotta keep my hopes up though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right now it feels like a downgrade to me. In DD1 I was running around with my TF2 pets, my Portal Gun, could choose between Elemental Bows, Multiple-Projectile Bows, Piercing Bows, Flamethrowers, Automatic Guns, Blunderbusses, Beast-Guns, Grenade Launchers, the Crystal Tracker, the Van Wolfstein, and many many more. And these are just the Huntress weapons. 

In DD2 I feel like a level 1 hunter in a generic MMORPG with the starter bow that shoots toothpicks. 

Then all the challenges are missing which gave you even more cool and unique loot.  I also dont like that the maps are full of stuff that block you while traversing them. I liked the simple and symmetrical maps in DD1 like The Summit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With all honesty in DD2s current state it would most likely get brushed aside after release due to all of the inconsistencies that it has with game play elements. As for the future of the game i think it could be promising as for passed experience in DD1 content creation has been one of the things Trendy seems to always get right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's gonna be a whopping game for sure when it comes out.

I don't think Trendy is going to mess the game up real bad. 

Just because a couple super-hardcore-mmo-uber-players-bbq can't handle a couple of changes with a handful of bugs, doesn't mean the game is a disaster =) I already spent more time in this than DD1 even though i liked DD1 a lot. I can count a total number of games that i spent 700+ hours playing.. on one hand. DD2 is on the list. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As it stands today, it is in my eyes nowhere near to be a worthy sequel to DD1. But it could be new game for a new crowd. The key components is missing: Fun and open.

It is now centered around fixed "builds" that just feels rushed and random. You can not even pass down gear to your alts as passives are class specific so the grind is real.

The maps looks really good, but are not like DD1. They are more narrow and limited space wich also contribute to the "Play it our way or no way" feeling. You also fall off the map quite alot :)

That being said, I will always pay close attention to the development.

@IGELmitDEAGLE quote:

I liked the simple and symmetrical maps in DD1 like The Summit. 

And +1. Alltho Throneroom has a great feel to it.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's going well.  I wasn't a fan of some of the changes early on, but now I really like the play style.  The slower towers make you rush around and repair or DPS.

I love combos, so cool.  Freeze then smash is brilliant as well as electrify.  I love the idea of "smart" building and not over-powering the towers.  In DD1 early shards games were like this.  You had to use double slows, auras and traps, to choke mobs while your squire or barb slashed them apart. 

Many people keep comparing this game to later DD1.  For like the first year in DD1, most of the gear was terrible.  It took forever to find a matching set of builder gear.  Every new patch brought imbalance until you could gear up or they nerfed the new mob.  Basically, this process doesn't feel that new ;-)

Sometimes the development process can be a little painful, but that is software. If I received the level of negative feedback dished out here, I'm not sure I would stay at my job. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love this new generation where people compare a game in alpha stage to a game released for years. You make a lot of sense ... just lol.

If you compare the very first version of DD1 and the current DD2 well DD2 is much better. I miss a lot of things from DD1 (mostly the veriety of maps, heroes and everything else) but just give time to devs to make things right. They barely started to add the core content of the new stuff (being builds mostly) and are still tweaking a lot of things.

I don't see any reason they would go wrong if they keep listening to the community and try to do things right (which they are doing so far).

Just give them time the game is only in alpha stage so far, you wouldn't be playing the game if it was DD1 (since early access wasn't a thing back then) so why are you even complaining ? If you are unhappy stop buying early access games and only go for polished products.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DD1 was fun, but it was so f..... up with bugs, stucked enemies, lousy pathfinding, hacked items everywhere. DD2 will be way better ... in time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Sombrero quote:

I love this new generation where people compare a game in alpha stage to a game released for years. You make a lot of sense ... just lol.

If you compare the very first version of DD1 and the current DD2 well DD2 is much better. I miss a lot of things from DD1 (mostly the veriety of maps, heroes and everything else) but just give time to devs to make things right. They barely started to add the core content of the new stuff (being builds mostly) and are still tweaking a lot of things.

I don't see any reason they would go wrong if they keep listening to the community and try to do things right (which they are doing so far).

