Diablo 3 Review

[vengerofthelight]

Repetitive garbage. It's the soggy fast food in a greasy bag compared to the feast of roast meats and exotic fruits that was games like Icewind Dale and Baldur's Gate.

Why do people pay Blizzard to shovel this gaudy shit to them?

Mmm. I love Baldur's Gate (that mod where you can play the entire series from start to finish with the same character in the updated Infinity Engine is so ridiculously awesome it defies convention) and Icewind Dale (even the first one ).

However, I'm pretty sure games like that are why Bioware has to make crap like TOR these days.

capcha: easy as cake. Heh.

 

[WhiteTigerShiro]

I wasn't talking about what other people do in Diablo 2. I only played with my friends, so I don't know what the "popular" builds were, nor do I particularly care. I'm talking about making a level 20 barbarian specc'd for throwing axes, and then creating another one specc'd for something else. One spellcaster is a flame master, another could be an ice specialist, etc. It encouraged & rewarded me to have multiple characters who each felt unique. The way D3's gameplay has been explained to me, anyone can swap to anything at any time. I won't say that's definitively a BAD thing across the board, but I personally view it as such.

Well, whether you'll acknowledge it, Diablo 2 existed outside of the personal bubble of you and your friends. But in any case, those unique builds still exist, and if anything I would argue that D3 encourages them. What happens when it turns out that the throwing build just doesn't work for the Barbarian? You basically lost all the time you spent leveling him when you have to delete him. Or, as in D3, you just take a few seconds to swap-out some abilities for another build. You no longer have to build a character specifically for solo play, only to feel gimped when you hop into a game with other people, because you can just swap-out to another build. I guess that if you hate being able to just play the game, then yeah, D3's system is bad. Personally though? I like playing the game, so I like not having to constantly re-roll or run into town to pay for a respec. A build isn't working? *Click click click* Alright, let's see how this works.

I'm a graphic designer by trade, and I take aesthetics and art design in the games I buy VERY seriously.

Says the guy who insists on using the term "cartoonish" to describe anything that isn't gray/brown with heavy bloom. I don't know if you've looked outside the window, recently, but there are more colors in this world than gray and brown.

At the end of the day, it's all well and good for Blizzard to say, "Hey, rainbow colors and toony graphics are easy to make, so we will do it!", as it's their IP. But the people behind D2 are all gone, and this WoW-style artwork is just further proof of it.

See, and that's all the more reason why I find it hard to believe that you take graphics seriously. You want to know why every single cookie-cutter Modern Warfare wannabe uses washed-out gray/brown colors for all their games (aside from the fact that it's the scheme used by the game they're copying)? Because THAT is what's "easy to make". The more color you put into your game, the more you have to make sure that the colors all work together. If everything is a dull gray and brown, you don't have to do much coordinating because everything is the same color.

BTW I think the difference between Spirit and Rage is that the latter is fast self-depleting while the former is not (but I could be wrong).

That's correct. Both require that you use attacks to build them up, but Rage will drain when you get out of combat; where as Spirit not only doesn't drain, but the Monk can learn abilities and equip gear that allows it to replenish itself.

 

[vengerofthelight]

I've had a chance to play a good amount now, so here are my thoughts:

Overall, I'm kind of disappointed to find an overwhelming feeling of "auto-play" in the game. Every aspect has been boiled down and streamlined to such a degree that it doesn't feel like a proper, AAA retail RPG, but more like a browser-based/facebook, "casual" shell of one that you just click through in auto-pilot mode.

My hope is that combat will become a little more strategy/puzzle-like after Act1/Normal difficulty, but simple point-and-click murder is standard fare for all three games in the beginning.

Your character's new abilities are just automatically granted to you with no thought or choice involved. There's a bit of variety with the runes and the "mapping" of mouse-click abilites, but they're easily changed on the fly. Good for indecisive types, I suppose, but kind of boring. And if I can just switch abilities so quickly, why not just let me have all of the abilities all the time?

In D2 my skill choices were pretty much automatic based on what I wanted to invest in from the get-go, so unlocking skills/runes automatically with level just takes that busy-work away for me.That said, having every skill available at all times would likely end up looking like the clutter-fest, macro-required gameplay that WoW is, and I detest WoW. Design like that is why games like Guild Wars (and it's sequel) stick to a set number of skills at a time.

Infinite-use Town Portal on demand is admittedly convenient (especially since you're drowning in loot, another point I'll touch on) but takes away the tension of deciding to use up a scroll. Same with HP and mana - there's no tension at all when killing a bunch of weak enemies constantly just replenishes it. I've had to drink a health potion once in about 5 hours of play.

Again, in D2 this was a non-issue because of my equipment choices. To clarify, if I knew I was going to be using a lot of mana, I would just keep gear that increased mana-regen and mana-steal. Removing the need to do that allows me more choice in what I'd like for gear, like increasing damage parameters or having effect% on hit.

The tension of using a TP, by the way, only existed for me early on in D1. I actually used to just carry a tome of TP in D2 so I could sell it when it was full. >.>

And then there is the utterly pointless identification of mystery magic items. Before, you had to use a scroll or be the class that had the ability, but now anybody can effortlessly just click the item and ID it - why even include mystery items then??? I am truly baffled by this one.

