|
Like many people I was desperate to play the latest addition to the Blizzard family, Diablo 3. I have loved Diablo since the original and I was eager to see how an entirely new game engine would lend itself to the lore of Diablo. While Diablo has always had a simple story, told primarily through cut scenes and short snippets of dialogue, the premise of the game world has lent itself to a world rich with lore. There was never really a need to hit the player over the head with a comprehensively developed story, the game did the leg work and let a players imagination take over. However, I had high hopes that Blizzard was going to deliver a story that built on its predecessors and delivered a unique and engaging plot to enhance what turned out to be addicting and fun as hell gameplay. This sadly did not occur.
I guess Blizzard set itself up for failure. Everyone cool is dead. Mephisto, Baal, and Diablo have all been defeated and all that is left are the two lesser lords of hell. Azmodan and Belial are the two token bosses to defeat and we are expected to understand why. Blizzard doesn't even make mention of either of them in an early cutscene to give the story some direction. Instead you are for some reason a travelling hero who decides that life would just be boring if you didn't hunt down a minor lord of hell. Is the world currently in danger? Nope, but better get at it just to be sure. About mid game Azmodan gets an amazing cutscene that finally gives the game its first burst of excitement, but you kill him about two hours of game time later so it never really gets kicking.
The story of Diablo is, to put it mildly, terrible. You begin as a hero searching for a mysterious fallen star, which turns out to be the fallen angel Tyrael. You meet up with the familiar character Cain and his niece Leah and begin a quest to find the star and delve into the history of the original fall of Tristram. Sounds good so far. So what the hell happened?
I knew things were going wrong when the fairly large town of New Tristram turned out to have only three characters of any substance, Leah, Cane, and a blacksmith named Haedrig. You can chat briefly with other characters but they are clearly stock characters. This would be forgivable if not for the fact that with each following Act you are introduced to one new character and everyone else is window dressing. The entirety of the story of Diablo 3 is told through a small cast of perhaps six or seven characters, many of which have no real purpose other than selling equipment. In fact, the blacksmith and jeweler decide to join you for the flimsiest of reasons. I was immensely disappointed when Haedrig asks you to kill his wife, accompanies you while you do so, and then shows no reaction when you hack her to pieces. "I guess I better go with you as that is what my wife would have wanted." Yes, I'm sure your wife would have wanted you to travel with a stranger bent on diving into the most dangerous situations possible with the person who murdered her instead of at least trying to find a way to save her. Good call buddy.
Situations such as this would be completely forgivable if Blizzard used the smaller cast to focus the story. The characters of Leah and Tyrael are interesting and have the potential to make a story without focus engaging. Both allow for some token moments of interaction but neither really give any indication of what drives them. The brief moments we spend with Cain are the best story moments in the game, simply because it is so easy to understand his motivations. Tyrael was a mysterious and impossible to read angel from Diablo 2 who gave you just enough information to keep you going, but seemed to have some knowledge you lacked. Turns out, he is just as dumb as everyone else. He has no fucking clue what is going on, and decides to join the human race because big daddy Imperious doesn't like his style. Wait, who is Imperious you ask? Who the hell knows! A badass looking angel with anger issues makes for an interesting take on the angelic host but we see him for about three minutes of total game time. Do we hear anything about why he exists? Does the story use him as a plot device? Does heaven benefit from his presence in any way? NO! He gets really angry at you for some reason but then passes out so you can go merrily on your way to kill Diablo...wait Diablo????? I thought I killed that guy twice already.
Turns out Diablo isn't dead...again. He is a clever mother fucker who planned the events of the entire first two games as a massive ploy to gain ultimate power and destroy heaven. Wow! That is so cool! How the hell did he do that? Well all he had to do was die twice, sleep with Adria (the witch from Diablo 1) and conceive a daughter that would have the power to get shit done. Slightly convenient plot device but what the hell, the big red guy is smart. Too bad this forces the story to essentially have no point until the final Act. Adria betrays you-don't ask why-and Leah dies to let big daddy take over. Your major connection to the story is dead and now you are to acknowledge the wonderful plot twist and finally kill the demon grand master of strategy. The Lord of Terror is so meta that your brain starts to hurt if you think about it too much. This guy isn't just making due with the bad situation of having being beaten two times, he actually set up those losses. HE WANTED YOU TO WIN SO HE COULD BEAT YOU NOW!!! Blizzard wants to make sure the title character is sufficiently bad ass to deserve having his own series. Too bad I don't fucking care. I haven't been thinking about Diablo at all this entire game so I guess Blizzard expects me to say "Ohhhhhhh, Diablo you crafty fuck, you got me." This must be some story telling genius I don't understand, deny the story any kind of interesting motivation so that for the last hour you can think about how well the story of the past two games built to this. I guarantee someone at Blizzard thinks this is cool. Too bad it isn't; its fucking dumb.
