Diablo 3 Quasi-Delayed To ‘Early 2012’


Bad news, everyone: Diablo III won’t be gracing your hard drives this year, I’m afraid. Blizzard have announced their joyous but cruel hacker-slasher has slipped to early 2012. No real reason given, but Blizzbozz Mike Morhaime suggests it’s just a matter of wanting to put more dev time into D3. Could it be that the beta has turned up unexpected problems? Or that they’re using the extra time to include an offline mode? No, that’s just my wishful thinking speaking.

Morhaime quote below, anyway.

“With every game we make, the temptation is always very strong to launch as soon as possible. However, we didn’t put so many years of work into Diablo III to release a game that was almost ready. The beta test is going very well, and we look forward to making the most of the extra time we’re taking to deliver an experience that lives up to our vision for the game and the expectations of our players. Next year is going to be an incredibly busy one for Blizzard, and we hope an incredibly fun one for Blizzard gamers.”

Like they’ve ever launched as soon as possible.

They will be expanding beta plans and number of participants, however. You can request to potentially be included in the next round of applicants in your Battle.net account management page.


  1. MrMud says:

    There are still systems to be finalized.
    For example the rune system is not locked in stone and the demon hunter just underwent a revision.
    So clearly this game is not yet ready.

    • johnpeat says:

      You have no idea how Blizzard work do you?

      By ‘BETA’ they mean ‘not working’ – by ‘RELEASE’ they mean still not working because we’ve no idea how to fix it – by ‘PATCHED’ they mean ‘fucked around with’…

      It’s delayed because, frankly, it’s Blizzard and they don’t like delivering things – simple as…

      and to think I won a bet on it not being available in 2010 (some people are ridiculous optimists) :)

    • wodin says:

      ^@JohnPeat….Great post which I’m sure can be applied to most game developers these days…not often a reply ior post makes me laugh…that did..

    • RegisteredUser says:

      I hear the DRM impediments simply weren’t yet annoying enough, so they’re making sure they annoy you even better “When it’s done.”.

    • Starky says:


      Blizzard in their entire history have never released a broken game – your post could be leveled against many, many developers, but Blizzard isn’t one of them.

      Even WoW, the massive sprawling, bigger than any game to come before it and any game since (only TOR might beat it) was amazingly polished, working and bug free for an MMO (oh it was buggy and had many issues, but a fraction of what any MMO before it had had)…
      Setting new standards for what gamers expected from a MMO at launch, and sank several MMO’s that came after it which failed to at least match the “WoW at launch” standard – Conan and Warhammer spring to mind right away.

      Hell what you are describing is Microsoft.
      beta “broke”, Release “still broke, but we want money”, SP1 “Working as it should at release”, SP2 “finally decent”.
      Win 7 kind of broke that, but then windows 7 was basically vista SP2.

    • paterah says:

      As Starky said, there are very few times I’ve came across a hater as deluded and ignorant as you. If Blizzard is known for one thing then it’s making sure they release their products at a state were the game is playable and completed on day 1. Even WoW which had a few rough times through their launch, it’s because it came out in 2004 and even then it still was one of the most stable and completed MMOs at release.

    • BroodKiller says:

      @Starky – I don’t want to be mean, I totally respect Blizzard for the quality of their products, but you seem to forget that the original Starcraft was quite a rushed and un-polished, release. The holy banner of balanced game that is raised whenever SC is mentioned was earned after a good couple patches (the vanilla had a very imbalanced early pool zerg rush). Moreover, its datafiles contained a good deal of left-over material (graphics, scripts, units) including, funnily enough, even some Warcraft2 data!!
      So while I am very far from saying SC was a ‘broken’ product, I am just as far from glorifying Blizz as a flawless developper. They are great, but they had to learn their lessons the hard way.

    • Carra says:

      SC2 was very polished on release. So was every WoW expansion pack.

    • abigbat says:

      I can’t get onboard with this either, Blizzard’s “done when it’s done” policy has resulted in a stream of highly polished games. OF COURSE the more multiplayer focused offerings have required extensive balance patches, that’s completely expected – no amount of testing can forsee every detail of unit balance, or take into account every mad strategy invented by players. The key to Blizzard’s design philosophy (and good design in general) is “feel” – their games feel incredible, and I’ve never had an issue with polish. Diablo 3 looks to continue this trend.

    • aerozol says:

      This seriously f*cked up dual-accusation of Blizzard releasing ‘beta’, because they release unfinished things, and not releasing things, because they can’t deliver, is outrageously stupid. THINK before you post.

    • Spider Jerusalem says:

      The white knights approach.

    • Starky says:


      I had SC1 on day 1 and it was near flawlessly playable – now balance may not have been perfect (I didn’t play SC online at all), hell it may have even been “broken” in the “this race is brokenly overpowered” sense – but that isn’t the same thing as them releasing a broken game.

      The single player was near flawless (as best memory serves, I’m not generally a rose tinted guy but you can never rule it out with memories), had no crash bugs, or memory leaks, and worked on all of the computers I ever tried to run it on without issue. No real animation bugs, freezes or oddities – the AI was pathetic for some units but that was just the age of the game.

      Still I’ll concede that even blizzard releases are far from perfect (all of then need patches after all), no PC game ever is – but SC1 was a long bloody way from broken or rushed.

      Still it may be an exception that proves the rule, their worst release (polish wise) was miles ahead of what many studio’s managed then and manage today (Troika springs to mind, and Bethesda).

    • skinlo says:

      Lol at all the Blizzard fanbois.

    • DigitalSignalX says:

      While I do hold Bliz in higher regard then any other publisher for “polish” – I remember waiting almost a year and a half for patch 1.5 in D2 which was frustrating as all hell since Hardcore players were getting ganked due to exploits it could fix.They announced it almost right after 1.4 and just delayed.. delayed.. delayed.. while the community grew ever increasingly annoyed.

    • Starky says:

      God I hate that term “fanbois”.
      You know it is possible to be a fan of a companies output, and not agree with everything they do (loved WoW, hate what they did with it after TBC, love SC2), and not be blind to aspects of a product that others may find disagreeable.

