Google+

Available on: Xbox 360, PS3, PS4, PC

Diablo III review

Ten years later the Diablo formula still works, though some of the changes are more beneficial than others

Words: on May 21, 2012

While looting still works as it does in most games (save for player-specific drops negating the mad rush to pick up items before your teammates), and players can now craft their own gear (though it’s not much different from the ability to buy unidentified items in Diablo II), the ability to sell and buy items on a game-wide Auction House has a fairly large impact. Within hours of the Diablo III’s launch, the AH was already full to the brim with gear for all levels, and as time goes on, it behaves as auction houses behave, with people racing to put up the best gear for the lowest prices.

And though this might sound like an incredibly useful feature, it’s, as of review time, possibly the largest threat to Diablo III’s long-term success. Purchasing items off the AH is quick and simple, and, in a way, makes finding loot meaningless. Every item we picked up from enemies we’d slain was insufficient to the one we nicked off the AH for ten minutes worth of gold. It threatens to break the genre, and unless the economy stabilizes completely we worry that the loot might remain somewhat unexciting. The obvious solution is “don’t use it,” but its effects are much larger than temptation – it creates an imbalance in the economy that we seriously worry could cripple the game’s long life, and that’s without the inclusion of real-money transactions.

One of the reasons the Auction House is available is because of the game’s switch to being online-only. Online multiplayer is an even larger component in Diablo III than it was in the others, so much that Blizzard opted to cut out the option for a traditional offline single-player campaign entirely. You can still play alone, but you’re forced to do so on Blizzard’s servers, which, so far, have been incredibly unstable. Even when playing alone, we were kicked offline on several occasions, and hit with random lag spikes that would often result in our character standing still while enemies from all sides beat us to death.

 

We’re not against the idea of mandatory server-based DRM in all cases, but for us to agree to “always-on DRM,” we need the servers to be “always on.” Lag hasn't been a serious issue for years, and it's distressful to see it being such a problem with such an important game - the second that a server issue kills off your single-player game (which should be playable offline) is the second it's officially unacceptable, and we're still having these issues at review time.

But with these caveats comes a benefit to the updated online infrastructure that makes playing with others easier than it ever was. You’re able to search for people on the same quest as you and join them instantaneously, which makes it a breeze to find groups for difficult sections; even playing with friends has been streamlined and simplified. Those who want to play alone can do so with no pressure to join with others, but it’s just as easy to make sure you’re always running around with two or three partymates. Since the game scales amazingly well to the number of players in a game, it means that online multiplayer will always provide an adequately awesome challenge for everyone involved, especially on the harder difficulties (and in the secret world of Whimsyshire).

Diablo II has been successful for years, but that’s because players had a reason to keep playing. Looting items and trading them with friends was fun, and charging towards level 99 (which took hundreds of hours) created the necessary excuse to jump back in time and time again. Diablo III’s level cap can be hit in a few dozen hours, which is still lengthy, but nowhere near long enough to give players incentive to continue playing after completing the four difficulty modes. If loot can just be bought for a few hours worth of gold grinding, and the level cap isn’t far away, the romantic notion of losing months and months into Diablo is shattered.

Once you beat the last act, you’ll progress to the next difficulty and begin hacking and slashing your way through the game’s four acts again, and you’ll likely find it just as gleefully habit-forming and fulfilling as we all hoped it’d be. Though it might lose the long life that the previous Diablo had due to missteps with new features, it’s still an extremely fun game, and a worthy successor to the Diablo throne. Just keep the caveats in mind as you click through the hordes to scoop up those loot drops.

Related

Games:

Diablo III

View Videos and Screenshots Hide Videos and Screenshots

Latest Diablo III Videos

Latest Diablo III Screenshots

  • Diablo III Screenshot
  • Diablo III Screenshot
  • Diablo III Screenshot
  • Diablo III Screenshot

Platforms:

Xbox 360, PS3, PS4, PC

Topics:

diablo

52 comments

  • Thedigitalg - May 22, 2012 1:53 p.m.

    To each their own, I guess. Diablo II is the reason I failed college, and Diablo III is equally incredible. I also have low standards with story, inherited from my unrivalled love for action films.
  • Higgins - May 22, 2012 1:07 p.m.

    I'm really enjoying the game so fare, but yaeh, the single-player lag is stupidity incarnate.
  • InFeRnOg - May 22, 2012 12:05 p.m.

    Anyone contemplating Diablo III, just go buy Titan Quest and its expansion for $10. Then, get Grim Dawn next year.
  • TanookiMan - May 22, 2012 9:16 a.m.

    Really good review. Also, I'm a huge fan of your style Hollander..."The gameplay – that’s the 'clicking on stuff until it dies, then leveling' part" made me choke on my coffee.
  • MetroidPrimeRib - May 22, 2012 8:06 a.m.

    Prime example of how if you wait 10+ years for a game it'll probably be disappointing
  • patbateman17 - May 22, 2012 11:13 a.m.

    Totally untrue, just look at Duke Nukem Forever...
  • Person5 - May 22, 2012 4:36 p.m.

    which was disappointing...
  • KuramaBingyi - May 22, 2012 7:04 p.m.

