• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Diablo 3 (console) Reviews


You're arguing the quality of the PC game though as well.

PvP on a console? No. (I'd argue no for all versions - waste of resources)
Drop rate? Been tweaked for console.
Haven't played in a year? Console is shipping with all patches.

... if a game can hold you for 200 hours it deserves high scores. Now I don't care about review scores, in fact I hardly ever post in threads about them because I just buy what I want to.

It's just frustrating to see so many people just taking a dump on Diablo 3 at every chance given because they were so upset with it over a year ago to either revise their opinion and try again or just move on. We get it - launch was bad and there are arguable fundamental flaws in itemization.

Open dialogue is fun and interesting when people are informed, but as it stands now when it comes to Diablo 3 - most people aren't.
 

Yoshichan

And they made him a Lord of Cinder. Not for virtue, but for might. Such is a lord, I suppose. But here I ask. Do we have a sodding chance?
damn.

Still, evade button makes me very interested. I love games w/ dodge roll.
What are the known details about it? Do you get invulnerability frames?
We don't know anything about the roll yet. I'll check the i-frames as soon as I get the game.
 
Yeah, I get it, D2 legacy, expected to be fun after 3000+ hour mark, yadda yadda, but... what current console games do not fall apart after 100 hours?
Your overrated random generic flavour of the month 95 Metacritic style over substance console blockbuster everybody has forgot about a month after release is not supposed to be Diablo 3's benchmarks however. Not trying to be a dick, I can see where you are coming from but NOT punishing a Diablo game that peaks in a disappointing end game is frankly sloppy reviewing. The end game is supposed to be the heart of the game, the part you spend the most time on. Even though you might have had reasonable fun for 100 hours, Diablo 3 was not supposed to be a game where the journey is the reward. Diablo 2 lived on for ages because of how deep the end game was. When there's fundamental flaws to be found even 100 hours in, a milestone most games don't reach, i know that, it is to be noted and sanctioned, especially in a game that evolves around that. I think, anyways.
 

ShadyJ

Member
I wonder... If you play bad games for 200+ hours, how long do you actually play good games? I have troubles hitting 200 hours for games I absolutely adore.

Every comment like this fails to see that diablo requires time to be sunk in to get the whole experience

The game begins in Inferno, after level 55 is when you start to see gear that actually may matter.
 

FlyFaster

Member
We don't know anything about the roll yet. I'll check the i-frames as soon as I get the game.

nice man, thanks.


I love i-frames in rolls, like Monster Hunter, I always feel like such a badass when I roll straight through an attack.

I think the addition of a dedicated roll mechanic is the single biggest thing for me. Really liking how this game is turning out.

I played the PC version a little bit when it came out and didn't like it, all the clicking to move and attack. Playing on Dual Analog sticks (and the addition of the roll mechanic) really makes it feel like the hack n slash games I played growing up.
 

monlo

Member
DIABLO 3

THE GOOD

The first time you play it up to max level, you're going to have immense fun learning the spells, skills and enemies. This takes about 10 hours. After max level, you'll soon realize just how empty this game is. With 5 character classes, you can tinker with the styles, the spells, the skills, and how much fun you'll have playing each. I, personally, like the witch doctor the best.

THE NOT SO GOOD
Then, the 'difficulty' ramps up. It's okay into the middle levels (nightmare mode) because the game is fairly balanced about it, and you're still 'fresh' with the game. Basically, the game adds exponentially more and more hp to enemies, some with special skills that are basically immune to specific playstyles/hero types. This is fun still until it is no longer fun. At the point where it is no longer fun/impossible to progress, you have one of two choices: try to whittle down the enemies with friends in game, or run/leave game/repeat until you get an easier instance of the game.

There is nothing 'new' at higher difficulties. There is no new item system. There is no high level crafting worth anything. Loot drops at the highest level are the same blandness level at 'growing' levels (read: fucking bland). Speaking of the weapon system, the entire premise of the game is built on 5 classes, all of which rely on the same stat build: weapon damage

THE WORST PART
Let that sink in for a minute. Every single character class is dependent on weapon damage to succeed. INT? no. STR? no. ATTACK SPEED? it used to be a 'way to go' until it was nerfed. Now it's just... a good bonus. Literally, the only stat you are ALLOWED to care about in order to trudge through areas is weapon damage. A wizard using a high damage sword is better than using a staff, provided that the sword does more damage. What is the real world effect on this? Every single player is seeking out the highest damage weapons, inflating the value of those items immensely. Also, there's no "other way to play the game" or item builds worth trying. Like, you can kind of build a defense-based witch doctor, but it's not really effective, and that's about it.