      It is possible not to see the world on black or white, fan or hater, PC or console…

      It is possible to understand why people are upset over an issue, and still disagree with them about it.

      Maybe when you grow up skinlo you’ll understand that.

      I remember that, it was frustrating as hell – hell that is probably my biggest dislike in how Blizzard operate, that they take so fucking long to push out patches for critical bug/exploit fixes.
      They’ve gotten better at it (a bit), but a recent example is in SC2, there was a crippling bug with protoss pheonix’s that made them really difficult to use, on their lift power – and it took ages for them to fix it – when it should have been hotfixed.

      I like how they take their time, with balance changes, and only then make minor changes and wait and see – but yeah, their bug fixing speed can be pretty sodding glacial.

    • abigbat says:

      I have serious doubts as to whether anyone who spells “boy” with an “i” will ever grow up.

      This isn’t needless fanboyism (I can invent words too), this is people giving a developer they respect the benefit of the doubt.

    • Starky says:

      As an aside, what the hell is it with modern gamers aligning themselves with systems/developers/games like they are sodding football teams?

      I just don’t get it. Like somehow if you like Blizzard games you’re not allowed to like Runic/Arenanet games – or if you like battlefield you’re not allowed to like modern warfare.
      Or if you dislike a companies practices you’re then somehow banned from liking any game they’re involved with…
      Growing up I don’t remember any of that going on with PC/Sega/Nintendo – I had Sega, my buddy had Nintendo – we’d trade, share and appreciate both, not argue which was best…

      It just doesn’t strike me as important, I mean Diablo 3 or Torchlight 2? Seems to me like the answer is “both”.

      It’s not a hard question, not like “Kirk or Picard?” [FYI, it is Picard, anyone who chooses kirk is clearly an ignorant sexist fool and should be instantly stabbed with a bat’leth]

    • abigbat says:

      That shit’s always gone on, PC/Mac, Quake 3/UT, Total Annihilation/Dark Reign etc etc – never understood it. Play what you like kids, respect others opinions and all that.

      Dark Reign was well better though.

    • lurkalisk says:

      Well… That was ridiculous unexpected. I’m going to take a wild guess and say the johnpeat was exaggerating, and few noticed.

    • Wulf says:

      Oh, Starky.

      Saying Blizzard has never released a broken game (and oh they have, oh yes, they have) is sort of like me saying that ArenaNet has objectively never released a bad game. That’s why you got fanboy levelled at you. Instead of “I’ve never had any issues with Blizzard games which have affected me.”, you actually said that no one has ever experienced an issue with a Blizzard game, ever, in the history of ever.

      And frankly, laughing at Blizzard’s UI code was a mod coder’s past time with WoW. There was so much broken there that mods had to fix. Oh, and there was that time when one of the crafting professions in WoW remained broken for eight months. Johnpeat strikes me as being more correct, really, because the evidence backs him up. Blizzard post Vivendi tends to release terribly knocked together and shoddy things.

      But to jump to the defence of Blizzard with the notion that they’ve never released anything broken in forever, ever? That’s a fanboy sentiment. Yes, yes it is. It’s shamelessly so. It’s either that or undignified apologism, but I’ll let you pick.

    • dogsolitude_uk says:

      “As an aside, what the hell is it with modern gamers aligning themselves with systems/developers/games like they are sodding football teams?”

      It puzzles me too. Mind you, it’s been going on as long as I can remember. I remember the arguments about BBC Micro vs Sinclair Spectrum vs Commodore 64, followed by similar regarding the Amiga vs Atari ST.

      I didn’t really understand it much then, but I remember when I was 8 my feelings used to get hurt if someone insulted my Spectrum, which my Dad had bought me.

      I’m not sure what happens really. Getting my pipe out and adopting the position of completely unqualified armchair psychologist, I think that with stuff like this and football teams etc some folks start to ‘identify’ with them a bit, perhaps even see them as a surrogate ‘family’ or tribe of sorts.

      Or maybe it’s the Stockholm Syndrome!

      Mitchell and Webb touch on this subject via Football:

      If anyone has a textbook explanation or reference leading to a study of this weirdness, I’d be most grateful :)

      Edit: Aha, some Googling has revealed this link:
      link to youarenotsosmart.com

    • Starky says:

      Wulf you definition of broken and mine must be vastly different.

      Vampire bloodlines was broken on release – requiring console commands to get past sections – it was still a brilliant game.
      KotoR 2 was broken on release – with constant crashes, freezes, and broken sections/abilities – it was still a brilliant game.
      Fallout 3 was pretty broken on release – With more bugs, crashes and instability than almost any game I can think of – taking many patches and lots of community work to fix – it was still a brilliant game.
      Magicka was broken on release – with broken net code, massive frame jitter, and lag on top end machines. It too was still a brilliant game.

      No Blizzard game has had near that level of “broken” – perfect? No, Without a single bug, clearly not – but bug ridden to the point where the majority of users has serious issues with connectivity, CTDs and game greaking errors? No, not even close.

      So I hope you don’t mind if I’ll ignore your accusation of fanboy – I’ll admit to been a fan of their work, but fanboy, not a chance. That would make me blind to their flaws (and I’ve been highly and publicly critical of blizzard in the past), which I am in no way blind too. You on the other hand are a rock solid idiotic frothing hater, as your post history on this site proves – so I’ll take any accusation levelled from you with a massive pinch of salt – because frankly Wulf when it comes to any Blizzard related topic you are a fucking moron.

    • Starky says:


      See I can remember nerdy debates, all on good fun and humour – but I guess because all such debates in my youth were face to face – and this been the internet people think they can just go straight to the most extreme of comments and view points with no repercussions.

      For example if someone when I was a kid was to say they prefer Nintendo over sega, I’d have been cool with that. If they had said to me I was an idiot (or worse) for preferring Sega over Nintendo (I owned both, a NES and a Mega Drive, but not a SNES until much later) – at that age I would have probably punched them (I had anger issues as a kid, hehe).

    • yiqiwanga says:

      When you try to shop online, choose low-cost good quality products, you must not forget to come from:link to tinyurl.com
      a professional online wholesalers and retailers. Thank you for your support.

