Just beat the game and...

  • 63 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Posted by PolyesterPimp (254 posts) -

I drew a collective "meh" after the ending cinematic. After putting so many hours into the game just to have it end the way it does.. So generically, so plain, so OBVIOUS... it just. Man i feel filthy. I know people don't typically come to this type of game for the story but this just felt lazily tacked on, rushed and not thoroughly thought out and the ending speech just made me feel the same way the ending tirades...err i mean motivational speeches given from Optimus Prime in all the Transformers movies did. Pissed. There's alot I want to say but cant due to spoilers but they didnt even try. Act 4 felt rushed. Act III was just alright. Act II and Act I were pretty good in terms of what progresses in them. This post isnt about the game play at all but strictly the story and its "conclusion" I was half expecting a fade to black after the credits then Sam Jackson shows up with a new initiative. And worst character of the game? Leah. That bitch whooooo I hate that bitch. I want to murder that bitch... Anyway lemme know if anyone agrees with me or not and if anyone wants to get some grinding on nightmare in JesusHimself#157 I think my tag is. Hit me up hoes

#2 Edited by handlas (2671 posts) -

I skipped all cutscenes. That's how you play Diablo! Skip ending... fire up Nightmare.

#3 Posted by TheJappernaut (124 posts) -

I liked Leah, also if you hate Leah you're not going to like the expansion. It's not a big secret or anything because Chris Metzen said it on the collectors edition making of dvd that the expansion will be about saving Leah's soul. I thought the story was alright, it wasn't mindblowing or amazing but I didn't really come to Diablo 3 for the story. They intentionally leave certain things open to revisit in the expansion. What do you mean when you say act 4 felt rushed? because it was shorter or because you didn't like the story? And what did you expect from the ending when you say it ended "obvious". Of course evil is defeated in the end, that's the way it always ends in these games.

#4 Posted by Panpipe (473 posts) -

What makes you so bloodthirsty when it comes to Leah?

#5 Posted by TentPole (1858 posts) -

Story is okay at best but there is nothing wrong with Leah.

#6 Posted by CornBREDX (5043 posts) -

It was done no differently then any other Diablo game haha.

That's why people don't come to diablo for story.

#7 Posted by phrosnite (3518 posts) -

This is Blizzard. I don't know why you are surprised. SC2's ending was also as predictible as the sun rising.

#8 Posted by artgarcrunkle (970 posts) -

Blizzard games are poorly written and have bad stories. They make mechanically sound rtses and left-click treadmills, and that's all they do.

#9 Posted by TheHumanDove (2523 posts) -

Uhh, have you ever played the other diablo games? I'm not sure what you were looking for here, but the game is a true continuation to the franchise.

#10 Posted by yoshisaur (2699 posts) -

Sounds like you have a build up of angst, I mean geez. I for one loved the pacing, characters, Nd overall everything of Diablo. Not every game requires a seven sided, convoluted, storyline in order to be interesting. As much as I moved forward for all the loot and to say I beat him in the end, I enjoyed the story just as much. People need to stop complaining that things are too lochs or redundant, be ause sadly there is no such thing as originality when it comes to story writing anymore.

#11 Posted by blueduck (964 posts) -
@artgarcrunkle said:

Blizzard games are poorly written and have bad stories. They make mechanically sound rtses and left-click treadmills, and that's all they do.

Warcraft 3 and Frozen Throne had a great story line so it's not true of all their games.
#12 Posted by Bwast (1342 posts) -

