D3TV: Diablo III’s Eve Of Release CGI Trailergasm

me, earlier, only I've have curlier hair and a bigger nose

Twi weejd! That’s what happens when I try to write ‘two weeks’ without checking my fingers are in the right place on my keyboard. And I was trying to write ‘two weeks’ because that’s how long (roughly) it is until I go on holiday to Greece for a week. Which means…

Oh no. Oh god. Oh god no. Oh no no no no no no no no no.


Were it not for the bally always-online rubbish (presumably the ‘evil is back’ referred to in the below trailer?) I might be able to pick up a copy for my laptop while I’m out there, but I’m pretty sure budget Kefalonian lodgings won’t have any wi-fi. I hate you, the future. So, I’m going to paint a corner of my work room black then go sit in it and cry, while intermittenly screaming ‘why? WHY?’ It’ll only embarrass the both of us if you watch me do that, so you’d better focus your attention on the clearly enormo-budget CGI TV trailer for D3 instead. Oh yeah, it includes Azrael.

So, yeah. I’m fine, I can wait a week. No problem.


  1. Syra says:

    Eagle eyed lore buffs may have noticed imperius is fighting tyrael and a few other neat things in that spot…

    Though I can’t justify the klaxons!

    -5 hour later edit- I lament for the state of affairs where one of the most hotly anticipated PC exclusive(!) games of all time release a sweet trailer close to launch and all anyone has to say about it is how much they hate blizzard for selling out, RMAH or DRM or whatever else. To the extent that Alec even edited his post up. Talk about the game guys! It’s great!

    • FunkyBadger3 says:

      “Don’t piss down my back and tell me its raining” – or words to that effect…

    • Dreforian says:

      The klaxons made me think of Star Wars. Now all Diablo needs is a trailer with the wilhelm scream!

  2. Strangerator says:

    Your free time. Will. Die.

  3. Uglycat says:

    Why do Earth-Destroying demons insist on pounding the earth instead of the human in front of them, who will almost inevitably turn out to destroy them?

    • sinister agent says:

      And why do killer robots and hulking great brutes always pick people up and throw them a short distance instead of simply tearing their limbs off?

    • Grargh says:

      Same as super-villains elaborating on their schemes until the hero finally gets up and surprisingly thwarts them.

      They’ve all graduated in Advanced Techniques For The Preservation Of Narrative And Plot.

      • Harvey says:

        I would love to see a comic or short film involving some scenes from that school

        EDIT: Destro as the class clown?

    • Aedrill says:

      It’s obvious – they’re Earth-Destroying demons, so they hit the Earth, why would the bother with hitting some pesky heroes? They’re not their target.

  4. Wisher says:

    Diablo III > Holiday in Greece.
    Simple as that.

    Now go QQ some moar. :P

  5. miguelyoung says:

    this is the second recent trailer i see using this kind of loud, syncopatic sound queues to imprint a sense of urgency.
    The first is Prometheus (Ridley Scott), which strikes me as very similar to D3’s trailer.
    link to youtu.be

    • hello_mr.Trout says:

      had that exact same thought! i think it is the digitised screaming on loop that adds to the sense of urgency

    • Brun says:

      Klaxons are 2012’s wub wub.

    • Tin_man_Tex says:

      The sound for the Promethus is homage to Ridley Scotts own trailer for Aliens from 1979, the sound is the klaxon of the Nostromo.

      • Lemming says:

        Thank you for saying this! The last thing we need is idiots saying “Ridley Scott must be a Diablo 3 fan lolol!!1”.

        It’d be ‘Warhammer ripped off WoW’ all over again. *shudder*

    • rivalin says:

      I thought everyone knew about this already, yes klaxon s building to a crescendo are indeed the big thing in trailers this year (wub wub is for computer games targeted at 14 year olds, nothing else)

      Trailers guys are sheep so expect every second action movie trailer to try this crap.

    • Revisor says:

      It’s “syncopated” and I don’t think it means what you think it means.
      See link to youtube.com
      Sorry for the anal-retentive off-topic.

      • Angel Dust says:

        I thank you, sir! Saved me the trouble of being the anal-retentive one.

      • miguelyoung says:

        well, english isnt my mother tongue and i´m not a musician, so, yes, you are an ass, or anal retentive, like you said.

