I just bought D3 and I used to play the other Diablos....I didn't beat them or discover much of the story, would it be worth it to go pick up the battlechest and play through those before I play D3?
Diablo 1 absolutely not. The game has not aged well and anyone singing its praises over Diablo 3 is drunk on nostalgia. As far as dungeon crawlers goes, Diablo 2 is still the best and has aged remarkably well, although the servers still lag like crazy because they were designed for 56k connections (like America Online Dial-up). You can live without Diablo 2 though as Diablo 3 is almost exactly like it. Act 1 is Tristram, Act 2 Desert + Egyptian tomb area, Act 4 is Hell (very similar to High Heavens in Act 4 D3), Act 5 is a war at Arreat (Act 3 D3). The only thing missing from D3 is the jungle area, which is by far and away the least popular act in Diablo 2 which is why they didn't copy it for D3.
The only real reason to get D2 is because the game has way, way more polish than D3 (D3 will get that in time) and as a result has more options for socketing (runewords and whatnot), but far less real flexibility as there are very very very few builds that actually work long-term. That's the biggest weakness of D2 is the fake "choices". If you play a Barbarian, you only have 2 real options at your disposal: Whirlwind or Shouts. If you're a Paladin you only have 2 real options: Zealer or Hammerdin. If you're a Necromancer 2 options: Summonmancer or Bonemancer. If you don't follow the cookie-cutter builds to a T, don't expect to survive very far into Nightmare and Hell mode is not even an option.
i considered playing them again as well...Diablo is one of my favorite all time games. It has NOT aged well as said before, still fun but aged. I never beat D2 just because you HAD to build your character just right. D3 solves this by giving us the same game but the option to change your build at any time. I simply cannot imagine slogging through the old games without this new system. D3 is my favorite Diablo game to date, it fulfills my nostalgia and allows me to tinker with my builds.
Would just like to say Diablo 3 is certainly NOT "almost exactly like" Diablo 2. I don't know which part of their body so many people seem to be pulling this information from. They share certain similarities, and if you focus only on those, then yes.. they are similar.. no doubt. But when judged as a whole, Diablo 2 is still the more superior title in the series, and as mentioned, has aged exactly as you would expect a fine wine to.. beautifully. Start from the top of the series - Part 2. In fact, everyone who plays PC games should be forced to play part 2. There's a reason it's been played by so many for 12+ years - it's a classic.
Get Diablo 2 + LOD, play it, and enjoy it. Then get a guest pass off someone you know for Diablo 3 and TRY it. For more info check the official Diablo 3 forums for user feedback. Lately it's been very up and down, though seems to be leaning towards the negative.BludshedX
Yes, Diablo 3 is exactly like Diablo 2 if you play Diablo 2 the way it must be played to succeed: cookie cutter specs. The acts are the same, the combat is the same (except your characters are slightly less powerful in D3), most of the enemies are the same. I wouldn't say D2 has aged like a "fine wine" lmao, the servers lag out if you use any class that can summon large-scale. Tell me one way D2 is discernably different from D3 gameplay-wise, and no "you get to allocate your stat points!" doesn't count.