And that is why the story of Diablo 3 is so terrible. In Diablo 2 you spend every cutscene and moment of the story following the Dark Wander. A hero tortured by his attempt to contain the Lord of Terror who eventually turns into Diablo. You spend every moment chasing the big bad boss man and it makes you feel connected to each location you travel to. You can see how intelligent and all knowing he is by following his actions. In Diablo 3 you do the exact same thing, except Blizzard doesn't let you know what you are doing, leaving you to wander aimlessly killing random demons who get only seconds of story development instead of building to an interesting villain.
There are a million other complaints I could make about the story. It has moments of brilliance, such as its sad attempt to make the Angelic side of the equation interesting, but it comes off a little like angelic power rangers instead of true characters. The plot twist could have been interesting if you weren't left with gaping plot holes. Is Leah dead? What the fuck happened to Adria? What the hell is a black soul stone and how did some random mage dude create it? Diablo 3 could have been amazing but I can't help but think that Blizzard is caught up in its own brilliance. Perhaps they have bought into their own hype, believing every idea is awesome instead of sorting through bad ideas to find the gems.
Could I do better? Who knows, but it isn't my job to. Blizzard needs to get the magic back, but I think it is probably too late. Diablo 3 is fun and I'll keep playing it, but unlike its predecessors it hasn't captured my imagination in a way that inspires fanatic devotion. An era is over; Blizzard has lost its mojo. Sigh.
 
|
Have you even played D2? Did it have 'substantive characters'? I dont even remember which npcs had scripted dialog, because I DIDNT GIVE A FUCK.
No one sits in the rogues encampment chatting with fucking npcs, this isnt mass effect.
|
On May 22 2012 13:57 m3rciless wrote:
Have you even played D2? Did it have 'substantive characters'? I dont even remember which npcs had scripted dialog, because I DIDNT GIVE A FUCK.
No one sits in the rogues encampment chatting with fucking npcs, this isnt mass effect.
Its been twelve years. You think they could have upped their game. Just a thought.
|
On May 22 2012 13:57 m3rciless wrote:
Have you even played D2? Did it have 'substantive characters'? I dont even remember which npcs had scripted dialog, because I DIDNT GIVE A FUCK.
No one sits in the rogues encampment chatting with fucking npcs, this isnt mass effect.
Counterpoint: anyone who's played D2 can probably name the NPCs and remember at least one line from them. Because they actually were something, unlike D3 which has pretty much nothing to give character to each town/environment.
|
uh the d2 story was pretty awful
i think people remember it as better than it was because they were like 14 when they first played through d2
|
On May 22 2012 14:03 Dfgj wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2012 13:57 m3rciless wrote:
Have you even played D2? Did it have 'substantive characters'? I dont even remember which npcs had scripted dialog, because I DIDNT GIVE A FUCK.
No one sits in the rogues encampment chatting with fucking npcs, this isnt mass effect. Counterpoint: anyone who's played D2 can probably name the NPCs and remember at least one line from them. Because they actually were something, unlike D3 which has pretty much nothing to give character to each town/environment.
That's a good point. I can't even name any of the merchants; heck I don't even remember the follower's names lol. I was largely disappointed not only with the story, but how poorly done it all seems. The game itself is super glitchy, and it really comes off poorly to the consumer.
Good blog post, I enjoyed reading it.
|
I don't know about the story but the game itself is so repetitive and got boring after beating it the first time, kinda regret wasting 60$
|
On May 22 2012 14:03 Dfgj wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2012 13:57 m3rciless wrote:
Have you even played D2? Did it have 'substantive characters'? I dont even remember which npcs had scripted dialog, because I DIDNT GIVE A FUCK.
No one sits in the rogues encampment chatting with fucking npcs, this isnt mass effect. Counterpoint: anyone who's played D2 can probably name the NPCs and remember at least one line from them. Because they actually were something, unlike D3 which has pretty much nothing to give character to each town/environment.