  6. Lobotomist says:

    Anyone has idea how to buy digital version from Europe. But pay it 60$ instead of 60 EU ?

    • bglamb says:

      May I recommend the £23 Amazon pre-order?

      You might have to travel back in time 15 months, but on the plus side you can be a totally smug bastard when the game finally drops.

      • Lobotomist says:

        Yes. Problem is Amazon does not accept PayPal :S

      • frightlever says:

        The other problem is that Amazon wants £32 now, not £23.

        Edit: Ohhh. Gotya. Yeah. My nephew has had it on pre-order with Play.com for four years, apparently.

  7. CaLe says:

    I’ll play through it once and enjoy the story. I dunno how people get addicted to these games.

    • Vorphalack says:

      People seem so eager to drop ”addiction” into every day conversations about gaming without really giving any thought to what the word means. Playing through a game more than once does not qualify as addiction.

      • Surlywombat says:

        Perhaps not, but those guys who have been playing Diablo 2 for 12 years are about as close as you can get.

        • Vorphalack says:

          You cannot interpret time investment as a sign of addiction.

          • SkittleDiddler says:

            Yeah, you can. It takes time to feed an addiction.

          • Vorphalack says:

            No you cant. Addiction is not caused by time investment and time investment does not cause addiction.

            If you want to run that line of reasoning, I should introduce you to a friend of mine. She has spent the last 24 years working for the NHS and is clearly addicted to hospitals. Or how about my brother, who is in the last year of his 4 year law degree. Should I warn him that he is dangerously close to becoming addicted to education?

          • ukpanik says:

            Vorphalack, do you get invited to parties much?

          • Boffin says:

            I’d imagine he does, even though he runs the risk of staying too long and becoming addicted to fun! =O

          • spelvin spugg says:

            You know, I really don’t like contradicting people, but you are absolutely and unequivocally wrong about this.

            What you aren’t taking into account is that things like loot drops absolutely DO produce a dopamine rush similar to that experienced by gamblers who score big. There is a great deal of established research on this subject. It’s the reason Blizzard, Zynga and other game companies hire behavioral psychologists to design the gameplay.

            It is quite literally addicting, in precisely the same way that small hits of cocaine are addicting, over time. The cocaine itself is not directly addictive, but the dopamine rush absolutely IS addictive. Dopamine rushes are the same phenomenon that occurs in video gamers. The reward mechanisms are quite carefully designed and some very smart people work on this.

            Heavy MMO and Diablo players unequivocally demonstrate all of the characteristics of addictive behavior. It is well known to destroy social lives. They would rather play games than associate with other humans. They think about the games constantly when not playing. They arrange their lives around the games. They experience huge highs and severe lows, an emotional rollercoaster related to the games. They may even become crabby when denied the game.

            In a great many people, I also suspect that these games act as a source of what’s called “narcissistic supply,” and are therefore addictive in that respect.

            Personally, I’m not going to buy Diablo III. Why? Because I have stuff that I need to do. Either Diablo III would not be very good, and would not be worth the money, or it WOULD be very good and would cause me to spend inordinate amounts of time chasing down virtual items. I’m talking 12-17 hours a day.

            No offense intended, but you simply have no idea what you’re talking about here.

          • Trillby says:

            Neighbourhood psychologist here, checking in:

            No, a game providing a dopamine kick does not equal addiction. Time spent is not addiction. Even money spent has nothing to with addiction. The first just makes it an enjoyable experience. The second two are a result of wanting to invest something in a hobby, which in turn make that hobby meaningful to the subject. If I get payed to do something I enjoy, then it becomes less enjoyable. Turn that around, and it still works: Freely investing resources (time or money) in something will increase the enjoyment and satisfaction I get out of it. This is the overjustification effect, and has nothing to do with addiction.

            In fact, addiction has a number of definitions, but the generally accepted model is a very pragmatic one: If I continue a behaviour even though that behaviour is causing adverse effects, then I am addicted. As an extreme example: Herion users only start becoming herion “addicts” when they start having health or financial problems, and still continue their usage. Many wealthy people partake of cocaine on a regular basis without it really having any marked effect on their lives. Thus, they don’t really count as addicts.