Just give them time the game is only in alpha stage so far, you wouldn't be playing the game if it was DD1 (since early access wasn't a thing back then) so why are you even complaining ? If you are unhappy stop buying early access games and only go for polished products.

I love people who also don't have the realization to what alphas are for... Yes this is an alpha. This is one of the most CRUCIAL parts of development in a games lifetime. The true direction of the development of a game is solidified in it's alpha stages. Aka the what will work and what won't work stage. People voicing their opinions in something they are helping fund (Especially during development) whether they be positive or negative is nothing but a positive for the development process. If... the developers look into what is being brought up.

Saying nothing, or only positive things would mean there are seemingly no problems as of current outside of bugs/glitches/etc. Just a reminder video game developers are human too. They make mistakes and also have the potential to miss things just like everyone else. Thus why early access funding was mainly pushed in the gaming industry. To enhance the development process  in accordance to those whom are going to play the game. Also to of course fund the game without a money-grubbing publisher. There are of course other reasons, but these are two of the main ones.

Why you felt the need to seemingly get upset over something practical is more annoying then what you tried to portray was, in your text.

If players currently don't feel like DD2 is shaping to be a true DD1 sequel. That my friend is likely a developmental issue. Either through communication between developmental team and community or actual core data via the project being worked on. There could also be other reasons, but it's highly likely that it would be one of these two. Why? Because the direction of DD2 is still not clear to the community backing the project, and possibly the developmental team. Or questions like this would most likely never be posed.

There is no argument here, you have none. Only your opinion, and I will not battle against something you are entitled to even if it's incorrect. So it's best not to try to "argue your point" with me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It definitely has potential, particularly with regards to a better gaming community than DD1, but at the current rate the game may not stand a chance of comparing or even surviving to release.

It will have better social community interaction due to lack of grossly hacked items since everything is server side, item wise, as far as I know now.

It will have a uber tavern town/social interaction plaza kind of set up and it has match making (though it should also have a choose from the list option as well...).

The pet systems, UI, spheres, and many other aspects bring a lot of potential.

Now, to the bad part...

Level design is far worse than DD1 and largely uncreative (except perhaps 1 level, Little-Horn Valley). Even simple maps in DD1 felt like they had a lot more diversity and creativity. They were interesting where DD2 maps feel almost different by aesthetics alone. You certainly don't have some of the more interesting maps from DD1 to compare with here. Complicated topic so I won't get into it too much but it feels like they developed a handful of maps for development purposes that they ended up keeping and didn't replace what should have likely been placeholders, mostly.

Visuals look great in DD2 but largely uninspired. Nothing comparable to Glitterhelm, Summit, Talay, Aquanos, etc.

Content, a MAJOR point, is that the game is extremely lacking as they are far more focused on pushing out features/systems over balance (a joke atm, they literally aren't even trying here even post wipe despite NEEDING a wipe for this without ANY preparation) and content. It makes sense, bar the balance fiasco, why they would do this. They will need comparable content to the first game to stand a chance and the first game did a truly superb job with additional content after the initial game's content, far better than most games released to date by quite the margin. Since the first game did such a great job at it and this is arguably one of the most important aspects to compete with and why the first one did so well it is hard to say it has any chance of comparing. If they can manage some great content down the line, mandatory before release if they want to do well due to current weak content as indicated above, than DD2 definitely is in place to succeed. Variety of content is important such as challenges, additional levels, bosses, scope (4-8 players?, much larger maps? etc.) in addition to better level design and visual inspiration all must be met and this creates a very steep challenge.

Equipment system falls flat atm: Exact stats, only two real stats per item, heavily reliant on passives that drop with item, even aiming for ANY passive and two specific stats combined has extremely poor success rate due to a proven busted beyond belief loot system that only gets worse with patch releases and no signs from Trendy on a willingness to resolve the problem other than "looking into it". Crit is so incredibly poorly balanced as are build choices that the end result is EVERY SINGLE PLAYER aims for the exact same stats/builds. DD1 offered tons of options, DD2 does not and what it does offer is a disaster.