    • Ergates_Antius says:

      @Wulf: Firstly “Blizzard post Vivendi tends to release terribly knocked together and shoddy things” is nonsense. Lets look at some of the games from the period you refer to: StarCraft, Diablo 2, WarCraft 3, StarCraft 2 – not exactly infamous for their poor build quality.

      “Everything is shit” isn’t the only alternative to “Everything is perfect”, anymore than being a rabid hater is the only alternative to being a raving fanboy.

      Secondly: 3 words* – Pot. Kettle. GuildWars 2

      * and a number

  2. abremms says:

    there is at least a chance that they are delaying to code up an offline mode. fingers crossed!

    • mwoody says:

      I’m still hoping for a softcore no-trading mode myself. Or perhaps trading only with people who have been on your friends list for X number of days, or some other barrier so I know I’m playing in an environment where people didn’t just buy their gear. Hardcore mode has it, but despite loving roguelike games, I’m not enough of a masochist to play an online-only real-time roguelike (oops, connection stuttered, lose 20 hours of play, better luck next time). Purchasable gear, more than always-on Internet required (it’s how I played D2 anyway) or region locking, is my biggest complaint.

    • ReV_VAdAUL says:

      I wouldn’t get your hopes up. Someone posted this in yesterday’s Diablo 3 comments (I forget who, very sorry but thankyou to whoever you are) link to the-ghetto.org

      Blizzard’s current business model and view of protecting their IP means an offline mode is almost certain not to happen.

    • Daniel Klein says:

      You’re setting yourself up for heartbreak. There is no way in hell they’d do this at this point. The decision to write the game with a strictly separated client/server infrastructure was taken VERY early in development. They’d have to rewrite a LOT of code that was never meant to run on Windows machines would be my guess.

      Basically the TL;DR is: D3 will not have an offline mode, and I’ll bet a lot of money on that.

  3. Wyrm says:

    Shall not buy.

  4. mwoody says:

    ‘Should probably clarify: you don’t specifically need to opt into this next round of beta testing, as far as I can tell. You just need, in general, to have opted in within the past couple months, and run their system spec checker.

  5. Timthos says:

    This delay was necessary. I could not feasibly have managed SWTOR, DIablo 3 and Skyrim all in such close succession, especially with Skyward Sword and AC Revelations thrown into the mix. Diablo 3 in 2012 means it will get the time and attention from me that it rightly deserves.

  6. fishy007 says:

    I don’t mind the delay, but I do mind all this blasted secrecy, hype and mis-information. It’s fine if they want to delay and polish the game more. But they keep throwing us mortals tiny scraps of information to feed the fires of rumor and guesswork. Personally, I’d much rather have them close the site and information mill until they’re ready to release a true closed beta to more than 100 people.

    • Fiatil says:

      So you’re saying that no game should release any information until it’s feature complete and has a large public beta test? Makes sense!

  7. reticulate says:

    This would be a Blizzard thing.

    They’re almost as bad as Valve. Although, I’m not sitting here waiting on Diabo 3: Episode 3 so FUCK YOU GABE GIVE ME THE GODDAMN FINISH TO ALL THIS YOU BASTARD

    • elfbarf says:

      Honestly, this is MUCH better than Valve (and most companies). At least they’re admitting that the game isn’t quite ready and they want to deliver the best product possible. Valve generally doesn’t say anything, and when they do their estimates are extremely inaccurate. There have also been quite a few games in the last few years having a delayed release on the PC version, only to be released as a buggy mess despite the delay (From Dust for example).

  8. CareerKnight says:

    I wouldn’t even call this a delay, more of a statement of the obvious. Blizzard has always had its done when its done approach to releases. The only way to judge when a Blizzard game is going to come out (before they announce it a couple of weeks before it happens) is the beta test for the game. They usually beta test for around 5 months so going off that historical precedent it would have been incredibly surprising if Diablo 3 had come out this year.

  9. abigbat says:

    Not hugely surprised about this, Blizzard are always fairly vague when it comes to release dates. From what I’ve seen the game is already looking super polished, more time can only be a good thing.

    GiantBomb did a great live playthrough and discussion the other night, well worth a watch if want to get a feel for the game:

    link to giantbomb.com

  10. D3xter says:

    They probably found out that Battle.Net 2.0 isn’t restrictive enough as of yet and there are still enough people willing to get their game and are going to fix that.

    Oh and remove Online SinglePlayer (is that an oxymoron?) by adding a lobby you have to wait in till at least another person joins, cause Diablo 3 isn’t meant to be played alone and they haven’t made that abundantly clear enough yet as people dared play the Beta alone. Of course if any of you flies out of the game everyone else does too.

  11. Starky says:

    There is zero chance of an offline mode – none.

    I know that it clearly pisses someone off, but it just isn’t meant to be a single player game – Blizzard are trying to build an online ecosystem around co-op, and anti-cheating, anti-duping, and server side code will not ever allow an offline mode – because it simply existing will damage what they are trying to do.

    You don’t have to like it, you don’t have to buy it – but I think at this point the anger, bile and rage from the gaming community is a bit too silly.

    Personally I’m glad Blizzard have drawn this line in the sand (even if i do have sympathy for those D2 players who only played it offline), Dupes, hacks and bots ruined much of the fun with D2, and with that code running server side it just won’t be possible anymore for those things to happen.
    Sure all those cheaters and hackers might run their own shard servers, that is fine, I don’t care that won’t ruin my experience with spam, bots and map hackers.

    • Sheng-ji says:

      It’s just such a shame there isn’t a better solution, I’m in the single player camp myself, but that doesn’t mean I don’t understand and appreciate your point of view. I’m not too worried about disconnects and such like from their side, nor am I particularly bothered about the lack of pause, I just hate the auction house! I really am praying that I will not be disadvantaged if I ignore it to the point where the game becomes frustrating!

    • Chris D says:

      Out of curiosity, if you’re fine with being always online and you only intended to play it as a multiplayer game anyway aren’t you better off going with a fully-fledged MMO?