            Jim playing quake and getting fired from a job because of it: Thats addiction. People playing Diablo 2 for years after it came out because it is they game they enjoy most – mostly due to the large amount of resources they have invested in it: Not addiction.

            EDIT: And I realise I’m being a bit hair-splitty with all this. I just don’t agree that things that can become habit-forming – i.e. increasing the numbers on my loot – should necessarily be labelled as “addictive”. Addictions are serious problems that take large amounts of focus and willpower to break. Habits can be dealt with comparatively easily.

          • spelvin spugg says:

            No, gambling addiction is universally recognized as addiction. There are twelve step programs for it. They are experimenting with using various drugs to treat it. These are typically the same drugs being tested for cocaine addiction– as I remember they are dopamine blockers of some sort.

            If you think video games aren’t addictive, then you must also think slot machines aren’t addictive and there is abundant clinical research and numerous journal papers proving you wrong.

            Disagreeing with the vast majority of clinical research regarding the roots of addiction to reward mechanisms seems to be a rather foolish position to take.

            These phenomena started being recognized and exploited by game companies a long time ago. My guess is that the reward mechanisms in Diablo 2 were tuned by behavior psychologists and since then the practice has become far more commonplace.

            They wouldn’t be doing this if it didn’t work. And yes, you absolutely can call gambling addiction an addiction, and yes, the physiological cause of the addiction is the dopamine dump.

          • spelvin spugg says:

            Ask yourself why Zynga has a behavioral psychologist ON STAFF. When you come up with the answer you will understand.

          • Boffin says:

            I think we’re losing sight of the real point here: spending time on something =/= addiction.

          • Trillby says:

            @spelvin spugg – Reread what I wrote, nowhere did I deny the existence of gaming addictions. In fact, I even diagnosed it myself to Jim…

            What I was explaining is that merely investing time in something does not make you an addict; many other symptoms must also be there in order to make that diagnosis. Chiefly, these have to do with carrying on gaming even when carrying on involves serious negative consequences. I was never undermining addictions – in my last paragraph I explained how serious they were. It undermines the seriousness of addictions by diagnosing them where they are not.

            Just because addicts spend much time gaming, does not mean everyone who spends much time is a gaming addict; in the same way that all cows have four legs, but not everything that has four legs is a cow.

    • Freud says:

      Playing through Diablo for the story is weirder than repeatedly playing through it for the loot.

      • CaLe says:

        Not if you have more important things in your life than numbers on a computer monitor.

        • Freud says:

          Did you just try to play the real life card just after telling us how you enjoy the story in Diablo? :D

          • CaLe says:

            I’ve never played through a Diablo game so I have no idea about the story in the first 2. What I know is a lot of work has gone into making these cinematics, probably from the same team that made the SC2 cinematics and I know I quite enjoyed that story. What can I say, Blizzard make quality products and get my attention purely through that quality. I’m not even an RTS guy and they got my with SC2. Not a Diablo guy and they got me with this too.

        • UncleLou says:

          So wait, while I play through D3 a second and then a third time, you’ll be doing what exactly? Donating organs? Or will you just play something else, which is just as “important” as playing D3?

      • Azradesh says:

        “Story” is why I got into and liked Diablo 1 + 2 and why I found Torchlight to be rather dull.

  8. bglamb says:

    It’s fine, you can just play it on your laptop whilst you’re sunbathing on the bea…

    Oh, no, I remember now.

    Well at least you can play it whilst your waiting at the airpo… oh….no nevermind.

    • Triangulon says:

      Oh well played sir.

    • Dowson says:

      Most airports have a WiFi.
      European Union laws are in effect for managing data rates in foreign countries meaning you can tether your laptop to your phone and not be charged though the roof.

      Though the 2nd one might not be force yet.

      • jalf says:

        What you mean is, you can tether, and only have to pay an arm and a leg, but you can keep your firstborn.

        Even with EU regs, the prices are still insane. They’re just less insane than they used to be.

        And you’d better be *damn* sure your connection is stable, because you get kicked out of your game instantly, the moment the connection breaks.

      • Milky1985 says:

        I recommend that you start a hardcore character via your hotel internet.

        Nothing could go wrong there!

