Something went wrong. Try again later

Giant Bomb Review

262 Comments

Diablo III Review

5
  • PC

The first Diablo game in over a decade is also one of the most insidiously satisfying loot treadmills in almost as long.

Action-RPG combat has rarely ever been this addictive.
Action-RPG combat has rarely ever been this addictive.

Blizzard made no attempt to reinvent the wheel a couple of years ago when it revitalized StarCraft after its decade-long absence, choosing instead to simply modernize and spit-polish that franchise's well-known fundamentals until they reached the company's trademark high-gloss sheen. They've taken the same tack in reviving Diablo after its own 12-year hiatus, and once again the result hews to the nostalgic strengths of its antique predecessors while also managing to feel like it belongs on a release list in 2012. And it's a hell of a lot of fun to play, with hooks that keep you playing longer in one sitting than you might have wanted to. I'm not the type to often play through a game more than once, so I guess it's saying something that after more than 35 hours with the game--first playing all the way through with my primary character, then playing through a bunch of it again on the next difficulty, jumping into numerous dungeon runs with friends, and dabbling with several other classes (all of whom I'd love, time permitting, to take to high levels themselves)--I really just want to keep playing more Diablo III.

This new game's staunch adherence to its loot-driven action-RPG conventions might tell you right off the bat if you should even be interested or not. Do you like loot? Not just a little bit of loot, but ubiquitous, shiny, delicious, stat-increasing loot everywhere you look? Just like its predecessors--and perhaps even more so than them--Diablo III is a game about constantly building and rebuilding your character with new gear and abilities to meet the challenges that are constantly increasing in front of you. It's also a game where the extent of your interaction with the world entails clicking to move, and clicking and tapping some number keys to kill everything in front of you. You play it entirely from a fixed overhead camera angle, and the story, aside from a handful of lavish CG cutscenes, plays out exclusively through small character models gesticulating a bit while their dialogue comes out of speech bubbles. In short, it rigidly assumes the form and structure of the old Diablo games, so if you already know you're burned out on that specific formula, you may move along.

The social features get you playing with your friends easily... you know, if you have any.
The social features get you playing with your friends easily... you know, if you have any.

If that sort of game does it for you--and there are plenty of you out there--you'd have a tough time finding one that's better put-together than Diablo III. A game where you spend 98 percent of your time killing stuff (and the remaining time performing upkeep on your ability to kill stuff) would get old pretty fast if the combat weren't a ton of fun, so it's a good thing Diablo III's is. I think it's the hardest-hitting I've ever seen in the genre. There's something about the interactions between your fighter and enemies, the visual and sound cues that go along with every strike, that just makes the combat feel, for lack of a better word, right. So often you feel like an unstoppable whirlwind of destruction when you wade into a dozen or more enemies and juggle your skills back and forth to control the crowd, focus down a single tough elite monster, or kite a bunch of enemies around as you frantically try to heal. The action is just tightly designed in a way that seems like a lot of designers spent a lot of time tuning it to perfection. Fighting enemies in this game never gets old, which is a good thing since finishing the story once sends you straight back to the menu with an urging to begin again on the next difficulty, where the loot is much better and the enemies don't just hit harder but also change up their tactics, forcing you to change up yours. I can't stress enough how enjoyable it is to keep playing after you see the credits the first time.

The game's classes cover all the bases you'd want, from the pure burly melee of the barbarian to nimble and arcane DPS courtesy of the demon hunter and wizard, respectively, to the horde of sinister pets that accompany the witch doctor into battle. My personal favorite, the monk, is like a martial paladin who can effectively heal up in between roundhouse kicks and a blur of fist strikes. Each class' skills are split across a variety of categories, and almost every skill has a long list of "runes" you pick from to add some ancillary effect that further differentiates them. The breakdown of skills into those different categories initially seems constraining, but there's actually a dizzying number of ways to build the skills of a given class to fit different play styles and challenges. Why the game hides the full ability to mix and match your skills behind the optional "elective mode" checkbox in the options, however, is completely baffling to me. Elective mode is absolutely essential to getting the most out of the game's combat, so it's a shame there isn't some tutorial tip that goes out of its way to let you know how much freedom to customize you actually have. Once you click that single checkbox, the gameplay really opens up.

Seriously, play a monk.
Seriously, play a monk.

If this were purely a combat game, I guess it could be conducted with stick figures and primary colors, but of course it's worth addressing the world and story Blizzard built up to propel your loot grind along. The plot proceeds with equal parts gravitas and cheese, about like you'd expect from a story about a literal war between heaven and hell, but that setup does make for some truly epic, screen-filling boss encounters and sieges for you to fight your way through. It's also fun to revisit some memorable old locations like Tristram (which comes with just a hint of the discordant acoustic guitar that practically defined that first game) and catch up on the continuing events of familiar characters like Deckard Cain and the skeleton king Leoric. Much more impressive is the expertly considered art design that bathes the game in exquisite detail and makes excellent use of color choice and lighting to create unique mood specific to each location. Don't think that the tiny character models and bird's-eye view of the action somehow make this game outdated from a visual standpoint. The art is so strong that each scene takes on a painterly effect that almost transcends its polygonal makeup, and I kept noticing how much detail was crammed into the periphery of each map, like a collapsed bridge here or some old statuary there, in places you can't even explore. There's a liberal use of ambient animations, like birds flying at the camera or old architecture crumbling when you run by, that make the environments feel more lively, and the game's excellent use of ragdoll to send enemies flying over ledges or into the water is always amusing.