The story is really bad. It's like it's written by a high school kid trying to impress his English teacher with really flowerly language but he kinda runs out of synonyms after a while. Every character bored me to tears. Tyrael leaves Heaven to help humanity but the second Diablo has the upper hand he cries like a little bitch and gives up hope. Adria was red flagged right from the get go when she said "I'll sacrifice even more before this is over.". I knew that ghost dude in act 2 was going to betray me. I knew the prince was Belial. I knew that red angel dude was going to try and stop me. I figured I was going to have to fight him but I knew from the moment I saw him in that little animation thing before the game came out he was going to be a dick. And for no reason, either, apparently. "No, I will not let you kill Diablo who is destroying Heaven because you don't belong here!. That sends alarms off in my head that this dude is under the influence of Diablo to some extent. Either that or it's just dumb. I knew Leah was Diablo's daughter even before the game came out just by playing the beta and hearing Leah's little quip about her father. She refers to the guy who drove the soulstone in his head in Diablo 1. Obviously. Really predictable, bad, cheesy, boring story. The only decent part was the cutscene where Diablo shows up in Heaven. That was alright. Blizzard games have always had terrible stories in my opinion. They really need to think about getting a dedicated writing team that doesn't include Chris Metzen. That dude is only interested in cheese and he either doesn't care about or has never heard of subtlety. Imagine a Bioware level of writing talent(people might not like them so much these days but even on their worst day they can write circles around Blizzard) with Blizzard's quality of game play. It would be the best game of all time.

#13 Posted by WinterSnowblind (7614 posts) -
#14 Posted by Breadfan (6589 posts) -

  

#15 Posted by Dagbiker (6956 posts) -

I didnt play the game, but let me guess what happens in Diablo 4. Does it have anything to do with Diablo coming back and threatening the world. And then that old guy says, "stay a while and listen." And then you kill stuff for hours on-end opening your inventory every once in a while to clean it out, identify something, or equip something.

#16 Posted by MaFoLu (1858 posts) -

I was kinda hoping the angels would turn against the humans in the end. Setting up an expansion where you fight against the angels who are trying to eradicate all humans before they get too powerful and cause something bad to happen again. 
It kinda just felt like the story ended a bit too happily, especially considering how previous Diablo games ended. 
I guess there is still time for the angels to change their minds, though...

#17 Posted by phrosnite (3518 posts) -

@blueduck said:

@artgarcrunkle said:

Blizzard games are poorly written and have bad stories. They make mechanically sound rtses and left-click treadmills, and that's all they do.

Warcraft 3 and Frozen Throne had a great story line so it's not true of all their games.

Yeah... story ripped off warhammer 40k.

#18 Posted by JP_Russell (1171 posts) -

Egh. It was about what I expected from this fiction, and was decently thrilling for what it was, at least. The main thing I would criticize within the scope of my expectations was how dumb and generic a lot of the characterizations were. Belial's supposed to be some kind of master deceiver, and Azmodan a master tactician, but they both were just the same, braindead "You fool! You'll nevah defeat me, ha, ha, ha, ha!" Imperius is made so blatantly dumb and arrogant and over-confident as to be a non-character that exists strictly to contrive an internal conflict.

Zoltun Kulle was probably the least shallow villain in the game because, in his madness, he actually still thought he was working for the good of humankind and the opposition of the Evils. In other words, some writer somewhere actually trickled an ounce of imagination into him as a character, something that just wasn't done elsewhere.

But anyway, whatever. I don't come to Diablo for characterizations, either, so I never mustered more than a "well, that's unfortunate" while I was playing.

#19 Posted by CornBREDX (5043 posts) -

@Dagbiker said:

I didnt play the game, but let me guess what happens in Diablo 4. Does it have anything to do with Diablo coming back and threatening the world. And then that old guy says, "stay a while and listen." And then you kill stuff for hours on-end opening your inventory every once in a while to clean it out, identify something, or equip something.

When did Diablo 4 come out?

MUST HAVE! =P

#20 Edited by Toxeia (729 posts) -
#21 Posted by MasturbatingestBear (1188 posts) -

I have no reason to hate Leah but I dislike her for some reason. Don't even care about her. Even then, why is Tyrael the focus of the ending when he hasn't done anything all game?

#22 Posted by Dezztroy (787 posts) -

I liked Leah. She was very pretty in the act 1 outro.
 
I felt like the devs were getting kinda bored halfway through Act 3 and they just wanted to get it over with.

#23 Edited by blueduck (964 posts) -
@phrosnite said:

@blueduck said:

@artgarcrunkle said:

Blizzard games are poorly written and have bad stories. They make mechanically sound rtses and left-click treadmills, and that's all they do.