    DNF is a bad example. Uh...Look at...Starcraft...Two?
  • MetroidPrimeRib - May 22, 2012 10:03 p.m.

    StarCraft II is probably the only game I can think of that actually was NOT disappointing with that long of a dev time. I mean sure it wasn't as good as Brood War but not many games are.
  • patbateman17 - May 23, 2012 6:08 a.m.

    Or the Syndicate reboot! Wait...
  • tuomotaivainen - May 23, 2012 5:02 p.m.

    You're assuming that Diablo 3 was in development for all of those 10 years. Same goes for Starcraft 2. DNF is the only REAL example cause we actually KNOW that it was in development for that long. Assuming that just because there's a 10 year gap between sequels means it's been in development for that long is both naive and wrong. That said, Diablo 3 does have it's flaws, I'll agree with that. It's still a good game though ;)
  • noneedlesjustshots - May 22, 2012 7:07 a.m.

    I was interested in this game until it came out and I discovered that it had DRM. I refuse to be playing a single player game that I (in this hypothetical situation) PAY $63 FOR, and then boot up a single player game to find NOTHING. Dear god, what if Call of Duty pulled this crap? There would be blood running through the streets!
  • Zeedar - May 22, 2012 12:43 a.m.

    I may get this, when the price drops. It is still a decent game, but it wont have the impact of Diablo 2. Also the DRM on this game is unacceptable. I'll definitely get Torchlight 2 first. Cheaper, no god forsaken DRM and there is LAN play. It's what the paying costumers deserve.
  • Person5 - May 22, 2012 3:17 a.m.

    The price will never drop, or it will drop in somewhere along the lines of five years from now. Blizz believes they can charge 60 for this game then why bother making it less. I do agree with you on Torchlight though, the actual Diablo III
  • bamb0o-stick - May 22, 2012 7:18 a.m.

    Hah, if you think about it, if you're going to spend $60 you might as well buy 3 copies of Torchlight and gift the other two to play together.
  • bamb0o-stick - May 22, 2012 7:23 a.m.

    Actually my mistake. Torchlight is being sold for FOUR copies for $60 on steam. What a steal.
  • Person5 - May 22, 2012 1:46 p.m.

    so if none of your friends get it just gift it to them so you have four out of eight people in your coop game, interesting fact, you can only have four people in a Diablo game, hm, the more you know.
  • Zyrusticae - May 21, 2012 9:44 p.m.

    I gotta say, the story/writing is definitely my biggest beef with the game. It seems like, somewhere around the release of World of Warcraft, Blizzard just lost all their ability to tell good stories - or at least, tell them in a manner that actually shows some level of restraint. I mean, compare Diablo 3 or Starcraft 2 to the originals - hell, even Warcraft 3 had better writing, as I could actually take the fall of Arthas seriously! There's just no build-up in Diablo 3; it's just a rapid-fire machinegun of events that hold no meaning to the player as there is absolutely no time given for the implications to percolate properly, not to mention they have a serious inability to withhold themselves from just dumping in more and more and more dialogue into the game. The demons do NOT need to be talking to the PC more than twice a damn game! They lose all their mystique that way! Hell, in Diablo and Diablo 2, Diablo himself never uttered more than two lines throughout the entire game, and that made the fucker MENACING. You had no idea what he was capable of, no idea what his plans were, all you knew was that he was badass, he was evil, and he needed to be fucked up quick or he'd fuck YOU. So in a nutshell: Poor dialogue, too much of that dialogue, no restraint, treating big bad demon lords like cliche cartoon villains, and not enough grimdark all contribute to the game's lousy, terrible, awful storytelling. It's a damn shame, too, because the rest of the game is pure excellence. (Minus the graphics, but I can live with that.) I guess I really shouldn't expect decent storytelling from Blizzard anymore. They just... whoever's at the helm, just doesn't know how to do it.
  • bamb0o-stick - May 22, 2012 7:21 a.m.

    I agreed with you with how scary and menacing Diablo was in the first two game. Heck, when I watched the cinematics in Diablo 2 I was at the edge of my seat engrossed with the great voice acting of the narrator. Now you have 'demon diaries' to pick up, a joke on the letters you pick up in-game where they are talking to someone about something. I just roll my eyes and say "really?"
  • Rubberducky - May 21, 2012 9:02 p.m.

    Definitely not feeling it this time around. Just doesnt seem to have the same thing as D2 had for me. Its entertaining in small doses but I haven't had the urge to play for hours on end. Think I'd give it a 7 myself, wish I had waited for a price drop now :/

Showing 1-20 of 52 comments

Join the Discussion
Add a comment (HTML tags are not allowed.)
Characters remaining: 5000

More Info

Release date: US
Sep 03 2013 (Xbox 360, PS3)
May 15 2012 (PC)
Expected release date: UK
2011 (PC)
Available Platforms: Xbox 360, PS3, PS4, PC
Genre: Role Playing
Published by: Blizzard
Developed by: Blizzard
Franchise: Diablo
ESRB Rating:
Mature
RSS
Connect with Facebook

Log in using Facebook to share comments, games, status update and other activity easily with your Facebook feed.