But again, it's about the loot, and how much fun the fighting is that gets you more of it. The game changes dramatically when you join up with other players, since the monsters get harder and you're able to settle into a more specialized role while other classes cover their own roles, allowing you to change up the way you play and what combination of skills you're using. The game isn't incredibly difficult your first time through, but I found it doled out new equipment and better drops at a good, steady pace as I got a handle on all the things my class could do, so that by the time the next difficulty rolled around, I was jumping at the chance to get in there with some friends and explore a range of new combat possibilities under much greater duress. It's when three or four high-level players are all in there doing their thing at once, with the action devolving into a high-speed orgy of colored lights and particle effects, that Diablo III is at its best. The game makes the elegant choice of distributing separate loot to each player, so you don't have to worry about some jerk grabbing the spaulders or daibo you wanted, but so far I've found there to be a nice spirit of sharing among all the players I've played with as we pass loot around that suits other people's classes.

The auction house is certainly capable of saving you some time.
The auction house is certainly capable of saving you some time.

It's too early to say what eventual impact the game's persistent auction house will have on Diablo III's economy and the value of rare items, especially since Blizzard hasn't rolled out the ability to sell stuff for actual dollars yet. It's safe to say that launch will have a profound effect on the way items are bought and sold, but even now the transactions being conducted with gold are providing an interesting case study in the ebb and flow of in-game economics. It's been amusing to see comparable items being listed right next to each other with an order of magnitude disparity in their pricing, leading me to believe some players are listing items as high as they can to see what they can get away with, or others are trying to sell gear without knowing the value of what they actually have, or both. Who can even say what the absolute value is of a one-handed sword with 100 damage per second and a bonus to attack speed? More practically, the game's auction house gives you so much control over search filtering that it's almost embarrassingly easy to specify the exact type of weapon or armor you're looking for, the level range, the stats you want, and exactly how much you're willing to pay for it. At the moment, there are enough people selling great loot at bargain-basement prices that too much time in the auction house can sort of trivialize the gear you find in the game itself. Whether that's a problem for you probably comes down to personal preference, and given that the auction house exists only at the game's main menu, it's easy enough to ignore if you want to maintain some sort of loot-lust purity as you make your way through. If you don't have a ton of time to grind through dungeon runs in an endless search for more loot, though, it can be a real time-saver.

Speaking of multiplayer and that auction house, you could scarcely know about Diablo III at all without having heard about the game's always-online connectivity that requires you to be constantly in touch with Blizzard's servers to play it at all, even by yourself. That approach to maintaining the sanctity of the in-game economy (and making sure a bunch of people don't hack and/or pirate the game) comes with plenty of ups and downs. On the upside, the level of integrated connectedness is pretty impressive, letting you chat with friends while you're playing alone, seamlessly invite them into your game or join theirs whenever you feel like it, and even inspect their characters and see their achievements popping up in real time. On the downside...if you can't connect to Battle.net, you can't play the game, no matter whether you want to play it with other people or not. That has real, unfortunate consequences when Blizzard doesn't have its act together, as evidenced by the calamity that ensued in the first 36 hours of release when I frequently had a hard time getting into the game at all, and latency-related issues messed with performance and booted me out a couple of times. It's been smooth sailing in the week since then, though, and given Blizzard's experience running large online networks for long periods of time, I'm hopeful those problems were an isolated incident under massive launch-day stress and not something we can expect to see again.

I can't stay mad at Diablo III for long, anyway. It's such a rare thing that my interest in continuing to play a game keeps increasing not just toward the end of the game but past the end, yet somehow the more Diablo I play, the more Diablo I want to play. It doesn't do anything especially new with the action-RPG genre, but it does all the old things very, very well, and sometimes that's more than enough.

Brad Shoemaker on Google+

262 Comments

Avatar image for osiris
Osiris

701

Forum Posts

227

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 2

Edited By Osiris

Diablo 3 is a very good game but doesn't deserve 5 stars.... There is little not no innovation brought to this game. If this was any other games sequel it wouldn't have gotten 5 stars. But then again, who cares about reviews. They are pretty much personal opinions :) Nice read though Brad, good review overall!

Avatar image for jakonovski
jakonovski

328

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By jakonovski

@Xshinobi said:

Great review for a great game. Now that the servers issues has been mostly fixed. The game is almost flawless.

It's not almost flawless, it's just a huge IP. The two often get confused.

Avatar image for wicked_wumpus
wicked_wumpus

202

Forum Posts

42

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 8

Edited By wicked_wumpus

I would have bet money that Brad would give this game 5 stars.

Avatar image for fateofnever
FateOfNever

1923

Forum Posts

3165

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By FateOfNever

@Beaudacious

The PvP is practically like DLC, however. It's something that was being worked on before release, they knew it would hold release back if they wanted it at launch, and when it didn't fit with the time table they said that they would add it after the fact. It's more or less what DLC is these days, whether you like it or not.

The RMAH, while not DLC, would be delayed anyway. One you don't want day 1 RMAH because if there are any problems (which it appears there are, especially with account security) having it day 1 is super bad and not just troubling or in need of fixing. Two you don't want it day 1 because then stupid stuff happens like people paying 20$ for something that's as common as sand. If I had to guess RMAH was held off on because of point one more than anything though. A need to make sure that everything else is in place and working right before you try to introduce something into the environment that could cause things to go painfully wrong. RMAH is finished, and complete, but it's not the kind of thing you want to be active day 1.

