Playing A Game Diablo III PC

I'm not going to harp on about the always-online requirement, because there's no way that any sane or rational person could see it as anything other than complete bullshit. If you want to see a game that had both online-authenticated player and item data, and offline and LAN play (not to mention the freedom to cheat by yourself if you really wanted to), you can look at Diablo fucking Two. That's all I have to say on that.

At any rate. As I've mentioned, by liberally up-ending the character-growth foundations of its forebears, Diablo III is surprisingly accessible (and re-roll friendly) without really sacrificing significant depth in the process. Practically speaking, losing the ability to arbitrarily invest stat points from leveling up just means that you can no longer create broken character builds; and translating dozens of different talents per class into just a handful with different rune options, means that - since most of those dozens of talents weren't very useful anyway - players will really enjoy more gameplay variety than they did before. It's still a little hard to get over the appearance of being shallower than Diablo II's character builds, but in execution, the Diablo III system really is an all-around improvement.

Like I suspected from the beta, the cinematic cutscenes Blizzard's delivered in the final game are suitably gorgeous and epic, setting the bar for visual fidelity in the same way they did back in 2000. But they haven't made the cinematics any more important than they were 12 years ago -- they still only occur between Acts, and they still exist in a sort of symbiotic dysfunction with the in-game dialog and events, neither of which fully agree on what's important in the game's developing story. This guy complains about the missed emotional significance of a brief scene in the game's first 20 minutes, but I shudder to think of how he'll feel about Act I's generally ambiguous objective and slapdash pacing.

It's a shame, because the plot abstract for Diablo III is actually quite interesting, and satisfyingly ties up the loose ends left from Diablo II (at least until Blizzard decides to make a D3 expansion pack). But in-game, the story is always in un-subtle service of the level design. Go through the uniquely beautiful grassy plains area and find your way through the spider-cave passage, because you have to find, uh, X. Seek out the portal to Hell and go kill a thing that represents, uh, a bad something. There's nothing wrong with this pragmatic game design, per se, except that it's exactly what I was playing 12 years ago.

Speaking of which, it is more than a little distressing how much of Diablo III's content is really just an updated form of Diablo II's. Act I has zombies in dark grasslands, a ruined old Tristram, and goatmen in highlands, plus the aforementioned spider cave borrowed from Kurast. Act II's town is a carbon copy of Lut Gholein; its outdoor environment is the exact same desert, with the exact same annoying vultures, insects, and tiger-people; and its sub-areas are the same sewers, bug caverns, and arcane realms. Act III is the most original, with a lot of content in a sieged fortress, but later areas delve directly into Hell (ala D2's Act IV). And while Act IV takes place in Heaven, it is really just a white-and-glowy version of D2's Hell, all the way down to the swarming enemies and abbreviated number of quests. Again, all of these design themes and elements work fine, but they seem lifted from Diablo II as a template, rather than originally designed from its inspiration.

There is a short but sweet list of mechanical innovations - the dynamic skill-and-rune system, equipment crafting, unique loot drops for each player in a game, really fantastic art and sound - that make Diablo III a clear victory. But there are other, equally significant ways in which it seems like a game stuck in the past, or even stumbling backward: no offline options; only four simultaneous players (D2 had eight!); not many meaningful connections between the story and game scenes; much of the same level and enemy design as its predecessor. What's generally disappointing about Diablo III is that it feels two or three years ahead of Diablo II, rather than twelve. By now, I feel like we should have a much better game.

Don't get me wrong -- it's still a blast to play. The character options are great fun to analyze and toy around with. I hunger for more powerful equipment to pimp out my stats. And I think I'll really enjoy playing the higher-difficulty modes, not to mention trying out the other character classes.

Diablo III nails the essence of its combat and character gameplay. But the rest of the game is just Diablo II with a facelift.

Better than: Diablo II, see above
Not as good as: Diablo II, see above
Now I'm actually curious about: Torchlight II

Progress: Finished Normal with a Monk

Rating: Good