Warcraft 3 and Frozen Throne had a great story line so it's not true of all their games.

Yeah... story ripped off warhammer 40k.


Haha wow you really hate Blizzard. I'll admit I don't like all of their games but you take the hate to a new level.
#24 Edited by JP_Russell (1171 posts) -

@Bwast said:

Tyrael leaves Heaven to help humanity but the second Diablo has the upper hand he cries like a little bitch and gives up hope.

There was actually supposed to be a reason for that. Tyrael wasn't the only one - If you went back to the keep and talked to people or talked to your followers, everyone was despairing. This was because Auriel, the angel of hope, had been captured. When you freed her, everyone's spirits returned in full force. Presumably, you didn't lose hope because you're nephalem and stuff. More dumb and cheesy writing, I know, but the point is it wasn't just Tyrael being a bitch.

#25 Posted by Brodehouse (9760 posts) -
@blueduck
@artgarcrunkle said:

Blizzard games are poorly written and have bad stories. They make mechanically sound rtses and left-click treadmills, and that's all they do.

Warcraft 3 and Frozen Throne had a great story line so it's not true of all their games.
They're not terrible for scope or archetypical characters, kind of like telling mythical stories... But their dialogue is bad and their characterization is nowhere near good. Not remotely. All the great heroes and locales of their games are well and good, but they're so shallow in comparison to anything else.

I'm not as angry as that other dude, but Blizzard games completely rely on mechanical superiority. If it was just narrative or art direction they'd be hopeless.
Online
#26 Posted by Mr_Skeleton (5139 posts) -

The writing was atrocious but who is playing Diablo for the story.

#27 Posted by Cataphract1014 (1313 posts) -

Blizzard games are really never about stories, imo. The lore can be cool though. Reading about the titans on a Warcraft wiki is pretty sweet.

They are about the extremely polished gameplay. To me, there are no games in their respective genres that play smoother and more natural than a Blizzard game. Be it RTS, MMO, or Action RPG.

#28 Edited by project343 (2816 posts) -

I honestly don't understand everyone's love for Diablo 3. And yes, I'm a fan of the genre. Yet most of my criticisms are met with 'but that's how Diablo is supposed to be/that's how it's intended.' I'm sorry, but Blizzard apparently intended to to produce an oversimplified, poorly-written masochistic gear grind. And no part of the RPG or the action is compelling enough to me to warrant this overwhelmingly positive reception.

@phrosnite said:

This is Blizzard. I don't know why you are surprised. SC2's ending was also as predictible as the sun rising.

Some of us remember Warcraft 3/Frozen Throne. Wonderful story, one of my favourites.

#29 Posted by Cataphract1014 (1313 posts) -

@project343 said:

I honestly don't understand everyone's love for Diablo 3. And yes, I'm a fan of the genre. Yet most of my criticisms are met with 'but that's how Diablo is supposed to be/that's how it's intended.' I'm sorry, but Blizzard apparently intended to to produce an oversimplified, poorly-written masochistic gear grind. And no part of the RPG or the action is compelling enough to me to warrant this overwhelmingly positive reception.

I don't get it. You say you are a fan of the genre, which I would assume means isometric action rpgs, but then you state that Diablo 3 is just like every other game in the genre, but are upset that people tell you that?

Oversimplified in what way? People shout this from the rooftops, but never actually provide reasons for their statement.

Also, this just in: different people like different things. There is no requirement for you to like the same thing as the 6 million people that are playing diablo 3.

#30 Posted by Galiant (2193 posts) -

@handlas said:

I skipped all cutscenes. That's how you play Diablo! Skip ending... fire up Nightmare.

They're so great, though. Definitely look them up when you can!

#31 Posted by project343 (2816 posts) -

@Cataphract1014 said:

I don't get it. You say you are a fan of the genre, which I would assume means isometric action rpgs, but then you state that Diablo 3 is just like every other game in the genre, but are upset that people tell you that?

Oversimplified in what way? People shout this from the rooftops, but never actually provide reasons for their statement.

Also, this just in: different people like different things. There is no requirement for you to like the same thing as the 6 million people that are playing diablo 3.