        On another point, do you think the cost of hotel wifi is so high because they have to make it compete with the cost of the special tv channels they offer?

        I’m talking of the sport ones of course.

  9. GallonOfAlan says:

    I’ve never played a Diablo. Should I start with one of the first two ?

    Answers on the back of a used tenner to the usual address.

    • Lobotomist says:

      Well you can definitely play Diablo 1 if you want to play the best of 3 ;)

      Its the one closest to real roguelike ….

      • Zelos says:

        Diablo isn’t and wasn’t a roguelike, nor was it ever trying to be.

        Regardless, neither of them is really worth playing these days imo. They haven’t aged well. If you’re interested in trying the game out you could probably find a friend with the beta or try playing Path of Exile, which is currently in beta.

        • Kaira- says:

          “They haven’t aged well”

          Bollocks. Diablo 1 is still a masterpiece in focused game design. Tight, gripping and true to it’s themes, and plays as well as when it was released. Only problem is that I can’t get it to run on Windows 7 (at least in such manner that it can be played). Obviously some features from Diablo 2 could have done good to it, but in the overall I think Diablo 1 takes the cake easily as the best ARPG/”Diablolike” ever.

          • Skabooga says:

            I had problems getting it to run in Windows 7 as well. If you haven’t already tried, try switching your overall computer graphical display from 32-bit color to 16-bit color and seeing if that doesn’t help.

          • Azradesh says:

            Going back to Diablo 1 is clucky, awful and slow, Diablo 2 is still very fun.

        • FunkyBadger3 says:

          The gameplay in D3 is actually a simplfied version of D2.

        • d32 says:

          False. If nothing else, Diablo 1 was directly inspired by roguelikes (I think they have mentioned Nethack as one of the inspirations).

      • Syra says:

        Totally disagree after playing 3 beta I couldn’t continue my years of diablo2… The interfaces and design are so shockingly out of date after a taste of 3 it is difficult to get your head round the old ones. The story continuity is worth playing if you’re new but I see no shame in d3 as a jumping on point.

        • SketchyGalore says:

          Ditto. I’ve been trying to play D2 to stave off the hunger for mid-May, but every identifying item and gold pickup and mis-clicked attack just makes me pine for the fluidity of my beta weekend. I’d say there’s no reason you shouldn’t be able to start with Diablo 3, but if you haven’t touched it yet, there’s still plenty of fun to be had with Diablo 2, what with it being one of the greatest games ever. I’m perpetually confused that I’m having trouble seeing that now, though.

    • f1x says:

      To be honest,
      it depends on what you are playing now, if you are playing games from that era then OK
      but if you are not, I think you will find the graphics and gameplay pretty outdated

      Regarding the storyline, you can always catch up reading a wiki or something

    • Skabooga says:

      Diablo 1 had atmosphere, dark and oppressive and chilling. Diablo 2 had a number of mechanical improvements but lost that je ne sais quoi of the original.

      • Khemm says:

        Great summary. Diablo 1 had superior atmosphere, music, imo more consistent visual style, brilliantly focused design, Diablo 2 polished the mechanics layer to a shine, but was a bit too long for its own good and for the most part, it was devoid of that gloomy feel D1 had.

        • Azradesh says:

          “imo more consistent visual style”

          Not hard when the whole game is underground in one dungeon.

          • Kestilla says:


            Despite that dungeon morphing many times into a wholly different dungeon until it made the final transformation into the very depths of hell.

            Except for that, I can see why you compared the game to the lasting novelty of the boring and utterly samey flatness of a drive through Kansas.

      • InternetBatman says:

        Absolutely. No Diablo II boss was as iconic as the Butcher. The loot was more addictive, the classes were better, but the game wasn’t dark and atmospheric.

        I will add that the original should be played after everyone else is asleep, with all the lights off.

        • Khemm says:

          Diablo 1 was actually scary… well, maybe not scary, but wonderfully creepy and unsettling.

        • Kestilla says:

          I liked D2’s classes better actually. More variety. The first game did make you feel more self-sufficient, with each class being able to learn basic magics, though, like in Torchlight.

          • InternetBatman says:

            I was imprecise in my original comment. I meant D2 has better classes.

    • Sorth_31 says:

      Play one and two. Ignore three.