Pets: Great idea, terrible execution. They were expensive to level in DD1 but they were incredibly valuable and diverse. The abilities, despite how grand Trendy constantly hails, them are genuinely terrible and boring. I mean they are BAD, not just in terms of actual use but there is no real creativity or magic here like the first game had. This isn't necessarily the guy who designed the abilities' fault but a fault of how pets are currently setup. Projectile count vs DMG/piercing/etc. was a HUGE deal and this game doesn't do crap with it, it doesn't even desire to acknowledge that it exists. Pet DPS is garbage to the core, there is never a point where it is good in the game and never has been since the inception of pets. Trendy has gone all out to make sure pets are not capable DPS pets. Then again, our special prize for Wipeaggedon is still the worst pet in the game because, Trendy cares... who needs stats on your pet anyways? or abilities? or the ability to visually evolve? Pet abilities in DD1 consisted of things like raw stats at function cost, healing players for pretty strong amounts or repairing specific types of defenses, weaker AoE healing + Dmg, mass AoE damage, mana generation, knock back effect, boosting, etc. They also scaled based off hero stats which current pets SHOULD do in addition to pet levels possibly acting as a multiplier rather than additive so more powerful pets would scale way better. It may all sound like stuff we have now, but its actually very different between the two games.

Enemy variety/design: Currently the mob diversity is extremely bad. You have a wizard who summons skeletons and heals, a wither beast who burrows near defenses and heals (by the way they should not stack, especially considering TrollBlood exists as it would make them more defined and better balanced), and that is it. After this you have ranged and melee damage soakers. You have Spear Throwers which are acceptable if not a bit too tanky and then you have Drakens which are basically better than any unit in the game even bosses because they come in masses have some of the highest hp in the game, high ranged attack, piercing, high damage, and AoE. Whoever designed Draken was clearly on an illegal substance at the time and possibly the lead designer because they haven't changed since. They are actually complained about more than bosses by far! 20k HP boss cheese? lol if you can get to him he is easy, get a mass of Drakens and it could be GG tho. The rest of the mobs like the bomb throwers are uninspired and offer no real design value as do the remaining melee units short of being a dmg sponge and dmg dealer. This leaves us with very little tactical design other than brute force, which works, because there are very few build options at the moment anyways due to a number of issues. Throw in Troll Blood + heal stacking from Mage/Burrorwers and themselves and DoT choices can be thrown out the window as a desirable build route. Many towers suffer from range issues dealing with ranged units while being outside Ogre/Kobold/PIERCE RANGE (WTH) dmg and Traps/Auras can be a chore, sometimes, since enemies can be immune to push/knock up and might stop just before one of them for whatever unintended reason (currently reasonable to some extent with better gear and higher level players cause of range increase passives/spheres though leaves issues like only one mine hitting or a specific tower thus whittling away a group of ranged HP vs 3-4 being effective against them, but definitely a design issue). This creates very large concerns for build diversity with traps/auras/Dots/and ranged all not just struggling but struggling across the board without substantial hero support or abuse of Frosty (buff beam worked in DD1, but the implementation here is so bad its laughable). Bosses... I'm not going there. They don't add difficulty, and there is some serious design issues when they are trying to force stat balls down our throat of a merely larger normal unit.

Lets compare some tower concerns:

Only 4 towers per character. Sigh... add a 5th one Trendy and the number of build potentials would drastically open up and the hero deck MIGHT actually be doable unlike currently where it is an immense limitation.