Since high levels add exponential HP to enemies, you literally need more and more damage in order to do anything. How do you do more damage? Weapon damage. It's the only way to add damage to your spells, skills, melee attacks... to anything. That 900 damage two-handed sword is in your list of goals as a witch doctor, even though your character shoots poison darts (that makes sense...).

The game was more fun at one point (read: the first month of the game's release) when you could farm gold 'against Blizzard's original plan'. Since the game came with an auction house, Blizzard had decided that they want to funnel all high level activity into it, to make more cash for themselves (I presume).

Do you guys know Candy Crush? It's the exact same premise in both games. The early levels of Candy Crush are a great little time waster puzzle game. Then, the game lies to you somewhere around level 50 or 60, appearing to be the same game, but making it impossible to progress without paying for items. Diablo 3 is exactly the same thing. You simply can't play high level stuff (read: after 10 hours of play or so) without using the Auction House.
__________________________________________________________________

Now, all of this 'beat em up' style gameplay is really smooth, and it follows a really boring weapon system. It could be remedied if the dungeons and open areas that you can play in which are fun and enjoyable. What about those, you ask?

Well, ACT 1 is roughly 40% of the entire game in terms of length. It is the most enjoyable for me, personally, and each following ACT becomes less and less enjoyable IMHO. The kicker is that this game provides zero random instances/areas. In other words, you will be playing the same area over and over and over and over until your weapon damage is high enough to move onto the next area.... to build up your weapon damage... to move onto the next area, repeat ad nauseum.

There is nothing else to really do after you hit max level. You simply try to get the highest level (FUN, to learn the game, enjoy the mechanics, play different classes, etc), then, try to get stronger (not fun AT ALL, for reasons mentioned earlier).

All in all, it's fun to play for a little while, but then becomes an exercise in frustration. It is not worth playing for any length of time, in my humble opinion. But, it's still worth playing in the early game.

I really do wonder how the game will play without an Auction House on the consoles
 
DIABLO 3



The game was more fun at one point (read: the first month of the game's release) when you could farm gold 'against Blizzard's original plan'. Since the game came with an auction house, Blizzard had decided that they want to funnel all high level activity into it, to make more cash for themselves (I presume).

Decided to remove everything and just bolded this. You do know they completely changed the mechanics of the loot, enemies and drops because they removed the auction house on the console versions, right?

I do not see how complaining about the PC version in a console review thread is going to help.

Oh wait, here's another thing you mentioned.

Do you guys know Candy Crush? It's the exact same premise in both games. The early levels of Candy Crush are a great little time waster puzzle game. Then, the game lies to you somewhere around level 50 or 60, appearing to be the same game, but making it impossible to progress without paying for items. Diablo 3 is exactly the same thing. You simply can't play high level stuff (read: after 10 hours of play or so) without using the Auction House.

Once again. Your post is completely irrelevant because the auction house has been removed from the console versions.
 
Do you guys know Candy Crush? It's the exact same premise in both games. The early levels of Candy Crush are a great little time waster puzzle game. Then, the game lies to you somewhere around level 50 or 60, appearing to be the same game, but making it impossible to progress without paying for items. Diablo 3 is exactly the same thing. You simply can't play high level stuff (read: after 10 hours of play or so) without using the Auction House.

Fundamentally and categorically false. It was a lie from launch and is especially a huge lie now. Considering the popularity of "self-found" characters now is a fact to that.
 

monlo

Member
Decided to remove everything and just bolded this. You do know they completely changed the mechanics of the loot, enemies and drops because they removed the auction house on the console versions, right?

I do not see how complaining about the PC version in a console review thread is going to help.

Oh wait, here's another thing you mentioned.



Once again. Your post is completely irrelevant because the auction house has been removed from the console versions.