Reading more into the account theft... thing? I don't know if I'd say it's straight up account theft because it sounds like people aren't even losing their whole account to a hacker that's changing their passwords and all that crap, they're more or less being hijacked from the sounds of it. That does seem rather bad. Saying that it wouldn't be an issue if always on wasn't a thing though is sort of apples and oranges. It wouldn't be an issue, you're right, but then that character also wouldn't be able to be taken online at all probably and then that would be an entirely separate issue. It would still be an issue for everyone that wants to play online though. It also seems to be something that has mostly come up since after the time that Brad started writing this review, so it's still not something I feel should be held against the review as a whole (like how MK9 had broken online after Jeff wrote the review for the game. He couldn't have known that the multiplayer was going to break the way it did when he was writing it and posting it up to the site, just like Brad probably didn't know this was an issue when he was writing it.)

As for the difficulty, while you're probably right, I feel like there are just as many people out there that may play through Diablo 3 once, or maybe once on each character class that interests them and then call it good and maybe only go back to the game in a few years or something. That's how I was when I played through Diablo 1 and 2 for the first time. I played through the games to the completion of normal difficulty and then never really touched them again except to play through with a new character. Then several years down the line, and after LoD came out for D2, I went back and actually played through D2 again and finally played through into the extended difficulties. The people that get really into the game will play through Hell and beyond, yeah, but there are a lot of people who will only play through normal and call that good enough. I understand where you're coming from, and if this review was from a more focused site, I'd say that yes, the review probably shouldn't even be written until the reviewer got to Inferno, but this is still sort of just a 'general information video game site' so I don't ever expect any of the reviewers to review a game from a standpoint of how the more dedicated and hardcore people out there are going to feel about all aspects of the game. If they do, that's great, but I don't really expect it because the review isn't intended for those people - those people are already invested and know whether or not the game is for them.

Lastly, I'd like to apologize for thinking that you had some foaming at the mouth going on. It's difficult to tell with written word and with how much fervor there has been around this game. I've sort of just started thinking that anyone that's criticizing the game or people that view the game favorably harshly is just livid at the game and its supporters, and not that they're coming at it from a more disappointed/disheartened standpoint, and that's my bad.

Avatar image for horry43
Horry43

113

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By Horry43

Is it a well-made loot treadmill if the loot is boring and uninspired? This is the dullest Blizzard that I have ever played. Thoroughly disappoined.

Avatar image for christoffer
Christoffer

2409

Forum Posts

58

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By Christoffer

Nice review... but. I played it through normal, tried some nightmare, and now I'm done with it. I can't for life remember what made this kind of grind fest appealing. The story was laughable and the technical issues frustrating.

To keep chasing numbers slightly higher than the ones I had before just doesn't cut it for me anymore.

Just my opinion.

Avatar image for zips
Zips

53

Forum Posts

13

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Zips

I just picked up the game today and while I agree with most of the positive points, I can already say that the lag is really off-putting for my single player experience. I'm in North America and still hitting average pings of at least 250-325 at various times in the day. And then random lag spikes warp me back in time a few seconds every so often.

For a company that excels at meeting the networking needs for millions in WoW, it's honestly odd to have this sort of thing in their newer title.

Avatar image for toma
TomA

2787

Forum Posts

188

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 11

Edited By TomA

Is it just me, or is this the most useless review ever. Nobody needs a review of a new Diablo game; you either like it or you don't. It's not just GB, it's everyone.

Avatar image for ildon
ildon

756

Forum Posts

469

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By ildon

@algertman said:

Yep. The gaming press continue to show how anti-consumer they are. 5/5 when this game had a shit launch.

So for the first 36 hours after the game came out, you weren't able to play it for maybe 12 hrs, during many of which most people in North America were either sleeping or at work/school. But it'll probably have ~97% uptime or greater for the next 15 years (if Diablo 1 and 2, Starcraft 1 and 2, and WoW are any indicators). Boo fucking hoo. It's not like it was some surprise that it was going to require an internet connection to play. Blizzard made that 100% clear. And anyone who'd played or even just read about online games for the past 10 years probably could have predicted the servers being unstable for the first day or so. So again, it wasn't some huge surprise. If you don't like always-online games that's one thing, and a valid point, especially since it's predecessors had fun offline single player. But to be pissed off just due to the launch being unstable? I don't know how you could possibly be more petty.

Avatar image for ujio
Ujio

637

Forum Posts

959

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 9

Edited By Ujio

@sins_of_mosin said:

BS. A 5/5 score is just BS. Brad you are a tool.

If it makes you feel better, GameSpot gave it an 8.5 =P

Avatar image for commisar123
Commisar123

1957

Forum Posts

1368

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 14

Edited By Commisar123

Glad to hear that the connection issues got resolved mostly, but I'm not so sure about a Diablo game that basically does what it has always done.

Avatar image for bd_mr_bubbles
BD_Mr_Bubbles

1850

Forum Posts

7791

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 8

Edited By BD_Mr_Bubbles

Opinion is a beautiful thing we all have them but most of you go past the opinion stage to outright saying the review is horrible and wrong and bash brad nonstop for it. Don't like the game? Disagree with the score? Fine but there is no need to be harsh about it like alot of you have.

Avatar image for cincaid
Cincaid

3053

Forum Posts

23409

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 5

Edited By Cincaid

Nice review. No way in hell I'm reading through the comments though!

Avatar image for loktarogar
LoktarOgar

698

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By LoktarOgar
"This new game's staunch adherence to its loot-driven action-RPG conventions might tell you right off the bat if you should even be interested or not. Do you like loot? Not just a little bit of loot, but ubiquitous, shiny, delicious, stat-increasing loot everywhere you look?" 
 