    • abigbat says:

      Starky’s post pretty much sums up my feelings exactly. I think we may as well look at D3 as an MMO-lite and just accept it for what it is. That doesn’t bother me personally, in fact I rather like the idea, but I can appreciate that a lot of people will find the concept offensive.

    • Lajcik says:

      Dupes, hacks and bots ruined much of the fun with D2, and with that code running server side it just won’t be possible anymore for those things to happen.

      Sure all those cheaters and hackers might run their own shard servers, that is fine, I don’t care that won’t ruin my experience with spam, bots and map hackers.

      Dont fool yourself. There will be people messing around with bots, map hacks, item duplication and possibly anything else that is found to be exploitable from the client side. Also there will be people spamming powerleveling/moneyselling services. This is just (sadly) what people do. You can’t be online and get away from that.

      While I agree that it’s a good thing that Blizzard is taking an active approach to combating these (suspending accounts etc) and making the the online mode more desirable (even if you want to solo the game), I really hate that they’re making the game require a permanent online connection – for the reasons stated both here on RPS and other sites – You can’t pause the game, you can’t play at your grans or when your internet is simply down. This blows. Diablo is not an mmo and should not require me to be online.

      On the other hand I’m really tired of people whining, acting all outraged and/or surprised and boycotting the game. Because, really? You know you are still going to buy it when you see your friends having a great time, simply because blizzard delivers. But alas, this is the internet. It wouldn’t be the same without all the grief.

    • pkt-zer0 says:

      The proper solution to having secure online without restricting anything would be a world in which people aren’t dicks, even if given the chance to massively screw over others for large personal gain and no chance of repercussion. That doesn’t seem terribly likely.

      Also, there’s a key difference between MMOs and Diablo: the latter actually has the potential for somewhat interesting gameplay. Also, no subscription fees! That’s good enough for me, anyway.

    • Starky says:

      @Chris D

      Fully fledged MMO? No not really those don’t offer the same gameplay or experience as Diablo does in 8 player co-op. I never played Diablo 2 offline – well except for hacking the odd build to test it solo in hell. So I’ve always considered Diablo to be a multiplayer co-op game, not SP, which is why the D3 issue has not bothered me. I have hundreds of SP games anyway (many untouched from steam sales) should my internet go down, or I be unable to play D3 for whatever reason.

      That and most MMO’s are either subscription or F2P, only 1 other game uses the buy the game and online is free model (guild wars) – people may try to argue it, but D3 is clearly aiming for a similar online only experience to GW, and guild wars was no more of an MMO than D3 will be, and I quite like the idea of MOGs (MMOs without the first M) doing 8-16 player co-op, but with the trappings of a larger MMO (auction houses, trading, boss/adventure instances, persistent character/gear) games, just without the server shards.

      Hell I’d fucking love a D&D game that did that DDO basically does, but I’d like a game that dropped some of the MMO overhead (the world, the plot, the server realm architecture) and focused just on the dungeon adventures.
      Or a freespace/freelancer game, with the EvE trappings of player economy, trading so on… Just based on 8-16 player combat fighters, in instanced adventures, missions and such with healthy PvP (8v8 would do) arenas – no capital ships (frigates might be acceptable), but mainly fighters.

      It is a shame there isn’t a solution that could satisfy everyone – well there is but no company would ever do it – which would be code 2 utterly separate copies of the game, so that the offline version didn’t share the code and algorithms of the online version.

    • Starky says:


      Well I’m not so foolish as to believe these things will vanish – they exist in WoW and most MMO’s after all – but they will be a HELL of a lot less destructive and all encompassing as D2, where you can be 99% sure that any high level rune is a dupe – where almost all high level farm games are done by bots in stinkingly good duped gear, where you cannot be in a public game for more than 20 seconds without a spammer joining the game spamming an advert for some item site and leaving again (and you probably average 2-3 spammers per minute).

      No it won’t get rid of these problems utterly, but it should significantly reduce them.

    • diamondmx says:

      What difference does it make to you if someone else dupes or mods their copy of the game to do silly things in Single Player? I think it means nothing. Unless it makes you sad that they got better drops than you by cheating in a Single Player game.

      And I’m not even generally for cheating, even in single player (though I might invent a DXHR play+ mode for myself using cheats). I just simply could not care less what other people do with their single player experiences. Nor should you.

      If you’re worried about dupes and cheats in multiplayer – that is a problem that could have *easily* been resolved with either this method or another method without crippling single player with this horrific DRM.

      So, I think that this isn’t all for the player, it’s to prevent competition with their stupid item mall, it’s a DRM measure, and this step plus the item mall makes this game drop from a “quite interested” to a “won’t play”. Instead I am playing Diablo 2 quite happily.

    • Reapy says:

      D3 is popular enough that there will most likely be something up by someone that lets you play offline. Maybe it’ll just be a faked out bnet process running in the background that grabs d3’s “hey is he online” messages sending back a “yup, all good here”. Though maybe that will be more complicated if there is no local storage of characters and the like.

      I do know that they have wow server emulators and the like floating around out there, so while it may take a while, I am pretty sure that people will be able to play d3 without going though battle.net.

      I think at first I was upset about the news, then I realized that even way back in the day I played diablo 2 ‘online solo’ in passworded games so I could use that character to play with my friends. Still, while it wont really be the end of my user experience, it is upsetting they do not have the online / solo char distinction in there for offline play.

      Online activation / verification seems to be becoming a way of life, no matter how much we scream. As long as they have the crack, we have to submit to the dealer’s rules. :(

    • Starky says:


      I think you misunderstand, no one cares if anyone cheats or hacks single player – but the hacks were not single player, they were online in the multiplayer.

      That single player code allowed hackers to breach it, tamper with client memory and send false information to Blizzard servers, allowing glitches and duping to happen.
      D2 ran that code client side, not server side – and that allowed the hackers and dupers to exploit it – something that will be much, much harder in D3.

      For Blizzard to allow SP offline play in D3 they’d need to allow users machines to run all that server code locally – making it trivial for pirates to run copied versions, trivial for hackers to learn any weaknesses and exploits in the client-server communication, and discover all kinds of hacks and cheats they might get away with.
      Something that is much harder if the only computers ever to run that code are owned by blizzard.