Yea, I am seriously wondering how it will play out on consoles. Since the PC game is how I explain above, it's going to be interesting
 
Review scores are abstract garbage and can mean anything or nothing, that's obviously not my point. If we intend to cling to tangible matters, let's compare it to its brilliant predecessor, Diablo 2. 1,5 years after release, there's still no PvP as far as I know. I heard the class balance is all over the place and the drop rate still hilarously low for anything worth your time. Diablo 2 had a complex PvP, rune, forge and random dungeons generator system + hidden levels and all that incredibly deep stuff Diablo 3 lacks. Surely, D2 acquired a lot of these things way after launch but that is hardly an excuse for D3 to be such an insanely shallow experience at launch given that all the experience from what made D2 so fantastic was at hand and for some reason left unused.

And even though it's anecdotal I feel like sharing that absolutely nobody has touched the game for over a year in my circle of friends. No patches, no paragon levels, none of these things remotely gained anyone's attention, that's how let down they were with its initial quality. I'm glad for console owners that they don't have to deal with the auction house rubbish but sadly, that was merely one problem out of a bunch of fundamental flaws. I can't understate how much of a trainwreck this game was. Easily pushed Deus Ex 2 off the throne as the most underwhelming sequel in history for a lot of people I think.

Didn't most of that good Diablo 2 stuff get added like 3 years after launch?
 
Yea, I am seriously wondering how it will play out on consoles. Since the PC game is how I explain above, it's going to be interesting

It has been well known for a couple of months that Blizzard decided to remove the auction house and change the gameplay accordingly for that. Loot drops will have changed to give the player more options, enemies drop better loot and there is more emphasis on controlling everything on your own.

This thread has become a pit for hardcore PC players to complain about their precious Diablo 3 being a terrible game. I can understand their frustration, but Blizzard definitely changed it for the good with the console versions. It is unfortunate they decided not to change things on the PC, but that topic is once again completely irrelevant.
 
tumblr_me06nwPQWk1rlbvwso1_400.gif


Where is this from? It's hilarious!
 

truly101

I got grudge sucked!
If I can play offline, which it sounds like I can, then I might give it a go. I enjoyed 360 Torchlight, so I expect this to be a bit more in depth.
 

monlo

Member
It has been well known for a couple of months that Blizzard decided to remove the auction house and change the gameplay accordingly for that. Loot drops will have changed to give the player more options, enemies drop better loot and there is more emphasis on controlling everything on your own.

This thread has become a pit for hardcore PC players to complain about their precious Diablo 3 being a terrible game. I can understand their frustration, but Blizzard definitely changed it for the good with the console versions. It is unfortunate they decided not to change things on the PC, but that topic is once again completely irrelevant.

my post was meant to inform new players in the console scene about the game in a general sense.

it was not meant to complain about the auction house. My personal problem with the game is that it is simply too directed, with the weapon/skill system. Diablo 2 let you build over-powered class types. Diablo 3 simply doesn't.
 

V_Arnold

Member
Your overrated random generic flavour of the month 95 Metacritic style over substance console blockbuster everybody has forgot about a month after release is not supposed to be Diablo 3's benchmarks however. Not trying to be a dick, I can see where you are coming from but NOT punishing a Diablo game that peaks in a disappointing end game is frankly sloppy reviewing. The end game is supposed to be the heart of the game, the part you spend the most time on. Even though you might have had reasonable fun for 100 hours, Diablo 3 was not supposed to be a game where the journey is the reward. Diablo 2 lived on for ages because of how deep the end game was. When there's fundamental flaws to be found even 100 hours in, a milestone most games don't reach, i know that, it is to be noted and sanctioned, especially in a game that evolves around that. I think, anyways.


Yeah, that is why D3 on consoles should not have 10/10 reviews. I can understand why/how it can be a 9/10 game (I rated the original 1.0 as 9/10, after 80 hours of gameplay, while noting that the itemization is shit, 1.0.8 improved compared to that TENFOLD), and why for some, it is 8/10 or even worse. But it still does not warrant a 6/10 or anything like that - again, imho. That is simply grudge-based review, which is fine in user reviews, but not on a "proper" review.
 
it was not meant to complain about the auction house. My personal problem with the game is that it is simply too directed, with the weapon/skill system. Diablo 2 let you build over-powered class types. Diablo 3 simply doesn't.