In the Rogue Encampment: Akara, the priestess and resident boring person who told you much of the backstory and progressed the quest line; Kashya, the warrior leader who tells you about Blood Raven; Charsi, the naive young blacksmith woman who asks you to return her mallet so that she can forge you a piece of magical armor; the caravan master Warriv who dispensed idioms; and Gheed, the greedy, underhanded merchant who wanted nothing more than to get out of there.
In Lut Gholein: Fara the Paladin, who said little and kept her past mysterious; Elzix the scoundrel-turned-innkeeper; Drognan the wizard, arrogant in his abilities; Fara, the woman who lost her family and asks you for revenge; Meshif, the ship captain who will later take you to Kurast; Jehryn, the young Sultan and lord, who failed to protect the young harem girls from their fate; Lysander, the nearly deaf alchemist who snaps at you at a moment's notice...
I could go on (highlights include Alkor the Alchemist and Ormus the "mad" mage in Kurast, and Nihlathak in Act V for being a misguided tool who thought he was doing the right thing), but I think I've made my point.
If you didn't give a fuck about the story, then stop responding to a topic about the story. Some of us have fucks to give.
|
On May 22 2012 14:26 Sc2Corpse wrote:
I don't know about the story but the game itself is so repetitive and got boring after beating it the first time, kinda regret wasting 60$
Did you expect an entirely dynamic world that is always changing? Go play WoW. Diablo has and will always be "repetitive" - that is why is it what it is. You repetitively farm and repetitively craft the same items hoping for better stats, that is what Diablo is.
Honestly I didn't buy Diablo for the background characters, the lore from Blizzcon was far far more interesting (and more understandable) than what is in the game, so I guess I was also disappointed on that front when you are told to kill these bad guys without much of a reason while at Blizzcon they explained an epic universe.
I really think Blizzard has gotten rid of all the wrong people, I was pretty disappointed with a lot of things about Diablo 3, but yet I still find it enjoyable to play with friends.
|
D2's story was not amazing, neither was diablo 1's.
With that said i think diablo 1 is the only diablo that i actually cared about talking to the npc's every time i went to town. They did a great job in the first diablo making the characters worth something. I used to love just playing through the single player and going through the story and listening to all the npc's and getting the history of the town. I think much of this was due to the fact that there was only one town, and not many.
This wasnt the case for diablo 2, although the story if paid attention to had substance. I certainly didnt expect it in diablo 3. The story does suck hard in diablo 3 but.... i dunno, its a minior speed bump. If it was there the game would be greatly enhance though.
And when i say talk to all the npc's, i dont mean just the quest line conversations. The gossip aswell.
|
Netherlands45349 Posts
The main storyline was awfull
However the side story lines(Templar,Enchantress), the many, MANY journals and the monster lore is REALLY well done.
|
Well metro uk does say that the game is basically all about hack and click all the time ...
In Short: Still the definitive dungeon crawling experience, and although controversial the changes to upgrading characters only makes it more accessible and customisable.
Pros: Expertly crafted as only Blizzard knows how, with great attention to detail. Highly versatile customisation options and character classes, with excellent co-op options.
Cons: Extremely linear and relatively short. Limited enemy artificial intelligence for enemies. Ultra nerdy story and dialogue. Always-online features have obvious drawbacks.
Score: 8/10
http://www.metro.co.uk/tech/games/899456-diablo-iii-review-hack-n-click
|
^^ and you expected something else from Diablo?
I agree with op about the story. Chasing the wanderer, felt really good. But then if you look at the ending of D1 it was already planned by b-north to have an expo/sequel, so they had something in place. Whereas there was nothing clear guiding the story in D3, and it felt like they just had to find a way to get diablo back to do a game, and they did it in a very unconvincing way that made it feel extremely forced. the story might have been bad in D2, but it had a certain charm to it. They tried to get some mileage out of nostalgia by recalling some of the older characters like leoric etc, but then it didnt really do much.
|
On May 22 2012 14:24 Jugan wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2012 14:03 Dfgj wrote:On May 22 2012 13:57 m3rciless wrote:
Have you even played D2? Did it have 'substantive characters'? I dont even remember which npcs had scripted dialog, because I DIDNT GIVE A FUCK.
No one sits in the rogues encampment chatting with fucking npcs, this isnt mass effect. Counterpoint: anyone who's played D2 can probably name the NPCs and remember at least one line from them. Because they actually were something, unlike D3 which has pretty much nothing to give character to each town/environment. That's a good point. I can't even name any of the merchants; heck I don't even remember the follower's names lol. I was largely disappointed not only with the story, but how poorly done it all seems. The game itself is super glitchy, and it really comes off poorly to the consumer. Good blog post, I enjoyed reading it.