Nope. Nothing to do here. Watching all the Diablo 3 footage shot by GB bores me to tears even more than a back to back FPS TNTs. I mean, if you like it, that's fine, but it is beyond me how anyone could.
Avatar image for flufflogic
flufflogic

321

Forum Posts

708

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 4

Edited By flufflogic

@TomA: Totally agree. The issue is that all the reviews cover the game, and ignore everything else surrounding it, and at this point reviewing just the game at the centre of the whole thing is irrelevant: if you loved the previous 2, you will love this by default. The only thing a review can really accomplish by this point is to cover how well it having to be always connected to the internet works, and really we won't know that until the paid auction house is open and PVP is activated.

Avatar image for deactivated-5d61ff6f14b61
deactivated-5d61ff6f14b61

1307

Forum Posts

1718

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 4

My only gripe regarding the lag is that it tends to be worst in the evening, which are most definitely peak hours (not surprising of course). Thankfully I've got plenty of free time on my hands these days so daytime play isn't out of the question. That won't be the case down the road when I come back to play as another class though...

Avatar image for ajamafalous
ajamafalous

13992

Forum Posts

905

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 9

Edited By ajamafalous
@sins_of_mosin said:
BS.  A 5/5 score is just BS.  Brad you are a tool.
lol
Avatar image for sweetz
sweetz

1286

Forum Posts

32

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By sweetz

@kcp12 said:

@GnaTSoL said:

Wow. I don't understand Giant Bomb. They kill other games for not bringing anything new or genre defining to the table but give Diablo 3 a five star rating even though its basically another point and click hack-n-slash we've all played before. Brad has bought into the hype and name of Diablo 3 maybe. But most annoyingly, if it's some genre or game franchise they obviously paticulary don't care for, they'll destroy them for not reinventing itself each title or at least turn it into a negative. I'm not hating on the rating, I just hate when they praise some games for their non-reinventing gameplay and just bring up how polish they are, then sob over other games for not recreating the wheel even though they're still just as polished. Stop it with the different standards.

You guys know what I mean...

Apples and Oranges. Those other games are being released every year or two (COD, AssCreed, Need For Speed, etc) so they will feel stale after their fourth iteration. They wanna see those franchises change shit up after the third or fourth iteration, especially if they don't particularity care for them in the first place. Its been almost 12 years since Diablo 2 on the other hand. Its OK not to expect Diablo 3 to totally reinvent the wheel. It does what it does exceptionally well and its super fun.

I think more like oranges and grapefruits. It may be 12 years since Diablo, but not 12 years since the last loot grind action RPG... Games driven by carrot-on-a-stick loot as their primary motivator have never really been my thing, but I played the Diablo 3 demo (guest pass version) and I don't really see what makes it that much better than other games in the genre. I mean, I generally find the underlying mechanics and driving force to be the same as several MMOs at this point - and there's been plenty of those.

Some games that the GB crew are negative about for being tired or unoriginal are also well done, entertaining games in their own right if you take them separately and haven't spent the last several years playing a bunch of games in the same mold. It's a genre thing, not just a franchise thing. In the Binary Domain quick look, for example, Jeff already seemed to be fairly down on the game, writing it off as 'yet another unoriginal shooter.' To be fair, there are a lot of other shooters on the market, and they have to play a lot of them for their jobs, so there may be a natural tendency to become a bit jaded on them; but normal consumers aren't playing every shooter. Some of us, like me, haven't even ever played a Gears of War (shocking, I know). And since I haven't been playing every other shooter on the market, I think Binary Domain is a pretty great game, it's quite fun and has some endearing qualities of its own - yet it seems to get dumped on for not reinventing shooters.

So, I would agree with @GnaTSoL's sentiment somewhat. It can be annoying to see them be a bit negative about a game for being unoriginal, when viewed in its own light is a good game but happens to be in a crowded genre; and then fawn over D3, when it doesn't seem to be bringing anything particularly new to the table either (excepting the auction house, which isn't really a gameplay thing).

Avatar image for babychoochoo
BabyChooChoo

7106

Forum Posts

2094

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 2

Edited By BabyChooChoo

@BD_Mr_Bubbles said:

Opinion is a beautiful thing we all have them but most of you go past the opinion stage to outright saying the review is horrible and wrong and bash brad nonstop for it. Don't like the game? Disagree with the score? Fine but there is no need to be harsh about it like alot of you have.

I agree, but alas, this is the internet. If someone has an opinion that differs from someone else, that other person is wrong. Go figure.

I've stopped trying to bring logic into 'review debates' because people will find any and every excuse they possibly can in order to prove the reviewer 'wrong' even though it's, like you said, an opinion.

Avatar image for petitfool
petitfool

643

Forum Posts

29

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By petitfool

A shining review for an outstanding game. I have once again shut up while Blizzard takes my money.

Also,

@ajamafalous said:

@sins_of_mosin said:
BS. A 5/5 score is just BS. Brad you are a tool.
lol

lol

Avatar image for unbreakablevow
UnbreakableVow

51

Forum Posts

4

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By UnbreakableVow

@Sweetz said:

@kcp12 said:

Wow. I don't understand Giant Bomb. They kill other games for not bringing anything new or genre defining to the table but give Diablo 3 a five star rating even though its basically another point and click hack-n-slash we've all played before. Brad has bought into the hype and name of Diablo 3 maybe. But most annoyingly, if it's some genre or game franchise they obviously paticulary don't care for, they'll destroy them for not reinventing itself each title or at least turn it into a negative. I'm not hating on the rating, I just hate when they praise some games for their non-reinventing gameplay and just bring up how polish they are, then sob over other games for not recreating the wheel even though they're still just as polished. Stop it with the different standards.