Except for... ShockNado Wizards, Whirlwind Barbarians, Cloud of Bats Witch Doctors etc. all of which don't require the best gear in the game and rely on some very specific set-ups of gear?
 

Trojita

Rapid Response Threadmaker
It is downright delusional to expect reviewers to bash this game because "it stinks a little after 150+ hours, so...stay the hell away from this piece of shit".

Yeah, I get it, D2 legacy, expected to be fun after 3000+ hour mark, yadda yadda, but... what current console games do not fall apart after 100 hours? If anything, D3's currently flawed endgame is more suited to the consoles than for PC's :D

You need to have a *very specific* mindset to judge a game solely on the question: "Does it stay fun after 200 hours?". I would not mind a review site dedicated to this very question, I would enjoy reading 2/10 Skyrim reviews alongside the parade of 1/10's or 0/10's that many "AAA experiences" would get from such site, but for mainstream consumption, for a $60 game that console gamers have yet to experience? Totally in line with the rest of the industry.

D3 didn't even last that long.

Shit loot tables. Fucked up balancing. End game was a joke.
 

eot

Banned
I understand why the game gets such high scores, it's great to play through once or twice. If you're a game reviewer you probably play it for as long as you have to then move on to the next thing. However, when you get to the point where the game wants you to min/max and fully understand its systems to make progress everything crumbles like a house of cards. The game fails horribly at half the things it set out to do, it is not hyperbole to say that it is bad. Its flaws are just never going to come out in the review process. It's like people playing one or two games of vanilla Civ 5 and calling it amazing. I'm sure it was for them, but the flaws are there even if they don't see them.
 

Fugu

Member
It is downright delusional to expect reviewers to bash this game because "it stinks a little after 150+ hours, so...stay the hell away from this piece of shit".

Yeah, I get it, D2 legacy, expected to be fun after 3000+ hour mark, yadda yadda, but... what current console games do not fall apart after 100 hours? If anything, D3's currently flawed endgame is more suited to the consoles than for PC's :D

You need to have a *very specific* mindset to judge a game solely on the question: "Does it stay fun after 200 hours?". I would not mind a review site dedicated to this very question, I would enjoy reading 2/10 Skyrim reviews alongside the parade of 1/10's or 0/10's that many "AAA experiences" would get from such site, but for mainstream consumption, for a $60 game that console gamers have yet to experience? Totally in line with the rest of the industry.
It is a simple fact that people have come to expect more longevity out of loot games than they do out of almost every other genre. An MMO that drops off significantly in quality after fifty hours would be lambasted, and it should because the entire point of the genre is for it to provide entertainment after a long period of time. Online-focused loot games have just about the highest expectations of longevity possible; the genre has indicated a propensity towards producing games that are essentially just fun forever due to the perpetual existence of avenues to improve and develop new ideas and characters. Blizzard spent a lot of time and effort to pander to this crowd as it constituted the majority of the people who played Diablo 2, and they attempted to design a game with a long-lasting endgame in mind. It's a bit disingenuous to me to argue that it is now not fair to criticize the game for not holding up after 50+ hours or so when it is clear that Blizzard fully intended the game to do so.

That said, I think this game is perfect for consoles, much in the same way that I feel Gauntlet Legends is perfect for consoles. It is just dumb enough for four people to be able to play it at the same time (no fancy number crunching, just pick the item with the biggest number in the damage column and the highest character-relevant stat/vit) and it is about as enjoyable for as long as it takes to get through the game on nightmare.
 
my post was meant to inform new players in the console scene about the game in a general sense.

it was not meant to complain about the auction house. My personal problem with the game is that it is simply too directed, with the weapon/skill system. Diablo 2 let you build over-powered class types. Diablo 3 simply doesn't.

But why not let players who are new to the Diablo franchise let them enjoy D3 on their own without being 'properly educated' by hardcore Diablo players who think that D3 is by far the worst of all the games and does not even earn the name Diablo?

I get it. You absolutely loved Diablo 2 but hated the direction Blizzard took with Diablo 3. That does not mean there is no fun to be had with the game, even though the end game is poor in comparison.
 

