Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

So I just started playing this again, and have completely forgotten 90% of the game mechanics. This is a BIG game.

Does anyone else enjoy playing this, and what type of builds do you run, did you run?

Right now I'm just trying to level a conjurer because I remember it being fun, but I may switch out for an inquisitor.

Really just looking for input on what you have found fun in the past with this game. Given how long it is, I am guessing all the classes get a little "samey" after a few hours.

My most recent two characters build on the Oathkeeper (since the class was new at the time). The latest one is combined with Necromancer for maximum menagerie. That's two Guardians of Empyrion from the former and maximum skeletons and the zombie golem thing from the latter, with a relic that summons a bone construct as well. I combined that with high health regeneration so I can stick around my my zoo does the work for me. The guardians have the poison morph to go better with the Necromancer abilities. It's nice if you want to sit back and let others do the work, to a degree anyway. Biggest downside here is that skeletons aren't very tanky and you have to constantly summon new ones in combat. Upside is that the guardians cannot be destroyed, so you'll always have at least two pets to protect you from tough enemies while you re-summon your stuff.

The other one combined the Oathkeeper with the Demolitionist for maximum flamey death, also using the guardians and a fair amount of health regeneration since the Demolitionist has an aura to help with that. Otherwise it's a pretty hands on melee damage dealer.

I've tried other stuff as well, but that's more in the way back when and with years of balance patches and the expansions I don't even know if they'd play the same these days.

I tried Necro, but my skellies kept getting wrecked. I was likely doing it wrong, but I dunno. I love my 4-5 minions with Conjurer. Each one is basically a Boss monster, unto themselves.

Yeah, Conjurer is nice for pets, too, and was the go to for that play style before the Necromancer got added for the option to have more of a horde feel to your zoo. I've haven't really played the class myself but saw it in action often.

Skeletons are somewhat expendable to be sure, but you can make them work even on Ultimate difficulty. They have a tough time with bosses there and that can't easily be helped, but they're still useful even then to add a bit of damage and distraction. The trick is that you have to fully commit to both your skeletons and pets in general to make them work. They need as many points invested in their base skill and the one that ups their maximum number to eight to have some basic resilience, and you need equipment and devotion powers to increase their resistances. Especially on higher difficulties and against bosses they won't survive without elemental, aether and chaos resistance. If you can't provide that, yeah, they'll get wrecked a lot.

So I hate it when you beat a game, and it asks you to do one more quest, and that 1 quest is the start of like 2 more DLC. I JUST WANT TO EXPERIENCE THE END....Damnit this game is longer than Titan's Quest it feels like. Half the time I am just running through the mobs to the boss/goal, dumping my minions, buffs, and advancing the quest. I am so tired of the "Your inventory is full" sound. You know what never really had this problem, the Inquisitor ARPG game. That game's problem was loot geysers from chests or bosses. Also, each "level/quest" could be completed in under 10 minutes. Perfect for bit sized snippets of action. In order to advance the quests in Grim Dawn it takes 20-30 minutes to get to the next rift/boss.

Not sure if the map is actually larger than that of Titan Quest. Grim Dawn is probably larger because it has two DLC expansions while the original Titan Quest only got Immortal Throne. Also Grim Dawn feels like it has more quests and owed to the devotion shrines there's a reason beyond mere curiosity to check out caves and dungeons on first playthrough, so you are definitely led to take more of the world in and spend that extra time.

I'd say you're a little late about episodic storytelling considering Diablo 2 did it over twenty years ago and it's been a thing in every ARPG I've played. It was a thing even before the advent of DLC, when we used to have real expansions. And truth be told, I'm not sure you're even going to experience the end in Grim Dawn. It seems set up to be a world in which stories happen, rather than a game driven by a single narrative, with all the benefit to brings for DLC expansion and ultimately Grim Dawn 2 if Crate chooses to make it.

Grim Dawn is definitely more of a classic time sink aimed at people who want to sit down with the game for an hour than something you keep yourself busy with if you have ten minutes to spare.

 Geifer wrote:
=rim Dawn is probably larger because it has two DLC expansions while the original Titan Quest only got Immortal Throne.

Titan Quest has had 4 expansions now... Immortal Throne, Ragnarok, Atlantis and Eternal Embers.

I know.

Which is why I said "original Titan Quest", as in the main game and only expansion made by Iron Lore. I haven't played the game since it got the additional expansions, so I really can't comment on what they add to the game. Plus, Crate is basically the successor to Iron Lore, so it feels right to compare their output and leave the extra expansions for Titan Quest on the side.