    • Chris D says:

      Alrighty. So have we reached a consensus that if you want an online co-op game you will probably get what you want but if you were looking forward to a self-contained single-player experience you’re screwed?

      If we have then that would seem to leave one issue. If it’s being marketed as an MMO-lite or similar then fair enough. It’s not for me but then it doesn’t have to be. On the other hand, if they market as the sequel to the rest of the Diablo series which could be played successfully as a single player experience without making it clear that you can’t do that anymore then I think people who buy it unaware of what they’re getting might be justifiably upset by that.

    • Bhazor says:

      @ Starky
      There is no excuse for not including an offline mode.

      Also for the umpteenth time this is a CO-OP game not a competitive game. Don’t want to play with people who cheat? Then don’t play the game with friends who cheat. Does anyone ever play co-op with strangers?

      Speaking of cheating. Who exactly gets cheated when a co-op partner cheats? The monsters? The devil? Fuck him.

    • Bhazor says:

      “where you cannot be in a public game for more than 20 seconds without a spammer joining the game spamming an advert for some item site and leaving again (and you probably average 2-3 spammers per minute).”

      You really think this is going to stop the spammers? Imagine what it will be like when goods have a set price, complete with seller costs for farmers to undercut and where getting hacked could see you perma-mega-ultro banned from any Blizzard game (with no offline mode to console yourself with natch). Now imagine there is no option for secure private servers?

      Played a public server of TF2 lately? Ever played any F2P MMO?

    • Starky says:


      And that I think is Blizzards biggest failing in this whole issue, not that they are making an MMO-lite online only game – it is their IP and they can do whatever they like with it – I bet this rage wouldn’t be happening if they had just called the game “Diablo Online”, as everyone would have known that it was a MMO-lite.

      Clearly Blizzard needed to be clear and open about this change as soon as they had settled on it – they should have immediately made efforts to communicate that it was online, and why – explained that it wasn’t designed to be a single player experience (even if you could play it solo) that they intended for it to be a multiplayer game and so on.
      Instead they released the news like it was a bloody feature, and everyone who had expectations set to X, and found out the game would not be offering X got pissed off.

      Then again, even if they were open and honest and said clearly and early it was going to be multiplayer only (with solo possible but not recommended or optimal) people would still be angry.

      You clearly have no idea mate – and the stupid quote from penny arcade I think proves that…
      Diablo was ALWAYS a competitive co-op. I’m guessing you never played D2 ladder seasons to any real degree – never got involved in no-twink rush contests, or solo hell speed runs. Never tied to get high on the level ladder. Most of all never player hardcore where dodgy hacking bastards could kill you while you were in town, or while they were in town and you were out killing mobs.

      That is most defiantly a case where cheaters/hackers could ruin your experience.

      It is a game where you are cooperating with players in any one specific game, but competing with every other player on your continent.

      If anyone could just magic up (hack) items it would ruin that whole aspect of the game.

      D3 I think will be much, much more of a competitive co-op than D2 ever was, and I’m hoping there will be a bunch of ladders, shared stat trackings (and ways to compare to other players) and competitive things you can do in game with your friends, playing against them but in a indirect way.

      Hell at first I was against the idea of the cash auction house because of this – but so long as it remains dupe free, consisting of items earned by players and listed by players (no items sold directly by Blizz), it will be no worse than if Blizz hadn’t including a AH at all (people would just buy off 3rd party sites), and Blizz may as well enjoy a small slice of those e-item sales.
      That and I’ll be playing hardcore mostly anyway and not care as there is no cash AH on hardcore.

    • Starky says:


      It may not eliminate spammers, nothing will – but it will severely reduce them.

      F2P isn’t the same as spammers have no barrier to entry, WoW is a more applicable example (as a low box copy cost will get you 30 days, and it has trials) – WoW had spam, but it was no where near as bad.

      I’m not asking for perfection from Blizzard, but I do expect a vast improvement, if only because spamming accounts that are banned/removed and lack of cross region play will vastly increase the cost for those farmers trying to sell goods and spam advertising for them.

      And if there is a trade channel then they can spam that all they like as that is what it is for, they won’t need to physically join games spam text and then drop.

    • FataMorganaPseudonym says:


      If they had just called this “Diablo Online” rather than “Diablo 3” then, yeah, I could have safely ignored it and forgotten about right from the get go, rather than being enraged when the DRM was unveiled years later, and then hoping (most likely futilely, as you say) that they’ll put back in a feature (offline single-player) that was in the previous two versions of the game, but which they took out for D3 due to so-called “features” (the auction house, the anti-cheating stuff, etc.) that mean absolutely jack to me since I would have never used or cared about them anyway, as I had no intention at all of ever playing the game in multiplayer.

      They say they “don’t want to splinter their player-base” by including an offline single-player mode where the characters can’t be used in multiplayer. So, instead of that, they’d rather just alienate the single-player gamers altogether? That’s a better solution for them? I know people are getting tired of hearing us say this but, no, I won’t buying this game while the “always connected” requirement is there. If Blizzard doesn’t want my money, then I’m perfectly fine with not giving it to them, and will use it instead to buy games that are more aligned with what I want, and what I want is most definitely not a “Diablo 3” that should have been called “Diablo Online.”

    • Bhazor says:

      You’re right like the vast majority of players I did not do what you just said you did. I played through single player twice. Then started a co-op character to play with some friends of mineon a secure server or a lan when we could manage. You should try it sometime because those public servers sounded dreadful.

      You really haven’t noticed the spam epidemic in WOW? This isn’t going to change anything. Farmers *are* going to spam other channels, hackers *will* access your account (which will now include your paypal account details), pirates *will* flood the servers and bots (or the Chinese) are going to farm bosses and sell in bulk online to avoid the auction fees. Every thing you said will still be there the only difference being the game itself will now be fundementally broken.

    • Starky says:

      Well I had a reply, but the spam filter keeps fucking eating it and I can’t seem to get around it without rewriting the entire post… bleh.