I never said Diablo 3 was like every other game in the genre. It's actually quite different and most of those differences are what annoy me. And oversimplified insofar as the only control I have over my character is their skill loadout. Most games in the genre give you this same skill control--and then several layers of character customization on top of that (physical appearance, hybrid/sub-classes, talent trees, stat allocation). Don't get me wrong, I think the Rune system is one of Diablo 3's redeeming qualities with how visually rewarding it is, but it still does not compensate for the lack of anything else.

Personally, I'm in the camp that is far more excited about Path of Exile and Torchlight II. Then again, this launch was not entirely shocking; I've been in the beta of Diablo 3 for several months now. I was already plenty disappointed months ago, and the final release certainly hasn't changed my mind.

#32 Posted by handlas (2671 posts) -

@Galiant said:

@handlas said:

I skipped all cutscenes. That's how you play Diablo! Skip ending... fire up Nightmare.

They're so great, though. Definitely look them up when you can!

eh well that's a bit of a lie. I watched some of the one where Diablo is fighting the head angel guy. Up till he got the hole in the chest or whatever and then I skipped it. It's nicely animated, of course.

#33 Posted by Cataphract1014 (1313 posts) -

@project343: I played a Path of Exile beta weekend. Their skill tree isn't really that interesting at all. It had a whole lot of 3% increased attack speed with bows things. Those can easily be accomplished with item stats. Can't speak for TL2, but I'll probably be getting it because its only $20.

Attribute distribution in RPGs is a thing I can do without. It wasn't interesting or fun in D2. It was get enough str/dex for what equipment you want to use and then dump the rest in to vitality.

#34 Posted by benspyda (2032 posts) -

I had no problem with Leah,

in fact I was somewhat sad about what happened too her, but not surprised either that twist about her mother betraying them could be seen a mile away, but still it sucks to be her.

But yea on second playthroughs I'm spamming through the dialogue because it isn't worth listening to again. Didn't really talk to the dudes with stars over their head either because I wasn't really interested in filling in the back story. Too busy getting mad loots!

#35 Posted by buft (3315 posts) -

I liked the story, you don't have to, look at all the shiny loot!

#36 Posted by project343 (2816 posts) -

@Cataphract1014: While I certainly don't disagree that there's an unnecessary amount of complexity to the Path of Exile skill tree, it's still something that is layered on top of the skill selection. Beyond skill trees though, Path of Exile also has gems and support gems and how their physicality affect the core skill selection. The sheer flexibility of the classes is also fairly welcoming.

My problem with Diablo 3 is that there isn't enough meat there to make me care about the unnecessary gear grind through all the monotonous story events several times over. If it were up to me, I'd just have a giant, story-less world that is randomly generated with randomly generated level ranges. I felt that the linearity and constant jabber of the characters only detracted from the experience. It just makes the 4 playthroughs per character seem like the most agonizing notion.

Also worth mentioning: Path of Exile is technically free, and is technically an MMORPG; Torchlight 2, like you said, is $20. For me, both these titles hold so much more promise than Diablo 3 for significantly less than $60 of investment. The fact that these are even comparable is appalling. But I suppose I spent all that money on those nice-looking CG cutscenes. Oh well.

#37 Posted by SamFo (1528 posts) -

Was I the only one that picked up the lore books?

#38 Posted by laserbolts (5317 posts) -

@handlas said:

I skipped all cutscenes. That's how you play Diablo! Skip ending... fire up Nightmare.

How do you skip them? Honestly have no idea.

#39 Posted by css_switchfoot (119 posts) -

I really like everything about this game. The gameplay is fun and I don't miss the stat allocation (I messed up a lot of heroes in Diablo 2). I really did enjoy the story, picking up all the lore books, and the top-notch CG cut scenes - I wish there were more! The gameplay has not gotten old after about 40 hours in one class (Barbarian).

But like other people have said - its not for everyone. I have always been engrossed in the lore and story of Blizzard games. That might make me a Blizzard fanboy...but I'm not on the internet screaming at everyone who hates it. Other people's enjoyment of a game has never impacted my own, and it just so happens I have enjoyed every Bliz game to date.