I just beat GD finally! It was not a good ending. What a let down for 40+ hours. Installed Inquisitor: Martyr, started a new character, instantly remember what a absolute jumbled mess of a game this was, and uninstalled it. Gonna try TL3, because I hate myself.

I always find Titan Quest's actual gameplay rather tame/dull to play through. It's like a top down Dungeon Siege only with 1 character instead of 8 (or 6 and 2 loot donkeys). It just never felt very actiony to me.


Grim Dawn is a bit of a let down in terms of its story and presentation on that front. It's actual gameplay is very solid and I have to say that for a fixed map game (no random maps) its very enjoyable. They got the gameplay down about right.
I think the only thing I'd welcome is a more free-form ability system like Diablo 3 has rather than the whole "pay gold tax to respec/skill" angle.


Otherwise its a game that I really hope we see a sequel too. It's solid good fun and it would be nice to see them take that solid gameplay and perhaps be a bit more bold with the story.

 Geifer wrote:
I know.

Which is why I said "original Titan Quest", as in the main game and only expansion made by Iron Lore. I haven't played the game since it got the additional expansions, so I really can't comment on what they add to the game. Plus, Crate is basically the successor to Iron Lore, so it feels right to compare their output and leave the extra expansions for Titan Quest on the side.

I've got Ragnarok - looks good but haven't got round to playing it yet. Atlantis if you'll pardon the pun sounded something of a damp squib. Don't really know anything about the latest one.

Have just reinstalled Grim Dawn to have another try at that, plus The Incredible Adventures Of Van Helsing - anyone tried that? Any good?

 Overread wrote:
I always find Titan Quest's actual gameplay rather tame/dull to play through. It's like a top down Dungeon Siege only with 1 character instead of 8 (or 6 and 2 loot donkeys). It just never felt very actiony to me.

I have no idea how you could get the numbers so wrong. One hero, seven donkeys. This is the way.

But yeah, gameplay. I disagree. Of course it's a matter of taste, but I held Titan Quest in high regard back when I played. It felt so much smoother than Diablo 2 and I appreciated that a lot. I also found the game to give me a good reason to actually maneuver, something that I'd say I get a lot less of in Grim Dawn and Diablo 3. The former basically has area effects that you have to keep an eye on and may move around, but enemies have such a short cooldown on these that you don't buy yourself much time moving around and are better off just accepting that you have to tank that stuff, maybe with the odd short break to refill you health. Whereas the latter hasn't given me much reason to move around in combat outside the silliest Rift difficulty my equipment can handle. I'd go so far as to say that the last time I had to move a lot was Inferno difficulty before the addon, when my indestructible monk was indestructible because of supreme maneuverability and that was the only way to handle the frankly ridiculous difficulty.

That goes hand in hand with how combat is presented. Titan Quest is, as you put it, somewhat tame, but it's orderly and you can see what's going on. Both in Grim Dawn and Diablo 3 do I frequently lose sight of my character because it's swarmed by (oftentimes large) monsters and there are layers of explosions and effects heaped on for good measure. It lends itself to gameplay where you park yourself in the middle of the enemy group and hit them with a stick until they're all dead, without ever doing much else. I think Titan Quest broke that up better or didn't start the fireworks to begin with. It seemed more tactical, which, I realize, isn't necessarily a big deal in an ARPG. Still, I liked being able to see what was going on and make good decisions based on that.

As much as I liked Dungeon Siege, I'm not sure I'd look at it the same as other ARPGs. Combat was far too RTS in that you clicked the enemy unit and then combat was automated, with little else to do than to watch what happened. Which you could do for a long time because everything was damn spongey. I don't think a comparison with Titan Quest makes much sense, to be honest.

 Overread wrote:
Grim Dawn is a bit of a let down in terms of its story and presentation on that front. It's actual gameplay is very solid and I have to say that for a fixed map game (no random maps) its very enjoyable. They got the gameplay down about right.
I think the only thing I'd welcome is a more free-form ability system like Diablo 3 has rather than the whole "pay gold tax to respec/skill" angle.

I bought Grim Dawn on the promise of getting more of the gameplay I liked in Titan Quest, and was not disappointed. To be honest I have barely paid any attention to the story. I much prefer the setting presented in Titan Quest over that of Grim Dawn.

I don't find the respec mechanic in Grim Dawn particularly limiting because I look at it as a way to correct mistakes in your skill selection. I don't much care for the Diablo 3 way of letting you alter your character on a whim.

For me I like the ability to change characters on the fly in this style of game because otherwise they tend to lock you into a certain build. So once you've got the two or three abilities you are putting points into that's it. Your combat never changes because you're always using those abilities no matter what you fight.