Fugu

Member
Weird how many people say how awful D3 is but brag about how many hundreds of hours they've put into it. Why play it if its so bad?
When you wait twelve years for a game you've got to give it some time before you can say it sucks.

But why not let players who are new to the Diablo franchise let them enjoy D3 on their own without being 'properly educated' by hardcore Diablo players who think that D3 is by far the worst of all the games and does not even earn the name Diablo?

I get it. You absolutely loved Diablo 2 but hated the direction Blizzard took with Diablo 3. That does not mean there is no fun to be had with the game, even though the end game is poor in comparison.
Why not direct new players to the franchise to Diablo 2, which is still active and still a far superior game?
 
When you wait twelve years for a game you've got to give it some time before you can say it sucks.


Why not direct new players to the franchise to Diablo 2, which is still active and still a far superior game?

When you go by that standard HL3 is probably going to suck as well.

Because there are thousands of people who refuse to play on the PC.
 

KKRT00

Member
Weird how many people say how awful D3 is but brag about how many hundreds of hours they've put into it. Why play it if its so bad?

Game was long, but also quite easy till Inferno, so many people had to put that 30-40h first to get to end game and then was Inferno testing for at least 30h.

Its still very fun action RPG, with great value money/time spend and nice different classes, but most people who bought it, bought it as a Diablo sequel, so sequel to one of the best loot game ever released. And because game was severely lacking any balance and mechanics were terrible it got totally trashed by community and rightfully so.

--
When you go by that standard HL3 is probably going to suck as well..

HL 2 already sucked as a FPS, so thats not really a problem :p
 

V_Arnold

Member
...and again, this version is 1.0.8 or 1.0.7, containing paragon system, monster power, density, Uber bosses, good crafting, more build variety (especially if you actually go for enjoying the game, not being the most efficient at Paragon farming).
 
...and again, this version is 1.0.8 or 1.0.7, containing paragon system, monster power, density, Uber bosses, good crafting, more build variety (especially if you actually go for enjoying the game, not being the most efficient at Paragon farming).

I hope density is in these ones, I thought they had to cut or refine that due to the console's limitation and I'm not so sure reviewers would have gotten to Inferno to notice for us.
 
What some people tend to forget is that hardcore loot based RPG's can be counted on oné hand for the consoles, hence why people tend to overlook some flaws that PC players are pretty much familiar with in other RPG's as well.

I hope density is in these ones, I thought they had to cut or refine that due to the console's limitation and I'm not so sure reviewers would have gotten to Inferno to notice for us.

They definitely had to refine the density of enemies according to some previews I read a few months ago.
 

foxdvd

Member
DIABLO 3

THE GOOD

The first time you play it up to max level, you're going to have immense fun learning the spells, skills and enemies. This takes about 10 hours.

Unless you are power leveling with someone else there is no way you get to max level in 10 hours. First time you play it is is going to be between 20-30 hours.

THE NOT SO GOOD
This is fun still until it is no longer fun. At the point where it is no longer fun/impossible to progress, you have one of two choices: try to whittle down the enemies with friends in game, or run/leave game/repeat until you get an easier instance of the game.
This was 100% true...until they patched it. Now the above statement is not true at all unless you are playing above maybe mp 5


There is nothing 'new' at higher difficulties. There is no new item system. There is no high level crafting worth anything[/B]
Late game crafting makes the best account bound items in the game, and as far as new, Key runs and uber runs do get old...after maybe spending many many hours playing them, but they are fun...but slowing raising the Monster Power in the game as you get better and better is fun

Since high levels add exponential HP to enemies, you literally need more and more damage in order to do anything. How do you do more damage? Weapon damage. It's the only way to add damage to your spells, skills, melee attacks... to anything.
Weapon damage is big, but you are being to simplistic....you need strength on a barb or that 1000 damage weapon does nothing...yes, the base of every character is weapon damage, but there is no way you survive focusing on that alone..with attack speed, and crit chance and crit damage you can take the same weapon on one character and do 100,000 dps and on another it will be 300,0000 when you factor in things other than weapon damage
 

Freezard

Member
I watched the two hour video preview up until Skeleton King (forgot the name of the gaming site who played it) and it looked nice for a couch co-op game. One thing that really seemed to suck was that whenever someone opened the inventory screen to check out loot or skills everyone else had to wait for him. Was kinda bad with four players. There's a quick equip button though so you don't have to bring the menus up.