#40 Posted by PolyesterPimp (254 posts) -

@TheJappernaut: act 4 was just alot shorter then any other act and the climax of fighting diablo wasnt really climatic at all and was diablo purposely feminine because he consumed leah?

@MaFoLu: i really wanted to fight imperius but they took that from me like they didnt have time it felt really rushed

@ccampb89: there isnt originality youre correct but the game itself was just bleh. lackluster. for something to be so hyped id have expected a story that didnt focus on the supposed hell spawn of diablo being the savior then turning around and being consumed... it was just meh

@JP_Russell: i agree kule was best villain in the game to me as well his voice acting and just his reasoning just felt awesome he reminded me of the necromancer from d2 so that helped as well. dude had swag

@Dagbiker: thankfully no one will be saying "stay a while and listen" in any other version of diablo... frankly cain is an annoying person in the series imo

@TentPole: so im the only one that didnt like leahs constant "Oh uncle youre so crazy" or just the random banter that your characters had? I mean the penny arcade people made a topic of her stupidity i think i have my right

#41 Posted by handlas (2671 posts) -

@laserbolts said:

@handlas said:

I skipped all cutscenes. That's how you play Diablo! Skip ending... fire up Nightmare.

How do you skip them? Honestly have no idea.

Enter or esc maybe? I can't remember exactly. But they are indeed able to be skipped.

#42 Edited by Draxyle (1821 posts) -

I do have to agree with the story being kinda.. eh. Not that the plot points themselves were bad, I actually liked some of the directions it took. It was just the writing. It felt liked canned, generic dialogue for the most part, and there was too much of it. Sometimes it was actually jarring and out of place, "You and your crazy stories, Uncle". ..What?

I think if they removed.. like.. 90% of the various villain's dialogue it would have improved the plot tenfold. I don't need the Demons cackling their evil master plans at me every ten seconds to taunt me. That is really cheesy. Silence makes them more mysterious and intimidating than anything they could possibly say.

I don't think it's fair to say that the previous Diablos had no plot. They were told through their atmosphere and lore; exactly like Demon's/Dark Souls. D3 took a very direct approach, but I don't know if Blizzard can handle that. They're all about gameplay first and foremost, and that's perfectly okay.

On a more positive note, I loved all the dialogue outside of the main plot. Especially all the chatter amongst your mercs and the allies you bring into your game. I thought it was brilliant how each individual player character can chime in as part of the dialogue at any moment. That's some real co-op innovation there if nothing else.

#43 Posted by JP_Russell (1171 posts) -

@PolyesterPimp said:

@TheJappernaut: act 4 was just alot shorter then any other act and the climax of fighting diablo wasnt really climatic at all and was diablo purposely feminine because he consumed leah?

That could be it, but I would also guess it may have been because he had Andariel's essence in him. If you actually compare Diablo Prime's body structure and posture to Andariel's, they're very similar.

Personally, I think they way overdid the feminine styling, either way. It mostly just gave off a "lithe lady demon" vibe as opposed to a "SUPER ULTRA PRIME EVIL OF DOOM" one.

#44 Posted by Zirilius (606 posts) -

@JP_Russell said:

@PolyesterPimp said:

@TheJappernaut: act 4 was just alot shorter then any other act and the climax of fighting diablo wasnt really climatic at all and was diablo purposely feminine because he consumed leah?

That could be it, but I would also guess it may have been because he had Andariel's essence in him. If you actually compare Diablo Prime's body structure and posture to Andariel's, they're very similar.

Personally, I think they way overdid the feminine styling, either way. It mostly just gave off a "lithe lady demon" vibe as opposed to a "SUPER ULTRA PRIME EVIL OF DOOM" one.

I actually thought it was supposed to be a representation of all the evils. He was primarily Diablo but if you look closely he had characteristics of the other prime evils.