So Diablo 3's approach of letting you change abilities on the fly means that you can, after 5 hours of using one set, change over to a totally new style of play with the same character, gear and not having to start all over again.
Of course D3 has its own problems, eg I tend to find that only one ability does the real damage so you're still spamming not changing up battle to battle as much as I'd like. And it has the strangest approach to difficulty, but that's a whole other topic unto itself.



You can still start over a new character, but I think in games that are designed to do a LOT of repeat grinding and where you can level up a LOT and sink a lot of hours into it, its good to have the ability to change things up for variety.

Titan Quest is dated now, and Iron Crate have noted that the game engine was becoming a severe limitation on Grim Dawn which is why they canceled a possible fourth expansion and said Grim Dawn 2 would use a new engine that wasn't 20 years old. Grim Dawn being basically Titan Quest 2.0 was more or less exactly what Titan Quest fans wanted and it didn't disappoint. It's hard not to agree though that the game looks passable more than anything and combat is not nearly as dynamic as a newer game in the same genre could be.

That said I would hope the next game isn't like Diablo III because while you could change up your set up in Diablo III on the fly, it was ultimately way more shoe horned in what did and didn't work than Grim Dawn has become. Sure a character can only be 1 maybe 2 builds without respeccing, but the sheer variety of viable builds in Grim Dawn is counted in dozens, whereas Diablo III has far less variety in end game sets and builds that actually work.

I liked Grim Dawn, didn't play it for long. I think I was in the beta or something. I'd probably check it out again. TitanQuest was cool for a while.

Most of what I don't like about both is the fixed cam.

Grim Dawn now suffers from the same problem of PoE, it's no longer about game play, or even story. The only point is getting to the end game, taking up the classes to get a masters in understanding the various synergies, deciding which 1% buff is actually worth investing 100+ hours, and then grinding till you get fired and your wife and kids leave.

Point being, it's no longer fun. Which leads me BACK to Diablo series. 1 is still the best, 2 is a mess of inconsistencies, even with D2R, and 3 was really fun at first, then turned into a daily grind session that quickly gets boring. But the Gameplay is really fun for a quick fix!

I'm eager to "TRY" 4, like the version I get from a friend, who has a boat and goes by Barbosa.

I will say D3 does what it does REALLY well and slick. I also love that they put in the ability to swap between skills on the fly. It just feels so much more engaging to be able to change your character build to go with the latest gear you've got or because you're bored of the same attacks and want to change it up.

One thing that Diablo 2 (which I still hold out as the best all rounder in its genre) and Grim Dawn and Torchlight can all suffer from is once you've chosen abilities and a stat setup you're basically locked into it.
You can pay gold in 2 of them to re-spec and D2 newer remastered has a few options; but in general its more "fixing a mistake" than "changing for the heck of it.".

Which means if you've an Ice Mage or such and want to go all fire you generally have to start over.

D3 you can just hot-swap and away you go and honestly in this style of game I love that.



D3's issue is that it lacks "soul" to its story and its gameplay is built around the grind a bit too much. Yes All these games are looters and grinders, but D2 felt more balanced.

I think the issues is D3 kind of blazes you through the main story to get to those endless combat loops at the end; whilst I feel D2 lets you take your time adventuring through the different settings and past bosses and such. D3 is a "blink and you missed it" kind of experience.

Too bad, but by now I would think there should be some decent mods out for it no?

The problem with D3 is that the PC game runs through Blizzards servers only. They've never patched it to run offline.

The console version can run fully offline, but you have to be online to get any achievements/scores/season rewards and such.

But unlike Starcraft 2, which is the same, D3 was never built as a modding game and was built closer to an MMO where Bliz controls things. Heck SC2 had an insanely powerful editor built into it (just like Sc1 had back in the day) so they openly encouraged it by providing you the tools you needed to mod things and build games and campaigns and whatever.

D3 just had an entirely different focus and structure from the ground up.

I still hope that when D4 hits they might decouple the online needs for PC D3 and let it run offline if just so they can scale back the support for it and steadily switch to D4 support .

That would be great too, what about GD? Is it unsalvageable? No modding?

 Overread wrote:
The problem with D3 is that the PC game runs through Blizzards servers only. They've never patched it to run offline.

The console version can run fully offline, but you have to be online to get any achievements/scores/season rewards and such.

But unlike Starcraft 2, which is the same, D3 was never built as a modding game and was built closer to an MMO where Bliz controls things. Heck SC2 had an insanely powerful editor built into it (just like Sc1 had back in the day) so they openly encouraged it by providing you the tools you needed to mod things and build games and campaigns and whatever.