    • Starky says:

      Okay I tried rewriting it and it won’t let me post it again… fucking ARH!….

      There isn’t even anything in it that should flag as spam, no links, no mention of shops or junk like that – just normal words and text… WTF.

      Anyway cliffs notes…

      I- t sucks a bit and I’m sorry for those who genuinely have internet issues that prevents them playing (angry nerds on the internet who don’t and just use it as an excuse to rail against the game/blizzard can GTFO).

      – Blizzard pulling it mid development was a bit of a dick move, and they should have been must faster and more open about communicating the change.

      – In the end though bliz will probably still make more money than they lose from this change… as the actual number of people who won’t buy it will still be a tiny percentage of the D3 audience – and that for every 1 who doesn’t buy it, someone who never even played D2 and does not care will replace them.

      – And from a business perspective, dedicated active players are worth more to a company over the long tail than offline single player only players. So even if they lose a massive chunk of the former, the latter will probably more than make up for it in future sales.

    • Kandon Arc says:

      @ Starky: “it will be no worse than if Blizz hadn’t including a AH at all (people would just buy off 3rd party sites), and Blizz may as well enjoy a small slice of those e-item sales.”

      Yeah, instead of trying to combat sweatshop labour, Blizzard should just profit from it. BUSINESS!

    • Starky says:


      Sweatshop labour is a natural and expected step in the process of developing countries – it happened in every single country in Europe during the industrial revolution. It eventually ends.

      There is simply no fast and easy way to go from dirt poor peasant farmers to healthy wage earning working class without it. It isn’t exploitation, as much as westerners would like to believe in their anti-coprorate ramblings – yes what they earn is a tiny fraction of what an equivalent western worker would get, but that is true of every job at all levels.
      Without that “exploitation” things would never improve in those places.

      I’ve been to China and spoken too Chinese workers in a factory the company I work for did business with, in conditions we would consider abhorrent (sleeping in military like barracks working 12 on 12 off shifts 6-7 days a week, communal showers and bathrooms, no privacy at any moment).

      But what they have in those conditions is a vast improvement over what they had before those factory jobs – many were homeless before, or lived in worse conditions as farm labourers [think black slaves on white owned farms as depicted in many classic movies and you are getting close – except it is rich chinese (often gov officials) and poor chinese workers], and they consider themselves blessed and very lucky to have those jobs. Jobs that we’d consider unfit for even criminals to do.

      The factory I visited gave them a 1 free meal a day (some kind of vegetable broth (might have had some chicken in too), a bit of bread and rice) and about 4-5 times the wage they might earn labouring on a farm – and it keeps slowly improving year by year as the workforce gets more skilled, more valuable and less disposable. In turn gain a bit more power to demand improvements in conditions and pay.

      It is a slow process, but a noticeable one.

      Still that is the bottom line without the incentive to exploit that massive cheap labour force, companies would have no reason to open businesses and factories in those area’s and the countries would never develop any kind of modern infrastructure.

    • Bhazor says:

      @ Starky

      (Ignoring the sweatshop stuff which I half agree on. Though as Brazil and India show once the lower classes get too expensive and outsiders leave the economy flops and everyone goes back down a level. Also those farmers and labourers are still around, except now their farms are polluted with industrial waste and their home village becomes a “cancer village”. Unlike Japan or post war Germany Chinese products are almost universally dreadful so they won’t be able to compete when we’re gone. But oh well, at least we got some cheap sneakers out of them first. That’s totally a moral victory.)

      You’re acting like I give a damn about how much money Blizzard makes. All I care about is actually having a playable game. The always online requirement will add nothing to the vast majority of players and won’t fix any of the problems you’re complaining about. As I said before, you are completely ignoring the secure servers that fixed all your problems all without ruining a single player game. This DRM *will* render the game unplayable for almost every player at some time or another. Including you.

      Is that really a company you want to spend so long defending?

    • Starky says:

      It depends how good the service is, given it is blizzard I expect that service to be top notch and downtime to be minimum (on their end) if they fail to provide that you can believe that I won’t be defending them one bit, and I’ll be then voting with my pounds and simply not buying any expansions ans such.

      A few minor outages I can live with, same as I have with every MMO or online only game I’ve ever played.

      On the sweatshop issue, yeah it’s a bitch of a thing when that happens, there is no moral right or wrong when it comes to such practices, only shades of grey – and often the governments and politicians of the country getting exploited are as much to blame – India didn’t invest any of that foreign flood of money they had in building their country up, so obviously when the boom ended they toppled back.
      China on the other hand is quickly catching up with the west in quality products, cheap Chinese shit is quickly becoming cheap and reasonable Chinese products – especially in electronics. It is a worry for western businesses actually taht Chinese knock-offs are actually starting to compete in quality too.
      China is also investing massively in education, infrastructure, modern farming and other such things that will make it somewhat self sufficient and not suffer that horrible collapse India suffered when foreign business starts to look elsewhere.

  12. Joof says:

    I’m going to buy one copy of this game for every time Wulf calls someone Xenophobic, misappropriates infrastructure limits as discrimination against “filthy foreigners”, talks about Blizzard social engineering addiction, or brings up Arenanet in a post about Blizzard.

    • admanb says:

      I’m with you.

    • Chris D says:

      Hey,if you’ve got that much disposable income shouldn’t you be doing something useful like solving the debt crisis or something?

    • Sheng-ji says:

      I’m assuming that the reason you didn’t add “talks about the amazing storyline in Torchlight” is that you don’t wish to bankrupt yourself.

    • Antsy says:

      Haha, there isn’t enough money in the world!

    • abigbat says:

      The pagecount is still at 1 so he obviously hasn’t posted one of his dissertations yet. Hope you’ve been saving buddy.

    • Nodja says:


      With the money that the US owes, you could buy 280,000,000,000 copies of Diablo III at 50$ each. Now if you would build a custom minigun that would fire DVDs and at a rate of 2000 per second, it would take 140000000 seconds to fire them all, or exactly 4 years.

      Basically you could conquer the world by firing Diablo DVDs at people.