Better than the PC version? Obviously not for the hardcore player, many things are limited.
 

Fugu

Member
When you go by that standard HL3 is probably going to suck as well.

Because there are thousands of people who refuse to play on the PC.
That's not true at all. I'm just saying that people would be inclined to reserve judgement on a game that they'd been waiting so long to see come out. Seeing as I had been waiting for Diablo 3 for a long time, I'm not just going to up and say that it sucks after 20 hours. I wanted to put time into it before I made a judgement, especially considering Diablo is the kind of game that you have to put time into.

If people "refuse" to play it on the PC then that's their own problem. The PC is home to more games than any other platform ever will be and limiting yourself in that regard is pointless.
 

eot

Banned
When you go by that standard HL3 is probably going to suck as well.

This is not a case of unrealistic expectations. Yes the expectations were high, but people also wanted to like the game. Blizzard were given the benefit of the doubt on a lot of things. Slowly but surely however the realization came that they simply had no fucking idea what they were doing and that was tremedously disappointing. The reason people don't pay much attention to Blizzard's attempts to remedy these problems is because they're so fundamental to the game.

It is the perfect example of a polished turd. Boy is it polished. It will give them great reviews, but this game won't inspire the same kind of fandom as D2, not a chance.
 

pixlexic

Banned
I watched the two hour video preview up until Skeleton King (forgot the name of the gaming site who played it) and it looked nice for a couch co-op game. One thing that really seemed to suck was that whenever someone opened the inventory screen to check out loot or skills everyone else had to wait for him. Was kinda bad with four players. There's a quick equip button though so you don't have to bring the menus up.

Better than the PC version? Obviously not for the hardcore player, many things are limited.

What's limited? I have the PC version but hate the controls so I would like to know what's degraded in the console version?
 
That's not true at all. I'm just saying that people would be inclined to reserve judgement on a game that they'd been waiting so long to see come out. Seeing as I had been waiting for Diablo 3 for a long time, I'm not just going to up and say that it sucks after 20 hours. I wanted to put time into it before I made a judgement, especially considering Diablo is the kind of game that you have to put time into.

If people "refuse" to play it on the PC then that's their own problem. The PC is home to more games than any other platform ever will be and limiting yourself in that regard is pointless.

I do not mind people preserving their judgement until they played well over a few dozen of hours before they say how good or terrible a game is. I never once stumbled over that subject in this thread.

I refused to play on the PC for the last 7 years and honestly do not feel that I missed out on games that were not released on the consoles, despite the overblown opinion that graphics are everything in a game. Something that PC-only players tend to use as a statement rather than their own opinion.
 

alterno69

Banned
Day one regardless of reviews, unless it runs like ass on PS3, had a chance to play the demo on PC months ago and had a blast. Playing coop with a couple of friends and realtime combat will be even better.

It does have realtime combat right?
 
Day one regardless of reviews, unless it runs like ass on PS3, had a chance to play the demo on PC months ago and had a blast. Playing coop with a couple of friends and realtime combat will be even better.

It does have realtime combat right?

Consoles should have 60FPS and Yes the combat is realtime.
 

Brandon F

Well congratulations! You got yourself caught!
I just hope normal diff has been rebalanced to not be so piss easy and content touristy.

Never made it past act 2 of the pc game out of sheer boredom with both the loot and difficulty. Seems I missed absolutely nothing given the overwhelming negativity even the late game produced.
 

solarus

Member
PC version is garbage, experiencing lag on what should be an offline game with an online component. I can't respect anyone defending the always online.
 
The Internet seems to swear D3 is terrible. I didn't believe them and still don't. 9 from EG? Come on, son.

Compared to D2 its definitely not good. D3 is good the first time you play it. Its a good experience. But the Diablo series is more than that. Its about playing beyond "finishing the game". Its about making you come back and keep playing the game. This is where D3 falls apart, IMO. D2's end game was perfect. D3's sucks ass.
 
Top Bottom