I can remember gheed, that's it.
The d2 story was unrelenting garbage, the d3 story is even worse garbage except the templer and rogue storylines are actually quite nice. Doesn't matter, incredibly fun game.
|
I actually liked the story of Act1 & 2.
Sure the reasons why the heroes visit Tristam seems artificial, but honestly - it's the typical "you dont know the backstory of the hero" plot device. And I can even agree with my monks reason "The gods send me there to check the fallen star".
The whole find the star, help the stranger, Magdha is evil, Magdha gets betrayed - go kill Belial story was kinda fun (and yes it was obvious who Belial was - but who cares^^).
But then Act 3 and the transition to Act 4 (Act 4 itself is kinda fine apart from gold armor guy).
The siege is kinda okay (but too long imho) so the rest of the act seems rushed ("Oh btw plz go to hell and kill Azmodan - but be back before dinner, dont worry it's just around the corner!").
The whole witch betrayal was also kinda stupid, because the same thing already happened in Act 1 & 2. Evil witch & betrayal!
How about: Leah is just too weak and - while the hero & Tyrael were running around killing demons (or doing whatever i.e. searching for something which is needed to destory the Black Soulstone) - she is overwhelmed & the demons take over (and since Diablo is the badass he's in control).
Oh and one thing: "Turns out Diablo isn't dead...again."
He's not dead. Again. He'll be back. I mean you even see the soulstone staying intact in the ending cinematic 
But I dont care about that 
|
Yea I feel like they had a lot of lore to play around with and make it totally kick ass, but unfortunately incorporating it into a game that's based on such a simple dynamic (gain levels, get loot, get skills, click click), I can kinda see why it gets boring. The boss fights are just more clicking too ): I heard in WoW that some bosses had to be killed in certain stages and with certain tactics, I think that would have been awesome. I use to play Ragnarok, and there were a couple of bosses that were (at the time) only killable with certain kinds of.. exploits I guess, like luring a boss into a corner with 1 tank, trapping him into a 2 block radius with certain skills, and then using 2 teams to keep the tank alive while also dealing damage. The fact that you can kill any boss with 2 (or even 1) guy, regardless of class, kinda takes away from how dynamic boss fights can be. Even things like puzzles could have been incorporated, but I was a bit sad with the overall product.
People said on opening day that streamers wouldn't really get viewers because they either didn't care or were playing it for themselves, but I watched a ton of d3 streams to see if i could find some aspects I really liked. Unfortunately not the case.
Still think it would be a really fun experience with friends on skype though
|
The OP expresses more or less my own thoughts.
Only, I can see the meeting in my head where they were discussing the story.
- <random guy> "Let's make Tyrael som evil mastermind that has plotted the destruction for millennia".
- <boss>" No, that's not propery. Everyone knows that Angels are good. We'll have parents calling us every hour of the day. We can't have that. That'll cost us money."
- <random guy> "Well let's make him a Jesus figure?"
- <boss> "Good, next point".
- <random guy> "Jesus figure that somehow fights Diablo. Noted, then the cast then."
- <random guy3> "Well I'm out of idéas. Which characters do we have?"
- <random guy2> " Some merchants, a mysterious witch, an old lady, some mercenaries. If we go back really long, and it pains me to do this, we could use the wanderer again."
- <random guy> "Oh, let's have the wanderer mate with the witch, bring forth diablo, and the mercenaries can help throughout the game".
- <random guy2> " Awesome, then we can fire the script writer tomorrow!"
- <boss> "Fired. Next, c'mon guys, this costs money."
- <random guy> "Final point of the day. How much time should the voice talents get to rehearse."
- <boss> "Well, they get paid for half an hour each, they can rehearse as much as they want. Done".
- <random guy> "OK we're done." "Oh boss you seem distant?"
- <boss> "I was just thinking of how jealous the EA executives are for my new fine DRM".
Joke aside, what I really dislikes the most it the "Liv Tyler" scene ("I choose, a mortal life.").
|
On May 22 2012 14:27 Aylear wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2012 14:03 Dfgj wrote:On May 22 2012 13:57 m3rciless wrote:
Have you even played D2? Did it have 'substantive characters'? I dont even remember which npcs had scripted dialog, because I DIDNT GIVE A FUCK.