Auras were creative and the dome effect was superior due to proper placement hitting air/lower units across multiple lanes and if you placed it right in some maps/areas you could put it on a higher area to make it hit a larger space because the greatest size of the aura was below the placement point in DD1 allowing for clever placement. Aura not stacking worked out well with the design in DD1. I don't understand why they have strayed from this and they likely feel they can't go back since they already have put effort for current auras in place but this is not true. They can certainly change it back but I doubt we will see that level of dedication to improving their game. Feel free to prove me wrong Trendy. Except Rage Aura, which had some uses in some maps like Uber Monster Fest as a temporary guard if you didn't have insane stats, all the other auras had pretty solid uses and functioned well. Boost, currently, is a joke of a tower even with +25% boost (since it doesn't scale wall current hp up too, and the amount of DP it grants scales VERY poorly. It gives 500 bonus DP out of 4k? That is barely an increase compared to Frosty, what a joke and doesn't give attack rate. Oh, it gives 100 DP at 1.5k stats? Yup, no one cares. You see a consistent issue of it barely adds anything for the DU being thrown at it? We haven't even gotten to upgrading, yet. Lighting aura is borderline worthless against flying units in almost all cases bar a few unlike DD1 where they were one of the two main towers for dealing with Wyrven/Djinn along with Inferno (harpoons, if your stats weren't good enough, to help). Their placement was important for covering air, multiple locations, getting the best bang for your DU out of them in size, etc. They are extremely binary here. Serenity is probably the best designed one of the bunch and the vertical element isn't a big deal here as most of the time though I would love to see it cross lanes better. It offers some interesting modifications such as exploding enemies, hero boosting, etc. I think the balance works appropriately with resistances, as well. Oh, that is it. Monk only has three auras. The 4th tower is anti-air and not an aura at all. It is single target high burst slow rate of fire with a potential slowing effect that I'm not even sure works appropriately. It suffers from a serious flaw in that Trendy scales flying units two ways at once. It gives them absurd HP to counter the naturally very high attack power of Sky Guard while making flyers almost unkillable by other tower types (except mines, special case) while also having them spawn in increasingly ridiculous numbers to the point even 4-5 Sky Guards with their poor targeting would get completely overwhelmed due to their single target nature. Frost tower has to be used to compensate the lack of a proper slow, as well. They have elevation target issues and they are designed to hit knocked up targets but this has become something of an ignorable trait since you only ever have 1-2 usually and not many geysers/knock up or elevation concerns. They have massive range to compensate for a lot of issues but it is clearly not enough. This is how messed up Sky Guard is, atm.

Traps: I miss uber sized trap ranges in DD1 but I can live without it. Currently the biggest issue is scaling. In the case of Blaze Baloon the passives are jacked, a focus on Crit is made but crit is currently hyper worthless, and with reduced mana vs DD1 it is hard to focus crit when you want tower HP due to their super low HP and how often you would have to repair, otherwise with your very limited mana in harder maps. Geyser exists but is largely questionable in value, atm, because using them puts SERIOUS risk of mobs going OVER WALLS or being knocked around them as they come back down. Most tower types can not hit a geyser airborne unit, either, which entirely defeats the purpose of Geyser in the first place (lighting aura, traps, etc.). The other two traps are not very creative, which would be fine except this forces her entire kit into an extremely binary brute force method even with the lower DU cost, particularly due to the nature of Frosty now for placement of trash mob killing. Blaze also doesn't really keep up with Chaos mine due to Frosty, and likely wouldn't be worth anything even IF crit and passives were fixed due to Frosty and attack rate.

App/Squire towers both have substantial issues... I wont even explain this one. Post already way to long.

Walls... App walls = utterly worthless and the feature they offer is actually a detriment as far as any sane player is concerned. Walls are heavily balanced around what can max be achieved with a wall at a given IPW value for a given map difficulty so unless you have pretty strong walls (needless grinding compared to other characters to keep par with maps). Expect to need to upgrade walls more than anything else on a regular basis. Mobs tend to often go over/around and even directly through walls due to a number of problems/bugs and Trendy has been as silent as possible on the issue. Most wipes, if you are readily geared are due to this very issue of mobs glitching some way past your walls. Don't dare use knock up/geysers at your wall or stand near a wall to heal it when a Ogre is near as it may jump and go right over the wall as will other units.

Serious issues in DD2 that Trendy has put on the back burner and may not get to fixing for the next decade:

-Ubers, finally some progress but still to slow to be remotely acceptable

-Defense Inspect (lol, I wont even go there)

-Pet leveling

-Money, currently everyone is a pleb unless you were born into nobility prior to the most recent big patch

-Wall jumping

-Loot drop rates/number of passives/etc.