THIS.

The whole unidentified item concept is horribly outdated. If I absolutely had to find something good to say about it, I would say that it can be exciting to see an item of the type you want; suspense is there until you're (usually) let down after IDing it, though each disappointment is (theoretically) contributing to the payoff when you do find the item you want and ID it.

(That all could be different on the other difficulty levels, I dunno. But even that's another thing - the need to unlock higher difficulties. Even that choice is denied us for the first playthrough.)

Again, I'll restate the enjoyment of the story for the first playthrough. Yes, we could have the cake/difficulty and eat-it-too/story at the same time, but if this is a compromise to make the game more accessible to people who haven't been playing Diablo for the better part of two decades.

I was hoping that the inclusion of a cool themed notepad with the game was an indication that it would be a kind of more old-school experience that would necessitate note-taking. Definitely not the case. Well, I guess the Lord of Terror can still help me make up a grocery list.

For the record, this is funny and should be quoted in at least one person's signature. I have no idea why there is a notepad within the game, except MAYBE for a hardcore roleplayer creating something we shouldn't think too hard on.

And then there's the loot. Blizzard seemed to grab this aspect of the series and really ran with it - you are rolling around in vast piles of the stuff, the huge majority of which is junk that will be sold for a few gold pieces. This game is like loot porn. I like loot as much as the next guy, but it quickly gets tedious here - they really could have cut back on it a bit.

Agreed. See my previous on the subject.

I have been having fun playing, simply as a social activity with my sister, her husband, and a friend of ours. But I have so far had no desire at all to play by myself. I wasn't even planning on buying the game, but received a copy as a gift - I wouldn't even be playing it otherwise.

That's a shame. I wonder, perhaps, if there is a specific lynchpin on your "meh?" I ask because my little brother, who's been playing Diablo as long as I have, was fairly "meh" about the game, though when we talked about it the biggest issue he had was that he was dying too often. In Act 1! On normal!

I knew there was something odd about this, and it turned out he was experiencing an abnormal amount of lag. After adjusting some settings, he went from "meh" to "YES!"

Not saying lag is necessarily your issue, just wondering if there is perhaps a barrier that could be removed to give you more fun.

 

[vengerofthelight]

Well, it's Diablo 3.
They did exactly what the fans wanted.
They didn't want drastic changes or innovation.
They wanted Diablo, and they got Diablo made better than ever before.
.

Exactly this, all I wanted was Diablo 2 with newer graphics and some new things to try out. That's what I got, except with some harder difficulty levels (which I'm pleased with)

If its not broken, don't break it it. Diablo 2 wasn't broken so it works out nicely.

That's a brave statement to make. For the record, I made a similar statement to my girlfriend yesterday, to which she replied, "But is that worth $60?"

To which I answered, "If it creates, at minimum, 60 hours of wonderful enjoyment, then it's just as good as when we go to the arcade, except there's new stuff in addition to old fun."

It's like an expansion pack, except the expansion updates the engine, gives an entirely new story line, and is incredibly long for an expansion. $60 for that? Sure.

 

[vengerofthelight]

Thank you for writing the post I didnt bother to do

Currently rocking as a melee (sword and shield) DH in NIGHTMARE, soon ready for HELL. The game rewards orginality MUCH better than D2 and D1 did, where there was one cookie cutter spec that was OP for every class.

You arent customizing stats, but playstyle. I facepalm at everyone who calls that "simplification"

Quoted For Truthery.

 

[Viruzzo]

In D2 my skill choices were pretty much automatic based on what I wanted to invest in from the get-go, so unlocking skills/runes automatically with level just takes that busy-work away for me.That said, having every skill available at all times would likely end up looking like the clutter-fest, macro-required gameplay that WoW is, and I detest WoW. Design like that is why games like Guild Wars (and it's sequel) stick to a set number of skills at a time.

Wait, isn't GW like D3 in that you can only have n active and passive skills at a time, but can choose from any?
The WoW model is only possible with (almost) unlimited buttons (multiple action bars with 10 slots each) and keybindings; though you have to understand that (especially as expansions go on) they are moving toward classes needing around less than 10 abilities most of the time, with half of them being either situational or one-shot. Or 2 buttons, if you are an arcane mage (just kidding)!

 

[vengerofthelight]

Wait, isn't GW like D3 in that you can only have n active and passive skills at a time, but can choose from any?
The WoW model is only possible with (almost) unlimited buttons (multiple action bars with 10 slots each) and keybindings; though you have to understand that (especially as expansions go on) they are moving toward classes needing around less than 10 abilities most of the time, with half of them being either situational or one-shot. Or 2 buttons, if you are an arcane mage (just kidding)!

GW is like D3 in that respect. Sorry if I didn't get that across clearly.

I wasn't aware that Blizzard was trying to clean up the skill buttons problem. I think that's likely a step in the right direction, but retroactive change is usually harder than just releasing a new game altogether. Even skill synergies from D2 was a big change (change for the better, in my opinion), but making D3 without having to deal with how to solve the problem in the existing system is the more elegant option. In theory. Heh.