    • Chris D says:


      You’re right. That is a better use of the money :)

    • Pointless Puppies says:


      How long do you suppose, and mind that I am asking for a simple guesstimate, would be the cost of firing said minigun for 12 seconds?

    • Starky says:

      I’d cost 1.2 million. (2000*50*12)

    • Premium User Badge

      Gassalasca says:

      Best comment ever.

  13. admanb says:

    I already assumed it wasn’t going to be out until 2012, so… victory?

  14. Freud says:

    How can you delay that which has no release date?

  15. karthink says:

    Something interesting about Diablo 3, found on the forums (via Pijama):

    “Diablo 3 will not be cracked at launch, you fools.”

    TL;DR version: It is likely that a significant chunk of the game (AI, level generation) runs on the server. Diablo is an MMO in disguise; more and more games are going to go this way. (I don’t have a problem with gaming as a service until they start charging subscription fees for singleplayer games. At that point I will probably have to look for new hobbies.)

    • D3xter says:

      That’s what Russian and Swedish people are there for: link to 2.bp.blogspot.com

    • TillEulenspiegel says:

      @Diablo said on Twitter weeks ago that D3 would be using a client/server model. Pretty obvious from that.

      The server emulators will be interesting, but you need to basically make a whole new game with the same graphics and interface. We’ll end up with a bunch of weird pirate knockoffs, rather than anything that’s a true clone of vanilla D3.

    • Starky says:

      Dexter, that D3 beta cracked version is broken beyond any playability, and because it is lacking all the server code will probably always be broken beyond any real ability to play it.

    • Bhazor says:

      @ Starky

      And it was done within a week. And it was done from inside a locked beta. Give the community a few weeks with the release version and see what you get.

      To put it another way. When was the last time DRM wasn’t hacked? Even if it took a few months such as the AssCreed 2 DRM.

      This will not work. It will be riddled with scammers and you won’t even be able to play a closed lan server.

    • Starky says:

      True, it may be hacked, but like any MMO shard servers, that has no real impact on legitimate users on legitimate servers, so I’m not really bothered.

      So you’ll be able to pirate the game and play it online on a dodgy server probably hosted in russia/china – or you’ll have to be tech savvy enough to set up a virtual server on your own machine, set up the configs for it, and then run the game connecting it to that virtual server…
      Which is a hell of a lot more complex and involved than copying a dvd crack…

      Still Asscreed was just DRM (very little [in fact I don’t believe any did at all] game code actually ran on Ubi server CPUs, it was mostly[all?] DRM specific code), and that took a few months, Diablo 3 is a full client-server split process MMO type design. Where gameplay essential code (item generation etc.) runs server side.

    • Azradesh says:

      Just like WoW’s private servers right? Oh wait, those work fine. It will take a fair while though, I’d say at least 6 months post release.

      And Starky, the server would be hosted on your own PC for Diablo 3.

    • Starky says:


      Did you even read the posts above yours? you just said exactly what I said directly above your post as if you were somehow correcting me…

    • Azradesh says:

      Yeah I see that now, sorry about that, didn’t refresh the page before replying.

    • Starky says:

      No problem man, I think we’ve all probably done that and looked a little silly because of it.

  16. mmalove says:

    Oh by the way, one more reason to hate on D3: if unthinkably blizzard goes out of business, you’ll still be able to play D2, but not D3 or SC2. Think they’d release a LAN patch or some kind of single player in that state? Flagship Studios sure didn’t. Customers went through 2 years unable to play their game in any kind of multiplayer, and when it was finally republished by Hanbitsoft they basically told all the original game owners and founders “Fuck you”, and made them all pay for everything cash shop just to enjoy the original game again.

    If the RPS team really wants to take a stand against D3’s persistent online choice, stop covering every little booger that emerges from Blizzard HQ. More indie devs that still care about their customers, please.

    • Starky says:

      The only way Blizzard will ever go out of business in the foreseeable future is if giant space rocks destroy half the plant and western civilization, in which case, who cares…

      Chances are inception/matrix level simulations will exist before blizzard go out of business… Hell they’ll probably be the first company to make a game of it.

    • Syra says:

      Don’t be ridiculous, blizzard don’t create original ideas. Or bring to bear cutting edge tech. Ever.

      They borrow and refine.

    • Starky says:

      Good point…

      I’ll change that too…

      Some students will make a game on it (probably MIT students)…
      Valve will then hire those students and make a game for it…
      A few other companies will make reasonably successful games for the platform…
      Blizzard will then release a game that is hugely successful, overshadows everything that came before it in polish and refinement (as well as having a bunch of small, but substantial when added together, new idea’s and innovations) and make trillions of Yuan (because both the EU$ and US$ will be worthless by then).

  17. Torgen says:

    So, has someone started a betting pool on how long it takes until some group of miscreants tries to put the servers down and lock everyone out of their single player games “to make a point”/”fight the man”/”for the lulz?”

    • Freud says:

      Don’t you think they have tried that on WoW tonnes of times?

      There is a reason they are bravely attacking login servers for smaller games and not going after bigger fish.

    • Torgen says:

      Hmm, perhaps one reason to region-lock D3 game servers by IP is to cut down on the number of bots that can be brought to bear on a single server farm…

    • Torgen says:

      Also, I don’t know that I would call Ubisoft’s main login servers “small fish,” and they were well and properly spanked weren’t they? Or was that because they tried to cut corners yet again and didn’t properly project the load when they went live?

    • Starky says:

      Ubisofts login servers really are “small fish” compared to blizzards, I’d not be shocked if Blizzards resources (bandwidth, CPU, switching capability, user capacity) on their B.Net login servers are larger by a factor of 100 or more.

      Ubi’s servers were maybe designed to handle 10k logins every hour, chances are blizzards handle 10k a second.

  18. Kill_The_Drive says:

    No problem. At least more people will get Torchlight 2 now, which will be better than D3 anyway.

    • Antsy says:

      I love this. Its almost a mantra around here. Because its either one or the other isn’t it? Surely no-one could POSSIBLY buy and enjoy both.