There are definitely a lot more I just can't think of them atm.

Other concerns that could severely harm the game:

Trendy's integrity/honesty with the player base (shown to lie, not once, but multiple times and plenty of proof on the forums).

Trendy's actions with regards to balance/shoving content/financials and communication with players shows a very clear indication of community is absolutely not their immediate priority, and considering some circumstances I can see why but this does not make it acceptable.

QA employees... just... look for posts on it on the forums. I won't go into this one.

I forgot the rest here, gtg for now.

tl;dr Game is a mess but has potential, with a huge burden that may keep it from succeeding. I will not format/fix this up as I don't care that much just consider this rough notes on the issue. Post might get deleted and thread locked because Trendy doesn't exactly like my posts and this doesn't put it in a good light. Game still early in development though, tons of room for a turn around, but not a lot of money to do this on Trendy's end so don't get your hopes up on such a change.

EDIT: Additional note: DD1 had quite a number of serious bugs, particularly targeting for harpoons/etc. and mob overflowing barriers/terrain, in its own right. It also got a huge amount of its content post release. These two things are worth considering compared to current in development DD2. Also worth considering is budget/personnel manpower DD2 has over DD1, the equally bad condition it is currently in, if not worse, despite this and the drastically worse content and build options than DD1 during development (particularly level design and tower design). The only particular aspect that really hurt DD1 compared to DD2 was it was partially limited, build wise, during development because some towers were so jacked up due to bugs that there were enforced build routes, as well, though far superior to DD2 still. Basically, DD2 is losing on all fronts except the technical side, when it is in a place that would, ideally, have it standing above DD1 by this point. Don't underestimate the technical side's value, though, as that contributes to dealing with some very serious issues DD1 had.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dunno.

Some online review, while comparing it to DD1, defined DD2's maps as "claustrophobic", and I think that it defines the comparison for now: in every way, DD2 feels smaller and more... suffocating when compared to DD1 - but then again, DD2 is still incomplete, plus the monetization model completely changed from it's predecessor - the experience went from a "do your thing", fast paced funfest to a F2P "Skinner box" grind.
...But so far we've only seen the first set of maps, so the ones leading to the next boss may turn out way bigger? I can't wait to see something like that Santa themed map from DD1 on the new engine and get the chance to climb some rooftops.

I've got high hopes for the game, but really don't know at this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Sombrero quote:

I love this new generation where people compare a game in alpha stage to a game released for years. You make a lot of sense ... just lol.

This argument is advanced all the time, and it's completely erroneous.  This game doesn't exist in a vacuum.  It has the advantage of being the sequel to a popular game that has been released for years.  It should be able to easily build upon the successes of the previous game, having learned from experience about what makes this kind of game fun.  Rather than feeling like the sequel, if feels like the prequel. 

Weak heroes, inability to increase tower range, inability to increase tower speed, strict limits on the number of heroes you can access in a game... these are conscious and deliberate choices to walk away from what made the original game fun.  It's no surprise that players can't fathom why the sequel is moving in the direction it is.

If we can't compare this game to DD1, then it can't be compared to anything.  It has to be treated as the first game of its kind to ever be created.  And you know what, if it was the first of its kind, it would be amazing.  But it isn't and, because it isn't, the only reasonable expectation is that they should learn from and improve upon what came before it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've seen this game develop and it's a fun game now and I am confident that it will be a great game when it is finally released..

If they do some QA, they might not destroy the player base before that happens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the game will be great also. I am praying daily that the hero deck is removed but much else seems excellent.

One vital aspect has been handled perfectly thus far: monetization. They have treated this issue with such integrity that it says volumes about the direction. Had this been done poorly then there would be cause for major concern. Everything else they are working out diligently. Example: balance in nm issue...week later fixed and it feels great! Just kill the hero deck and were all set ;P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Zuqual quote:


@Sombrero quote:

I love this new generation where people compare a game in alpha stage to a game released for years. You make a lot of sense ... just lol.