 

[maturin]

Help a newb out. Is the buzz about this game mostly because of nostalgia and the long wait?

Speaking as someone who regards 'hack, slash, loot' as the worst part of every RPG.

 

[Carnagath]

Currently I find myself in a situation where I can't use the game in the way that I want to, because Blizzard are unable to support it. It really all comes down to the miserable condition of the servers. All day, every day, until about 1 in the morning, the latency hovers around 350ms for me, with occasional (even higher) lag spikes and occasional random disconnects, both for me and for others in my party. This makes it impossible to even consider playing Hardcore mode with friends, which is the reason why I bought the game. And don't tell me "be patient, it will sort itself out", because I honestly don't care if it will sort itself out 2 or 4 or 6 months from now, I bought the game NOW and this is when I want to be able to play it. As it stands, D3 is currently unplayable. Also, today, Sunday, the EU servers have been down since the morning due to "Battlenet issues", and it is now 9 at night. Wow. This is, all in all, an absolute disaster that I did not expect from a company with Blizzard's resources. This is, really, PSN-hack levels of fail. One thing is certain, I will never ever purchase another Blizzard game on launch again, until I have read lots of feedback and am absolutely certain that their game is actually playable. If you are interested in the game but did not buy it yet, I strongly suggest you wait.

 

[Denamic]

If you really think stylism is bad, you're a pretty shitty graphics designer.

People are allowed to have preferences. Even graphic designers.

No.
Not liking a style is one thing.
To dismiss it is another thing entirely.
Were you competent, you'd appreciate the values of styles you do not personally enjoy.

...Why? Why should you possibly tolerate every art style in order to not be considered a shit graphic designer?

Did you not read what you quoted?

For instance, let's say H.R. Giger fucking hates anime. Does that make his art shit(-ier, if you don't already like it), in your eyes?

I never bother with strawmen.
You can omit them entirely for future posts.

 

[Denamic]

I read it. It had no explanatory value. Your vague notions about values don't mean anything until you actually ascribe those values. And please, explain to me how this is in any way a strawman.

Because you can't call yourself a competent graphics designer if you dismiss an entire artstyle.
Like I said, it's one thing to not like an artstyle, another thing entirely to dismiss it.
A good artist would recognise value in an art style he does not personally enjoy.
Especially considering graphics designers apply their art as a trade, as in, for other people.
Their own tastes are secondary.
Don't make me repeat myself.

And really?
You can't see the strawman argument?
That calls things into question that I'm not going to go into here.
Let's pretend it never happened.

If you really think stylism is bad, you're a pretty shitty graphics designer.

This is what you started off with.

And again, context, dude. Maybe the guy meant this sort of style doesn't fit the universe/genre or whatever. There's no reason to think the guy doesn't like this sort of stylization on its face.

That may be true, but I very much doubt it going by the way he used single micro-sized screenshots to make juvenile remarks in place of any actual arguments.

 

[Sergey Sund]

Next up:
the Prime Evils have been defeated!
BUT without leaders the demon hords are still making trouble!
Only now, there is no good way to follow one head-villain to the next, is there?
Blizzard presents:
Diablo 4 - Asymmetrical Warfare !!!!

 

[Denamic]

Okay, define "dismissing" an art style.

I derived it from his abrasive attitude towards stylism, using words like 'cartoonish' in a negative manner, while using 'realistic' as the positive example.

...And why the fuck should he be thinking about how this appeals to other people when he's criticizing this as a consumer?

Because he sought to establish himself as an authority figure on the matter as a 'graphics designer'.
As such, his credentials as a graphics designer gets called into question.

 

[Denamic]

-snip-

This is getting ridiculous.
It's just arguing for the sake of arguing now.
Let's drop this shit and move on.

 

[Venatio]

"Blizzard has said that this will not be the last we see of the setting."

Oh boy...

Seriously, if I hear the words "Diablo" and "MMO" togther I will probably induce vomit. It's not Diablo I have a concern with, but the standard mmo formulas of the day have a way of mucking up and simplifying even the most prestigous IP and turning it into fetch-quests garbage.

Just my 10 cents. I would be happier than anyone else if I was proven wrong on this, though unfortunately that doesnt seem to be the case.

 

[remmus]

The thing thats making me a bit sad is that I don't think the reviewer played through the game either, considering in the video there are about 5 seconds of footage from the very very beginning of act 2, and the rest of it is act 1. Sure you can blame it on blizz for not handing out early review copies, but in the end I'd still wait for a proper, completed review than having it 2 days early.

Its sort of like reviewing a final fantasy game upon its first 5 hours.. Kind of disappointed.

No offence, but I never get this argument with "oh but you can´t judge a game/wont really find the game fun until X hours in" talk folks bring up in a game defence, the sole reason I buy a game is to enjoy and have fun, and often I pay good money for one, I think I´m in a position where I can fairly judge a game from the instant I boot up the start menu, not say 5 hours in.