    • Vinraith says:


      I’ve never seen anyone around here suggest that no one would buy both, that would be self-evidently stupid. It’s true, however, that many people will only buy one or the other, as both games are quite similar, and something that pushed some people away from D3 is likely to cause at least a small increase in Torchlight 2 sales if it (wisely) sets itself up as a customer-friendly alternative to Blizzard’s behemoth.

    • Kill_The_Drive says:

      Exactly. I myself am going to buy both, but this delay will give Torchlight more potential customers. Hopefully at least.

  19. archimandrite says:

    They released Diablo 2 earlier than they should have. It crashed all over the place before the first patch. I’m guessing they don’t want to repeat that.

  20. tyren says:

    Hopefully during this time they’ll fix the issues noted by John in the DRM article.

  21. Deltadisco says:

    Is it really possible to delay something that didn’t have a release date?

    And did anyone REALLY expect this to drop in 2011? Frankly I’m surprised they even publicly stated “early 2012”.

    Not that it particularly matters to me anymore. Always online+(a currently) overly-aggressive client timeout means I would have to wait until my kids are old enough to go to school to even attempt playing.

    For awhile I thought I’d give it a go anyhow – but it’s just not worth it. Torchlight 2 – please be extra awesome!

  22. Solly says:


    • mwoody says:

      Did… did you just accuse a Diablo game of copying Dungeon Siege?

  23. kud13 says:

    well, that surprised no one.

    I predict Q2 2012.

  24. Kleppy says:

    Well for me Diablo is a summer kinda game anyway. I played Diablo 1 back in summer of ’97 I think, and Diablo 2 in the summer of 2000 (interspersed with Deus Ex, my god that was the best summer ever for gaming). So it wouldn’t feel right playing D3 at winter :)

  25. Plivesey says:

    I wasn’t aware there was ever a release date set for Diablo 3, strange that it’s considered ‘delayed’. Ah well, gives me plenty of time to finish with Skyrim I guess!

  26. Deadend says:

    I didn’t think it was coming out this year. Blizzard will want ads in all the magazines and on TV/everything they can. Most ad deals need to be made fairly far in advance for things like during Sports events.

    I’m feeling a good chunk of the delay is to do ads everywhere.
    Oh, and maybe balance the game enough so that some classes don’t feel terrible.

  27. Lemming says:

    Well at least this gives Torchlight 2 a good open run at some revenue!

  28. BobsLawnService says:

    Yes, this is about the DRM…

    But why couldn’t they have used the same system as Starcraft 2. I have a notoriously bad bad connection and that worked well while still locking down the multi-player.

    • Ghoulie says:

      I know right, I was really looking forward to it but I have a horrible connection that gets especially slow at night (when I want to do my playing).
      I have many fond memories of my brother and I lanning D2 and other games.
      I’m going to have to skip it out of necessity. And that saddens me.

  29. RandomGameR says:

    Yet another reason I’m not going to buy Diablo 3…

    …at least not until they release it.

  30. Starky says:

    reply fail

  31. MythArcana says:

    The more I hear about this disaster, the more I plan on staying clear of it.

  32. Frankie The Patrician[PF] says:

    It is okay, I wasn’t going to buy it anyway for multiple reasons:

    1. I still consider D1 better than D2 in many ways, gameplay-wise
    2. I don’t fancy paying 60 euros for a new game, no Sir
    3. I don’t support always-on DRMs with my wallet (as much as I avoided any StarFarce games)
    4. I like playing games my way and this seems too..Apple-like – no more individual stats points distribution, server-side solution preventing from some harmless SP shenanigans…urgh, no thx

    • Starky says:

      And all that is totally okay – not every game is for every person and it’s totally okay not to like, or want to play D3, De gustibus non est disputandum and all that.

      Just silly how some people get so angry over the fact that the game is not to their tastes (or worse like some people insult, belittle or accuse those with different tastes of been sheep or manipulated).

      What is that youtube thing that was floating round a while back?

      Oh yeah: It’s okay not to like things, it’s okay, but don’t be a dick about it. [not saying you are your post was fine :) ]

  33. felisc says:

    i heard they need the extra monthes to turn the game into an fps.

    • mda says:

      don’t blame them, what they originally had was scarily pushing the envelope, way ahead of its time and wouldn’t be understood by anyone

  34. Shooop says:

    And not even 20 minutes later there’s a report of DOTA2 being finished ahead of schedule.

    Grab a helmet folks, it’s a war.

  35. Fameros says:

    If I wanted a hack-and-slash game with no pause button and always-online requirements, I would be married.

    Torchlight 2, here I come.

  36. MythArcana says:

    They are waiting for Torchlight 2 to be released so they can steal ideas and more setup screens from Runic. The character setup screen is almost pixel per pixel the exact same as Torchlight. Scary.

    • mwoody says:

      Now someone accusing the Diablo team of copying Torchlight? The irony meter is off the SCALE in this thread.

  37. michal.lewtak says:

    You’re tearing me apart, Blizzard! link to youtube.com

  38. alundra says:

    @Starky What’s really silly here is the amount of replies you’ve made trying to justify actilizzard’s symphony of customer f***ery called Diablo 3.

    @mwoody If you take into consideration that Torchlight was co developed by Max Schaefer and Erich Schaefer who were in turn co-designers for Diablo 1 and 2, it’s hard to say who is plagiarizing who.

    @Bhazor What?? is the resident legion of doom going to resort to low hits now???

    How convenient that the video card melting issue present on SC2 upon it’s release was not mentioned by those arguing in favor of a perfect release record for blizzard, blizzard is dead people, it stopped existing after the merger, deal with it, if you still like their products, fine, but stop resorting to all sorts of bigoted reasons to try and make others think likewise.

  39. dellphukof says:

    Yeah, not being able to pause is pretty balls. An offline single-player mode (or LAN mode, too) seems like it should be included in the final version. RPS knows what’s up.

    And knowing blizzard, this game probably won’t be released for at LEAST another year, maybe two. I have faith they’ll make the right decision! I think we’ll definitely see one of Heart of the Swarm or the next WoW expansion before Diablo III. Maybe even both.cong ty seo