You guys know what I mean...

@GnaTSoL said:

Apples and Oranges. Those other games are being released every year or two (COD, AssCreed, Need For Speed, etc) so they will feel stale after their fourth iteration. They wanna see those franchises change shit up after the third or fourth iteration, especially if they don't particularity care for them in the first place. Its been almost 12 years since Diablo 2 on the other hand. Its OK not to expect Diablo 3 to totally reinvent the wheel. It does what it does exceptionally well and its super fun.

I think more like oranges and grapefruits. It may be 12 years since Diablo, but not 12 years since the last loot grind action RPG... Games driven by carrot-on-a-stick loot as their primary motivator have never really been my thing, but I played the Diablo 3 demo (guest pass version) and I don't really see what makes it that much better than other games in the genre. I mean, I generally find the underlying mechanics and driving force to be the same as several MMOs at this point - and there's been plenty of those.

Some games that the GB crew are negative about for being tired or unoriginal are also well done, entertaining games in their own right if you take them separately and haven't spent the last several years playing a bunch of games in the same mold. It's a genre thing, not just a franchise thing. In the Binary Domain quick look, for example, Jeff already seemed to be fairly down on the game, writing it off as 'yet another unoriginal shooter.' To be fair, there are a lot of other shooters on the market, and they have to play a lot of them for their jobs, so there may be a natural tendency to become a bit jaded on them; but normal consumers aren't playing every shooter. Some of us, like me, haven't even ever played a Gears of War (shocking, I know). And since I haven't been playing every other shooter on the market, I think Binary Domain is a pretty great game, it's quite fun and has some endearing qualities of its own - yet it seems to get dumped on for not reinventing shooters.

So, I would agree with @GnaTSoL's sentiment somewhat. It can be annoying to see them be a bit negative about a game for being unoriginal, when viewed in its own light is a good game but happens to be in a crowded genre; and then fawn over D3, when it doesn't seem to be bringing anything particularly new to the table either (excepting the auction house, which isn't really a gameplay thing).

Not only do I agree with this, but I feel that games in a genre-defining series that takes as long between installments as Blizzard games tend to should have more expected of them. If you're churning out a new Call of Duty or Assassin's Creed every year, yes, it's easy for fatigue to set in, but it's also a lot more understandable as to why much isn't changing. Blizzard has had twelve years, twelve years on a single-player game to sit back and look at other games in the genre and figure out new approaches, and they simply came back with "not that different," "doesn't reinvent the wheel," etc."

Well, Gearbox came along and reinvented that wheel in their absence. And yet I guarantee Diablo 3 will garner more GOTY talk than Borderlands 2. I hope, I hope that Brad tries to pull "BL2 isn't that different from BL1" out of his hat. It would be absolutely hilarious.

Avatar image for stingingvelvet
StingingVelvet

596

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

Edited By StingingVelvet

I honestly believe it's dangerous and irresponsible to give a game with this online requirement a 5 out of 5. It's not just about the hiccups and server issues which will now mostly be forgotten, but the principle of the thing. Lag in a singleplayer game? No playing the game you bought unless the company allows you after purchase? Literally streaming and downloading conent while you play, not even keeping it all on your PC? Ruined longevity and real risk of a singleplayer game dying and becoming unplayable when the servers go down?

To me those are such massive issues they HAVE to be factored in, ignoring them in the score just tells companies "yes please, abuse us more." LIke an editorial I read recently said, this is a time for game journalists like Brad to step up and say "this is bad for consumers" and fight for us, not shy away from the issue and give the game a perfect score. Even if Brad, like many others, is only interested in multiplayer characters anyway he has to realize that a majority of DIablo 2 players played solo, and that Diablo 2's simple offline character mode would work fine for Diablo 3 without risking anything he mentions in the review as far as economy and hacking.

People need to realize that a future where we log in to corporate servers to play all our games is a dark future indeed with real downsides. Journalists have a responsibility to inform the average Joe of this.

And all that aside, I personally find loot grind click-fest games like this insanely boring, but I know Brad loves that loot... if the game had an offline mode I think the 5 out of 5 would make sense, it's the perfect representation of that style of gameplay (which sadly I don't "get"). It doesn't have an offline mode though, and that deserves to injure Blizzard on metacritic.

Avatar image for doobie
doobie

612

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By doobie

@UnbreakableVow said:

@Sweetz said:

@kcp12 said:

Wow. I don't understand Giant Bomb. They kill other games for not bringing anything new or genre defining to the table but give Diablo 3 a five star rating even though its basically another point and click hack-n-slash we've all played before. Brad has bought into the hype and name of Diablo 3 maybe. But most annoyingly, if it's some genre or game franchise they obviously paticulary don't care for, they'll destroy them for not reinventing itself each title or at least turn it into a negative. I'm not hating on the rating, I just hate when they praise some games for their non-reinventing gameplay and just bring up how polish they are, then sob over other games for not recreating the wheel even though they're still just as polished. Stop it with the different standards.

You guys know what I mean...

@GnaTSoL said:

Apples and Oranges. Those other games are being released every year or two (COD, AssCreed, Need For Speed, etc) so they will feel stale after their fourth iteration. They wanna see those franchises change shit up after the third or fourth iteration, especially if they don't particularity care for them in the first place. Its been almost 12 years since Diablo 2 on the other hand. Its OK not to expect Diablo 3 to totally reinvent the wheel. It does what it does exceptionally well and its super fun.