I thought act 4 was a bit rushed but overall though I thought the story was pretty decent. I feel it's the best told story in the Diablo series but not as strong as SCII or WC3

#45 Posted by fox01313 (5069 posts) -

I know that after finishing the game the first time, I didn't feel that wrapped in the story enough to get too moved by it. The story & cinematics weren't bad but I would have liked seeing the crazy awesome cinematics with even a stock version of the male or female character you were playing thrown in to give it a little more strength to it. Also I deleted the normal difficulty hardcore character I had (level 10) then started up nightmare. The few times I did die in the first run through were rough enough & the game seems like for me it'd be more fun to just stick to the non-hardcore mode difficulties & play with friends.

#46 Posted by megalowho (963 posts) -

Agreed that the writing was worse than the actual story, and that all of it is periphery to why I enjoy the game. Then again I've never understood the reverence that Blizzard's CG movies get, even when they were shiny and new back in the day. Always been the laziest form of storytelling in games.

I do wish there was some kind of an actual endgame after the main story finishes instead of simply making you go through the motions again and again. A deep randomized dungeon, quests that finish up the loose threads from your companions, whatever. The less story hooks the better, just gimme dat atmosphere and loot.

#47 Posted by Lazyaza (2175 posts) -

Imo you had much too high expectations for D3s story but sure, it could have been better, same as 99% of games out there that ended badly or whatever. I dunno I'm getting close to my 50 hour mark playing through nightmare and the game isn't really about anything but loot, stats and achievements to me now, well and unlocking Whimsyshire.

#48 Edited by Ravenlight (8040 posts) -

@JP_Russell said:

Egh. It was about what I expected from this fiction, and was decently thrilling for what it was, at least. The main thing I would criticize within the scope of my expectations was how dumb and generic a lot of the characterizations were. Belial's supposed to be some kind of master deceiver, and Azmodan a master tactician, but they both were just the same, braindead "You fool! You'll nevah defeat me, ha, ha, ha, ha!" Imperius is made so blatantly dumb and arrogant and over-confident as to be a non-character that exists strictly to contrive an internal conflict.

Zoltun Kulle was probably the least shallow villain in the game because, in his madness, he actually still thought he was working for the good of humankind and the opposition of the Evils. In other words, some writer somewhere actually trickled an ounce of imagination into him as a character, something that just wasn't done elsewhere.

But anyway, whatever. I don't come to Diablo for characterizations, either, so I never mustered more than a "well, that's unfortunate" while I was playing.

I feel like they missed a great opportunity to have had Adria turn out to be Belial. Being disguised as the [spoiler, I guess] was so transparent.

It was also a huge letdown to get to the top of Act 4, meet Imperius face-to-face, then not get to fight the cocky bastard!

@SamFo said:

Was I the only one that picked up the lore books?

Those things dish out cold, hard XP. Even if I didn't listen to them, I'd still looked for them.

#49 Posted by Stepside (509 posts) -

I actually dug the story.

#50 Posted by JP_Russell (1171 posts) -

@Zirilius said:

@JP_Russell said:

@PolyesterPimp said:

@TheJappernaut: act 4 was just alot shorter then any other act and the climax of fighting diablo wasnt really climatic at all and was diablo purposely feminine because he consumed leah?

That could be it, but I would also guess it may have been because he had Andariel's essence in him. If you actually compare Diablo Prime's body structure and posture to Andariel's, they're very similar.

Personally, I think they way overdid the feminine styling, either way. It mostly just gave off a "lithe lady demon" vibe as opposed to a "SUPER ULTRA PRIME EVIL OF DOOM" one.

I actually thought it was supposed to be a representation of all the evils. He was primarily Diablo but if you look closely he had characteristics of the other prime evils.

Yeah, I know, that's what I was referring to about him having Andariel's essence in him. But they didn't put those characteristics together into something that actually looked like the Prime Evil to me. His design was so focused on the feminine styling that it doesn't feel like much direction was put into making him look like a magnificent amalgamation.

@Ravenlight said:

It was also a huge letdown to get to the top of Act 4, meet Imperius face-to-face, then not get to fight the cocky bastard!

Yeah, absolutely.

He was all corrupted and everything. I was like "Okay, here it is. They foreshadowed him as a corrupted angel boss in that animated trailer, and here we are, corrupted angel boss time." But Diablo would have none of that.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.