Diablo 3 is another triple A title that was somewhat disappointing to me. It looks like the drive to make money at all costs is hurting at least a little bit companies that had a very good track record before, like Bioware and Blizzard.
Dragon Age 2 had the repeated features, the lack of customization for your party, the lackluster final act, amongst other things. Yeah the game is not terrible, but it sure felt like a rushed product.
I even regret to have bought it on launch because I felt it was not worth full price.
Starcraft 2 had only the humans in the campaign. The campaign was still lengthy enough (if unimaginative), but the variety was gone. The game was good enough, though.
Mass Effect 3 had the almost impossibly bad ending and the unnecessary multiplayer that was needed to get the ?best? ending in single player (although it turned out better than expected and kind of saved the game replayability somewhat). And, of course, all the misleading statements from Bioware.
And now Diablo 3.
What I don?t like:
1. Online always. The decision that was single handedly responsible for the huge amount of frustration on the launch day. It also feels like the game is a service and not a product.
2. Auction House. I don?t see anything wrong with it itself, but it is probably one of the big reasons why D3 is online only. They are putting their pockets first and consumer satisfaction on a distant second. I understand ?second?, but I don?t like ?distant?.
3. Game-breaking bugs.
4. The ?magic? classes feel somewhat off to me, with every skill based on the weapon they are wearing, with the weapons themselves disappearing in the animation. Weird. Why not make exclusive weapons and tie the abilities to them (like they did on the Demon Hunter). It feels unpolished.
5. The auto skill tree makes the progression of the characters feel like a game of DOTA, League of Legends, etc. With the market full with this kind of games, it feels repetitive and way too simple for an RPG (even an action one). Granted, things open up a little bit in the later levels with more options to choose, but the initial stages are boring, hurting replayability. Diablo 2 was also very easy on the beginning, but the skill tree gave the players something to think about.
I liked to start a new character in D2. In D3 not so much.
6. Unimpressive. The art direction of the game is great, the animations are fantastic and the physics are fun. But Sacred 2 impressed me more with its seamless and gigantic world and well implemented, creative characters, Torchlight impressed me more with its innovations (like pets, fish, side missions, fun artstyle, fame, etc.) and Titan Quest impressed me more with its graphics (for the time) and its physics. D3 manages to be a better game than Sacred and Titan Quest specifically because of the pacing (Blizzard really nailed it) and overall polish. But what I see is quality with zero creativity, which is not bad, but, again, somewhat disappointing. Blizzard is working on this thing for god knows how long with an incredible amount of resources at their hands. C?mon.
And, if compared to Torchlight, Diablo might only have the art style and a little bit more of variety to brag about.
In the end, Diablo 3 is a great game and Blizzard has the resources to correct mistakes and make the product better on the long run, but I just can?t shake off the feeling that if Blizzard and EA still had the pro-consumer drive that CD Projekt and Valve have, the games I cited here could have been some of the most fantastic digital experiences ever.
Instead they are reasonable to good, some even great at moments, but disappointing in what would seem an easily avoidable way. Well, CD Projekt makes it look easy anyway.
Dragon Age 2 had the repeated features, the lack of customization for your party, the lackluster final act, amongst other things. Yeah the game is not terrible, but it sure felt like a rushed product.
I even regret to have bought it on launch because I felt it was not worth full price.
Starcraft 2 had only the humans in the campaign. The campaign was still lengthy enough (if unimaginative), but the variety was gone. The game was good enough, though.
Mass Effect 3 had the almost impossibly bad ending and the unnecessary multiplayer that was needed to get the ?best? ending in single player (although it turned out better than expected and kind of saved the game replayability somewhat). And, of course, all the misleading statements from Bioware.
And now Diablo 3.
What I don?t like:
1. Online always. The decision that was single handedly responsible for the huge amount of frustration on the launch day. It also feels like the game is a service and not a product.
2. Auction House. I don?t see anything wrong with it itself, but it is probably one of the big reasons why D3 is online only. They are putting their pockets first and consumer satisfaction on a distant second. I understand ?second?, but I don?t like ?distant?.
3. Game-breaking bugs.
4. The ?magic? classes feel somewhat off to me, with every skill based on the weapon they are wearing, with the weapons themselves disappearing in the animation. Weird. Why not make exclusive weapons and tie the abilities to them (like they did on the Demon Hunter). It feels unpolished.
5. The auto skill tree makes the progression of the characters feel like a game of DOTA, League of Legends, etc. With the market full with this kind of games, it feels repetitive and way too simple for an RPG (even an action one). Granted, things open up a little bit in the later levels with more options to choose, but the initial stages are boring, hurting replayability. Diablo 2 was also very easy on the beginning, but the skill tree gave the players something to think about.
I liked to start a new character in D2. In D3 not so much.
6. Unimpressive. The art direction of the game is great, the animations are fantastic and the physics are fun. But Sacred 2 impressed me more with its seamless and gigantic world and well implemented, creative characters, Torchlight impressed me more with its innovations (like pets, fish, side missions, fun artstyle, fame, etc.) and Titan Quest impressed me more with its graphics (for the time) and its physics. D3 manages to be a better game than Sacred and Titan Quest specifically because of the pacing (Blizzard really nailed it) and overall polish. But what I see is quality with zero creativity, which is not bad, but, again, somewhat disappointing. Blizzard is working on this thing for god knows how long with an incredible amount of resources at their hands. C?mon.
And, if compared to Torchlight, Diablo might only have the art style and a little bit more of variety to brag about.
In the end, Diablo 3 is a great game and Blizzard has the resources to correct mistakes and make the product better on the long run, but I just can?t shake off the feeling that if Blizzard and EA still had the pro-consumer drive that CD Projekt and Valve have, the games I cited here could have been some of the most fantastic digital experiences ever.
Instead they are reasonable to good, some even great at moments, but disappointing in what would seem an easily avoidable way. Well, CD Projekt makes it look easy anyway.