I think more like oranges and grapefruits. It may be 12 years since Diablo, but not 12 years since the last loot grind action RPG... Games driven by carrot-on-a-stick loot as their primary motivator have never really been my thing, but I played the Diablo 3 demo (guest pass version) and I don't really see what makes it that much better than other games in the genre. I mean, I generally find the underlying mechanics and driving force to be the same as several MMOs at this point - and there's been plenty of those.

Some games that the GB crew are negative about for being tired or unoriginal are also well done, entertaining games in their own right if you take them separately and haven't spent the last several years playing a bunch of games in the same mold. It's a genre thing, not just a franchise thing. In the Binary Domain quick look, for example, Jeff already seemed to be fairly down on the game, writing it off as 'yet another unoriginal shooter.' To be fair, there are a lot of other shooters on the market, and they have to play a lot of them for their jobs, so there may be a natural tendency to become a bit jaded on them; but normal consumers aren't playing every shooter. Some of us, like me, haven't even ever played a Gears of War (shocking, I know). And since I haven't been playing every other shooter on the market, I think Binary Domain is a pretty great game, it's quite fun and has some endearing qualities of its own - yet it seems to get dumped on for not reinventing shooters.

So, I would agree with @GnaTSoL's sentiment somewhat. It can be annoying to see them be a bit negative about a game for being unoriginal, when viewed in its own light is a good game but happens to be in a crowded genre; and then fawn over D3, when it doesn't seem to be bringing anything particularly new to the table either (excepting the auction house, which isn't really a gameplay thing).

Not only do I agree with this, but I feel that games in a genre-defining series that takes as long between installments as Blizzard games tend to should have more expected of them. If you're churning out a new Call of Duty or Assassin's Creed every year, yes, it's easy for fatigue to set in, but it's also a lot more understandable as to why much isn't changing. Blizzard has had twelve years, twelve years on a single-player game to sit back and look at other games in the genre and figure out new approaches, and they simply came back with "not that different," "doesn't reinvent the wheel," etc."

Well, Gearbox came along and reinvented that wheel in their absence. And yet I guarantee Diablo 3 will garner more GOTY talk than Borderlands 2. I hope, I hope that Brad tries to pull "BL2 isn't that different from BL1" out of his hat. It would be absolutely hilarious.

but surely blizzard had no reason to 'change things up' all that would do would be to piss people off in a different way. people would be bitching that its 'no longer diablo' and all this modernisation is ruining gaming. just as people have done with max payne 3. rock star messed with the max payne formula (slightly) and people didn't like it so much, they felt it wasn't a max payne game.

the diablo formula did not and does not need fixing. its was perfect the way it was and the way it is.

Avatar image for phrosnite
phrosnite

3528

Forum Posts

1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By phrosnite

Hahaha. Brad Shoemaker, everybody. This like giving a 12 years old who has never played a COD to review MW3. Hilarious.

"Action-RPG combat has rarely ever been this addictive." <- hahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Also, the story is garbade.

Avatar image for krystal_sackful
Krystal_Sackful

804

Forum Posts

504

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By Krystal_Sackful

To anyone thinking about getting Diablo III, please PLEASE, rethink it. There's so many diablo-like games out there like Torchlight, Titan Quest, Dungeon Siege, Diablo II, and (hopefully) Grim Dawn, that DON'T cost 60 dollars and DON'T require horrifying always-online-DRM and cash shops. Please stand against this terrible trend.

Avatar image for halfdane1975
halfdane1975

299

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By halfdane1975

Agree to disagree. Like all blizzard games (I don't love any of them) it's extremely well made but I think it's not quite as fun as people say. That said I'm not the greatest fan of chasing loot. 4/5 for a well made game that is entertaining.

Avatar image for eloj
eloj

753

Forum Posts

761

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 7

Edited By eloj

I'd give it a 4/5, and it only rise above 3/5 due to being extremely polished.
 
It's a very short game if you only intend to play it through once (normal) or twice (nightmare). The story is about one step above "rescue the princess from the evil wizard's castle", and the ending is borderline stupid. The companions are like something out of game design in 1995. You can talk to them, but they don't seem to have any quests (unless that kicks in at very high levels) nor ability to change in attitude towards you or any of basic functions what you'd expect out of a companion in a modern CRPG.

The game doesn't bring any new interesting mechanics to the genre. There's a slew of odd design decisions, like the blacksmith not being able to repair items, and the weird way in which wizard spells grow stronger across the board by equipping weapons like a dagger och sword. So called "Legendary" items for the most part seem anything but; there's a distinct lack of interesting "one-off" special effects on items. After a while they all look the same, it's just that some have higher numbers than others. Why couldn't there be effects that for instance modulated spells/skills in interesting ways?
 
My main complaint is that the combat isn't very interesting. I'd like some sort of more active combat, perhaps if you had a roll and active block. Fewer enemies with more tactical combat would be more interesting I think. Now it usually degenerates to either standing (because you have a shield up) or running around while spamming the same two spells/skills over and over. There doesn't seem to be any interesting spell or skill combinations to be found. If there are, I certainly haven't seen any documentation about them or seen any feedback from performing them. I'm talking about combos like in Dragon Age or Magicka. Why shouldn't freezing an enemy and then hitting him with fire cause a shatter effect?
 
The maps/dungeons are random, but the pieces used are so large and distinct you always feel like you've been there before. Some of the minor locations are randomly not available, I guess to encourage replay, but it just means people like me (who aren't going to replay a map 20 times) won't see that content at all. Though probably not a huge loss, these locations are often insignificant.
 