No one sits in the rogues encampment chatting with fucking npcs, this isnt mass effect. Counterpoint: anyone who's played D2 can probably name the NPCs and remember at least one line from them. Because they actually were something, unlike D3 which has pretty much nothing to give character to each town/environment. In the Rogue Encampment: Akara, the priestess and resident boring person who told you much of the backstory and progressed the quest line; Kashya, the warrior leader who tells you about Blood Raven; Charsi, the naive young blacksmith woman who asks you to return her mallet so that she can forge you a piece of magical armor; the caravan master Warriv who dispensed idioms; and Gheed, the greedy, underhanded merchant who wanted nothing more than to get out of there. In Lut Gholein: Fara the Paladin, who said little and kept her past mysterious; Elzix the scoundrel-turned-innkeeper; Drognan the wizard, arrogant in his abilities; Fara, the woman who lost her family and asks you for revenge; Meshif, the ship captain who will later take you to Kurast; Jehryn, the young Sultan and lord, who failed to protect the young harem girls from their fate; Lysander, the nearly deaf alchemist who snaps at you at a moment's notice... I could go on (highlights include Alkor the Alchemist and Ormus the "mad" mage in Kurast, and Nihlathak in Act V for being a misguided tool who thought he was doing the right thing), but I think I've made my point. If you didn't give a fuck about the story, then stop responding to a topic about the story. Some of us have fucks to give.
This is silly. Diablo was NEVER about the story. It's like you're saying OH NOES, MINESWEEPER 3'S STORY WAS QUITE SHALLOW. And everyone else is like well it's not like there was much of a story to begin with. And if you think that there was an actual story in Diablo 2, just cause you can name the characters, only means you see things through nostalgia tinted glasses.
|
I played d1 and d2 and believed LoD had the perfect ending to the story with the defeat of the 3 brothers, destruction of the world stone.
It absolutely had no opening for speculation of a sequel but somehow blizzard pulled this one out of their butts. I agree with the OP 110% and glad I didn't buy this game.
Wait so diablo is a chick now?
|
On May 22 2012 16:09 Chaggi wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2012 14:27 Aylear wrote:On May 22 2012 14:03 Dfgj wrote:On May 22 2012 13:57 m3rciless wrote:
Have you even played D2? Did it have 'substantive characters'? I dont even remember which npcs had scripted dialog, because I DIDNT GIVE A FUCK.
No one sits in the rogues encampment chatting with fucking npcs, this isnt mass effect. Counterpoint: anyone who's played D2 can probably name the NPCs and remember at least one line from them. Because they actually were something, unlike D3 which has pretty much nothing to give character to each town/environment. In the Rogue Encampment: Akara, the priestess and resident boring person who told you much of the backstory and progressed the quest line; Kashya, the warrior leader who tells you about Blood Raven; Charsi, the naive young blacksmith woman who asks you to return her mallet so that she can forge you a piece of magical armor; the caravan master Warriv who dispensed idioms; and Gheed, the greedy, underhanded merchant who wanted nothing more than to get out of there. In Lut Gholein: Fara the Paladin, who said little and kept her past mysterious; Elzix the scoundrel-turned-innkeeper; Drognan the wizard, arrogant in his abilities; Fara, the woman who lost her family and asks you for revenge; Meshif, the ship captain who will later take you to Kurast; Jehryn, the young Sultan and lord, who failed to protect the young harem girls from their fate; Lysander, the nearly deaf alchemist who snaps at you at a moment's notice... I could go on (highlights include Alkor the Alchemist and Ormus the "mad" mage in Kurast, and Nihlathak in Act V for being a misguided tool who thought he was doing the right thing), but I think I've made my point. If you didn't give a fuck about the story, then stop responding to a topic about the story. Some of us have fucks to give. This is silly. Diablo was NEVER about the story. It's like you're saying OH NOES, MINESWEEPER 3'S STORY WAS QUITE SHALLOW. And everyone else is like well it's not like there was much of a story to begin with. And if you think that there was an actual story in Diablo 2, just cause you can name the characters, only means you see things through nostalgia tinted glasses.
There actually is a story. Sure you wont' get something like Half-life or Portal quality but there is a story. Have you watched the cinematics in between the acts? Paid attention to the NPC dialogue? Combined together they actually piece together a pretty satisfying story. Also I quite liked the NPC dialogues. Back when I was playing diablo 2 i used to talk to them in between runs when someone was tp'ing to the throne for example, there were some pretty good lines such as larzuk inventing hot air balloons for scouting.
Sure the story is second priority in Diablo but there definitely was one. Perhaps you should go and play the game again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