D3 just had an entirely different focus and structure from the ground up.

I still hope that when D4 hits they might decouple the online needs for PC D3 and let it run offline if just so they can scale back the support for it and steadily switch to D4 support .

Diablo 4 is going to be worse for online. The 'overworld' areas are going to be shared spaces with other players. Its not only online always, its multiplayer always. There are instanced dungeons that you can escape the crowds, but that's it.
There is no off switch for this, and there won't ever be. Unfortunately, its part of the game's design ethos.

https://www.pcgamer.com/diablo-4-everything-we-know/

How do the online features work?
The main takeaways are that dungeons will be instanced for solo or partied players, and in the overworld you'll see more players in towns and safe areas—though there's no option to turn them off altogether, even if you're solo. World events will draw players together, and you'll be able to ride mounts to cross great distances (these will be horses, and yes, you'll be able to buy horse armor for them). Difficulty can be set when you enter a dungeon, while above ground it will be scaled to your level (though there is a permadeath mode).

Sadly, this is all bad news if you're understandably an opponent of always-online games: you won't be able to play Diablo 4 offline.

PvP will be limited to specific areas, but you'll have to deal with other people.
My interest in the game tanked when they declared 'shared open world'

Sounds ok to me, as long as they're screening for edited versions to prevent cheats and there's no issues with respawning creeps and unlocking quests, and loot.

It's ok save that it means its basically an MMO which is very different to Diablo 1 and 2 and 3 on consoles which could be played fully solo and offline (though you'd miss any unlocks/achievements/bonuses with 3).

I'm not surprised at the direction they too, if anything considering WoW I'm surprised how much D3 tried to straddle between the two formats of offline and online. I'm not surprised, but it is disappointing for me.

I just generally never get on with MMO games. They require constant attention, regular keeping up, constant gaming in bits and a LOT more grindnig whilst to me the rewards are less because often as not story and video sequences and other aspects are heavily diluted because its built around the grind and around being in a team who all want to advance at different speeds but no one wants a 20min cutscene and storyboard and chat and explore. They want quick into the next quest etc...

Oh no I'm not into mmo's at all. I like multi though.

GD has a "healthy" modding community, and whats better, the devs verbally support it. You'll never catch that from Blizz, they still won't release the Source code for D2 classic, despite it being essentially abandonware at this point.

Torchlight 2 was the best of the loot clickers in my opinion. All the classes felt unique and weren't terribly difficult to actually play. But it suffered from all the quests basically blending together in a furious urge to just GET TO THE NEXT TOWN. TL2 slows down HARD after the first act and it just becomes a slog of fetch quests and kill this mob style quests. GD is even worse, with daily "collect 10 random loot bits for an extremely pitiful faction increase". Which you then grind for several weeks only to get plans to build gear that is significantly worse than what you currently own.

It's a shame the Torchlight team kept chasing the MMO. Even way back in TL1 they were chasing it and in the end they chased it into TL3 and it backfirefailed and they had to scramble to take an MMO that didn't work and release it as a singleplayer game. Which fundamentally doesn't work, MMO games as singleplayer can be ok but they feel hollowed out/watered down.

It's a shame because TL1 and 2 grew really well one to the next and they were onto a steady winner.

Good to hear on the modding community. I knew TitanQuest had a somewhat decent modding community at the time.

Due to the nature of these Isometrics, I really wonder how much we can expect from them. They're all a bit repetitive and that's one reason I like having multiplayer, specifically pvp, because while you can encounter griefers, the competitive aspect removes the grind these suffer from.

It's worth considering that Grim Dawn uses the same engine as Titan Quest (i.e. an engine that is 20 years old). The devs have pointed out around the release of Forgotten God that they'd basically pushed the engine to its limit.

If the game seems aged in a lot of ways, that's why.

Titan Quest always seemed dull to me. I think its because its animation isn't as charming as Torchlights; whilst its maps are 100% linear railroad style. Very much like going back to Dungeon Siege era.

I'm always amazed that Diablo2's random map generation was something only it ever really did super well compared to so many games that came after it. Even if the maps have similar elements the random nature of the layouts really helped build a level of replayability.

GD I honestly felt did really well with their map design. Yes its fixed maps but they have a sprawling nature of them that I find enjoyable for a fixed map game. They really nailed that right in my view.


I really hope we see a GD2

The devs I think have confirmed they want to do Grim Dawn 2 but they've said they're focusing on their city builder game or some such and need to make a new version of the game engine to compete with more modern ARPGs.

So TLDR: eventually, maybe. I never minded the fixed maps. I liked the build variety and the lore, especially for Grim Dawn.