Pretty much nothing about the internals are explained. How does adding players of different levels change the difficulty/xp/gold/item drop curves exactly? Why was 'elective mode' hidden away in a menu, basically undocumented? "Oh, complainers, here you go. Use whatever skills you want then. If you must."
 
Graphics are good, sound is good, the effect when leveling and so on are great. When playing 4p and the spells go flying the game can degenerate to a mess of effects where you can't tell what's happening.
 

No Caption Provided
The first week the servers were down a lot on very attractive hours (I'm in EU). Latencies have been fine for the most part, but it's annoying to have to live with them when I'm playing SP. Once I experienced 1300ms spikes in SP.
No Caption Provided
 
The auction house is very bare bones, with a somewhat confusing interface with limited searching and sorting abilities, and when you put items up you can't influence for how long. The cynic in me think this is because Blizzard will sell you "extra slots" down the line (you're limited to 10 auctions today).

One should also remember that the game launched without the famed PvP component, which now looks to be so late that the majority of non-obsessed players will have LONG since moved on when it is patched in.
 
If you feel the need to answer with stuff like "that's not what diablo is" then don't bother. I know what diablo /is/, I just wish that it'd aspire to be more.
Avatar image for cikame
cikame

4474

Forum Posts

10

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By cikame

This game feels abit like Starcraft 2 with its graphics and animation i'm wondering if Brads known SC2 cravings affected this review.

Avatar image for abendlaender
abendlaender

3100

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By abendlaender

The purpose of a review is to tell people if the game is any good. Stuff like DRM should not affect the rating because everybody can still choose whether to buy the game or, as long as it is mentioned in the review it's fine for me. I have no interest in D3 because of its DRM but that doesn't mean I exepect every reviewer to hate it. I also hate First-Person Shooter Controls on consoles but I don't expect other people to care.

Good review Brad

Avatar image for stimpack
Stimpack

1012

Forum Posts

10

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 1

Edited By Stimpack

5/5? really?

Avatar image for privateirontfu
PrivateIronTFU

3858

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

Edited By PrivateIronTFU

@phrosnite said:

Hahaha. Brad Shoemaker, everybody. This like giving a 12 years old who has never played a COD to review MW3. Hilarious.

"Action-RPG combat has rarely ever been this addictive." <- hahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Also, the story is garbade.

Derp.

Avatar image for richiejohn
RichieJohn

544

Forum Posts

7

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: -1

User Lists: 9

Edited By RichieJohn

I really think points should be taken away because of all the online mess.

If it was graphical cock ups points would be taken away.

I'm not buying it as it's overpriced and the presence on the real money auction house and the always online stuff makes me feel dirty.

If the game was cheaper I could excuse some of it but not a £45. I think it's a real shame so many people bought it.

The game itself looks excellent by the way not up to Torchlight II standards though but good.

Avatar image for ventilaator
ventilaator

1569

Forum Posts

179

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 11

Edited By ventilaator

I'm excited to check out the leaderboard explosion on imcalling.it, because there was literally no chance at all that this game would not be getting a 5, no matter how much of a cocked up mess it is.

Avatar image for jamesisaacs
jamesisaacs

228

Forum Posts

288

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By jamesisaacs

Reviewers still giving games perfect scores? I haven't played D3 yet, i like the look of it, i'll go through the first two games before playing it. This sort of game might be just what i need to break away from the norm but the retail price is quite laughable. I'll wait till it's around £20.

Avatar image for bd_mr_bubbles
BD_Mr_Bubbles

1850

Forum Posts

7791

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 8

Edited By BD_Mr_Bubbles

@BabyChooChoo said:

@BD_Mr_Bubbles said:

Opinion is a beautiful thing we all have them but most of you go past the opinion stage to outright saying the review is horrible and wrong and bash brad nonstop for it. Don't like the game? Disagree with the score? Fine but there is no need to be harsh about it like alot of you have.

I agree, but alas, this is the internet. If someone has an opinion that differs from someone else, that other person is wrong. Go figure.

I've stopped trying to bring logic into 'review debates' because people will find any and every excuse they possibly can in order to prove the reviewer 'wrong' even though it's, like you said, an opinion.

You are right this is the internet so that will happen. The real unfortunate thing is I can remember back to the first year or so of GB's existence it was a stable community of people whose opinions may have differed but they were civil about it. Almost four years later and this place is filled with garbage. At this point its only a few rungs below 4chan on said garbage scale.

Avatar image for ucankurbaga
ucankurbaga

182

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By ucankurbaga

Good review, the game deserves its score. The story and gameplay is extremly polished. The graphics are also fantastic.

Avatar image for canteu
Canteu

2967

Forum Posts

65

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Canteu

@eloj: All your arguments and complaints were completely invalidated when you decided to call diablo a CRPG.

Avatar image for sticky_pennies
Sticky_Pennies

2092

Forum Posts

308

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 3

Edited By Sticky_Pennies

He's reviewing the game, not the DRM. So yeah. Stop.

Avatar image for binman88
Binman88

3700

Forum Posts

49

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 2

Edited By Binman88

@ildon said:

@algertman said:

Yep. The gaming press continue to show how anti-consumer they are. 5/5 when this game had a shit launch.

So for the first 36 hours after the game came out, you weren't able to play it for maybe 12 hrs, during many of which most people in North America were either sleeping or at work/school. But it'll probably have ~97% uptime or greater for the next 15 years (if Diablo 1 and 2, Starcraft 1 and 2, and WoW are any indicators). Boo fucking hoo. It's not like it was some surprise that it was going to require an internet connection to play. Blizzard made that 100% clear. And anyone who'd played or even just read about online games for the past 10 years probably could have predicted the servers being unstable for the first day or so. So again, it wasn't some huge surprise. If you don't like always-online games that's one thing, and a valid point, especially since it's predecessors had fun offline single player. But to be pissed off just due to the launch being unstable? I don't know how you could possibly be more petty.