This argument is advanced all the time, and it's completely erroneous.  This game doesn't exist in a vacuum.  It has the advantage of being the sequel to a popular game that has been released for years.  It should be able to easily build upon the successes of the previous game, having learned from experience about what makes this kind of game fun.  Rather than feeling like the sequel, if feels like the prequel. 

Weak heroes, inability to increase tower range, inability to increase tower speed, strict limits on the number of heroes you can access in a game... these are conscious and deliberate choices to walk away from what made the original game fun.  It's no surprise that players can't fathom why the sequel is moving in the direction it is.

If we can't compare this game to DD1, then it can't be compared to anything.  It has to be treated as the first game of its kind to ever be created.  And you know what, if it was the first of its kind, it would be amazing.  But it isn't and, because it isn't, the only reasonable expectation is that they should learn from and improve upon what came before it.

What you say is nonsense.

Range of all towers can be upgraded quite drastically using appropriate Spheres. Tower speed is not a thing anymore which is not too bad because it was a bit absurd, even though it would be good to see it back using spheres or something, as a stat it was a bit weird in endgame.

This one is a free to play, so it has to have some monetization to it and the hero deck limitation is one of them. Such as the number of bags. If you don't like just buy more spaces and you'll have a game still cheaper than DD1.

Now I agree some things they should have learned from DD1 but I think we can thank them for not making an easy copy-paste from DD1 and try something new.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Sombrero quote:


@Zuqual quote:
@Sombrero quote:


What you say is nonsense.

We can go ahead and agree to disagree about everything in paragraph two of my statement.  Whether any person likes any one design choice is irrelevant to whether it is fair to make comparisons between the games. It would be better for you to argue against paragraphs 1 and 3, as these contain the point I am making about the validity of comparing DD2 to DD1, your stance on which being what I took issue with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Sombrero quote:


@Zuqual quote:


@Sombrero quote:

I love this new generation where people compare a game in alpha stage to a game released for years. You make a lot of sense ... just lol.

This argument is advanced all the time, and it's completely erroneous.  This game doesn't exist in a vacuum.  It has the advantage of being the sequel to a popular game that has been released for years.  It should be able to easily build upon the successes of the previous game, having learned from experience about what makes this kind of game fun.  Rather than feeling like the sequel, if feels like the prequel. 

Weak heroes, inability to increase tower range, inability to increase tower speed, strict limits on the number of heroes you can access in a game... these are conscious and deliberate choices to walk away from what made the original game fun.  It's no surprise that players can't fathom why the sequel is moving in the direction it is.

If we can't compare this game to DD1, then it can't be compared to anything.  It has to be treated as the first game of its kind to ever be created.  And you know what, if it was the first of its kind, it would be amazing.  But it isn't and, because it isn't, the only reasonable expectation is that they should learn from and improve upon what came before it.

Now I agree some things they should have learned from DD1 but I think we can thank them for not making an easy copy-paste from DD1 and try something new.

It's not about them making the choice of copy-paste. It's about taking what you have and expanding upon it in new ways that weren't possible during the original creation and of course making it better. That is what sequels are supposed to do. Currently it seems like the path trendy is taking with DD2 is regression through limitations as apposed to progression.

As for the trying something new. Their original concept for DD2 was trying something new for dungeon defenders, and they scrapped that idea because it wasn't good for dungeon defenders. Thank goodness. Their current concept plays like dungeon defenders via the basics, but currently seems like they are trying to systematically limit the content you experience. Content as in the entirety of what dungeon defenders is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Sombrero quote:


@Zuqual quote:


@Sombrero quote:




This one is a free to play, so it has to have some monetization to it and the hero deck limitation is one of them. 


Please explain how the Hero Deck is monetized. It isn't and it's completely broken in concept since the matchmaking system was changed. It should be removed both due to sound design choice and popular opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DD2 was shaping up to be a good sequel.

A slew of terrible game design choices came around all at once and smashed the progress that they had made.  Between the scavenger, the forced builds, a low quality loot system, fewer tower options than DD1, less customization in stat allocation, a poorly thought out skill sphere system, and the absolutely terrible UI, there really isn't anything that it has an advantage in over DD1.

Trendy has their work cut out for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...