I think you have to take into account that a lot of people play a game once (or at most twice) through. The fact that the servers will be mostly stable for the next 10 years won't mean much to the person who just wanted to play it the week they exchanged hard-earned cash for it. Also, it wasn't just day of release issues; the EU servers were down for most of Sunday's waking hours. I would have to agree that given the decade they had, a stable launch could have been prepared for and achieved.

Avatar image for mnzy
mnzy

3047

Forum Posts

147

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By mnzy

@jamesisaacs said:

Reviewers still giving games perfect scores? I haven't played D3 yet, i like the look of it, i'll go through the first two games before playing it. This sort of game might be just what i need to break away from the norm but the retail price is quite laughable. I'll wait till it's around £20.

5 stars is not a perfect.

http://www.giantbomb.com/help/

Avatar image for death_burnout
Death_Burnout

3847

Forum Posts

1617

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 6

Edited By Death_Burnout

@Mumrik said:

@artgarcrunkle said:

I hope D3 is the center of this year's hyperbole filled GOTY podcast temper tantrum.

I think we can count on that.

This is the only thing anyone needs to worry about. If it wins. Diablo himself will cry silver tears.

Avatar image for slickshoes
SlickShoes

14

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By SlickShoes

@jamesisaacs said:

Reviewers still giving games perfect scores? I haven't played D3 yet, i like the look of it, i'll go through the first two games before playing it. This sort of game might be just what i need to break away from the norm but the retail price is quite laughable. I'll wait till it's around £20.

read the giant bomb scoring system, 5 stars does not mean it's perfect.

Avatar image for ptys
ptys

2290

Forum Posts

3

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 14

Edited By ptys

Well can't say I didn't see that score coming.

Avatar image for thedudeofgaming
TheDudeOfGaming

6115

Forum Posts

47173

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 1

Edited By TheDudeOfGaming

@phrosnite said:

Hahaha. Brad Shoemaker, everybody. This like giving a 12 years old who has never played a COD to review MW3. Hilarious.

"Action-RPG combat has rarely ever been this addictive." <- hahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Also, the story is garbade.

Are you a troll? If you are you gotta tell me.

Avatar image for addfwyn
Addfwyn

2057

Forum Posts

33

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 11

Edited By Addfwyn

@RichieJohn: Disagree on a lot of points. Popular online games have rough launches, it always happens, and it could have been WAY worse. A day or two of hiccoughs is minor, when last year's GOTY (Skyrim) was basically unplayable on an entire platform for MONTHS. Despite not even being an online title.

Your argument that is overpriced is up to you, I can't tell you what your value system for a video game is. However, it's standard retail price for a game that you can easily get WAY more gameplay time out of than most modern releases, so I think it's pretty far price. Even if you only play it through on Normal once, you're looking at a longer campaign than a lot of games out today. How is it a shame that people bought it, or are people just not allowed to buy things that are popular?

As far as the tired RMAH debate, don't use it. There's a gold AH for softcore players that you are more than welcome to use instead of the RMAH if you so choose, or you can play Diablo how it should be played (hardcore) where there isn't even an RMAH anyway. It'd be a valid complaint if it were the ONLY AH and you had to use it, but it's only an option vs the equally functional gold AH.

Avatar image for eloj
eloj

753

Forum Posts

761

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 7

Edited By eloj
@Canteu said:

@eloj: All your arguments and complaints were completely invalidated when you decided to call diablo a CRPG.

Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you the logic of a 12yr old.
Avatar image for theht
TheHT

15998

Forum Posts

1562

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 9

Edited By TheHT

Good review! I'm having a blast with this game. Too be honest I'm kinda hoping my internet craps out tomorrow though. I just installed Alan Wake's American Nightmare and if my internet's fine I'll probably be hooked on Diablo 3 all day instead of chasing down Mr. Scratch.

GITTIN DAT LUTE.

Avatar image for stepside
Stepside

559

Forum Posts

416

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

Edited By Stepside

Great review Brad. ThIs game rocks my face.

Avatar image for vextroid
Vextroid

1595

Forum Posts

1219

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 6

Edited By Vextroid

@Death_Burnout said:

@Mumrik said:

@artgarcrunkle said:

I hope D3 is the center of this year's hyperbole filled GOTY podcast temper tantrum.

I think we can count on that.

This is the only thing anyone needs to worry about. If it wins. Diablo himself will cry silver tears.

Is Heart of The Swarm launching this year?

Avatar image for richiejohn
RichieJohn

544

Forum Posts

7

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: -1

User Lists: 9

Edited By RichieJohn

@Addfwyn: A new PC game is usually around £30 at launch here. This is the whole price of Torchlight 2 more than that at £45.

With Torchlight 2 being the price it is and preorders for Grim Dawn being around that price (from the kickstarter at least ) I think the market sort of set the price for this type of game and Blizzard charged way over that.

It just worries me when lots of people complain about a thing then everyone still buys it.

I know you don't have to use the RMAH but it's there and they want you to use it because it makes them money so I think it should push the price down a bit.

I've not played this but I've been in the TL2 beta and from watching this game and playing that one I can't see what this one does better.

To be perfectly honest all of my problems with the game would be pretty much gone if they weren't over charging which in my opinion they defiantly are.

Opinions are opinions I guess but as a fan of Diablo 1 and 2 I'll get the game made by those guys.