  10. Sweedums says:

    I remember being on holiday for a week when Starcraft 2 came out….. that was a tough week.

    • RedViv says:

      I was pretend-beating up people wearing fifteen kilos of latex and various foams. That was a nice distraction from not being able to play SC2 during its release week.

  11. kud13 says:

    I’d be excited for this, if not for the always online thing.

    • f1x says:

      Because you don’t have internet connection? Ok I understand

      • PopeJamal says:

        No troll-d-locks, because I, unlike many people have chosen to “put my money where my mouth is”.

        I don’t approve of how they’ve developed this game with the RMT and the internet DRM. I’m choosing to NOT give my money away to things that go against my beliefs and I’m not being the least bit unreasonable by doing so.

        So the statement still stands: Too bad they are requiring an internet connection. Too bad for THEM, because I have Grimrock, Torchlight 2, Shadowrun Returns, Walking Dead, Wasteland 2 and any number of other games I can (and have) throw money towards instead of giving it to people who set bad examples and precedents.

        • Sorth_31 says:

          Personally I agree. While I DID buy Starcraft 2 despite the always on DRM and intend to buy its expansions Diablo has strayed far enough from its source and, for me, single player roots that the “always on” DRM is enough to make me pass. I may be a hypocrite, and in some cases even embrace such a label, but frankly I have some standards (bizzare though they may be). As such I will not buy a single player game that requires an internet connection. Whether they are different from others is another issue.

          Apologies if this came across as sanctimonious, it was just an attemt to get my point across.

          • Azradesh says:

            You are a stronger man then I, but Starcraft 2 does not have always online DRM.

        • f1x says:

          Of course I respect everybody’s choices and arguments

          But my point is: do you really think “it needs internet connection, I dont like it” its a valid argument to turn down a game?

          with more arguments then I can agree

          • Sorth_31 says:

            “But my point is: do you really think “it needs internet connection, I dont like it” its a valid argument to turn down a game?”


          • Brun says:

            The RMT is a troubling development because many of the mechanisms behind it are taken from the socially engineered world of Zynga games and the like. I don’t like that garbage creeping into my games.

            That said, in the beta at least, the RMAH is far from omnipresent, and it isn’t shoved relentlessly in your face. In that regard it plays very much like a real hardcore game. The internet connection is a dealbreaker for some but out of all of the publishers and developers out there who have considered an always-online system like this, Blizzard is the only one who has proven reliably over more than a decade that they can provide servers with extremely high reliability and uptime (both with WoW and Battle.net). Moreover, they seem to have a commitment to maintaining support for what other companies might call “legacy” games – I’m pretty sure I can fire up a multiplayer match of Warcraft 2 on Battle.net even today. As such, I’m not worried that 20 years from now I won’t be able to play a game of Diablo 3.

          • HothMonster says:

            I see the RMT as a way to stifle the black market and gold farmers. If you are going to have something like the RMAH you do really need an always on set up. But I understand why people are scared/fearful/hateful of both.

          • Brun says:

            You don’t have to force people to play online unless you’re trying to generate revenue with it.

          • HothMonster says:

            Kind of. They could have added single-player only characters that could never be taken online. But I think they were worried about 2 things

            1) dividing the player base. A lot of people will start off playing single player and down the line join friends or convince someone to buy it and I don’t think they wanted to limit people choosing multi or single like they did in D2. Plus just because people are online doesn’t mean they will now use the RMAH so it can’t purely be to make money off them.

            2) Giving people the full game code still increases chance of cheating the system in the online mode. I think there was a fear of people using the single player code to figure out how everything works and then inject items into their multi-player character.

            I don’t really believe that they can solely be motivated by greed, though I am sure someone is drooling over the transaction fees.. The RMA is an interesting solution to stop black market item selling but they really have to protect it. The whole thing certainly could blow up in their face otherwise.

          • Brun says:

            Dividing the playerbase was never a problem in previous games (of all franchises). This isn’t an MMO, nothing is lost by having an offline and online segment of players – except potential revenue for the RMAH.

          • HothMonster says:

            I still doubt that is the sole reason. DRM is certainly another, I think AH integrety is one, but you maybe right it maybe largely motivated by insuring that all players have access to the RMAH and are therefore potential buyers which will net them transaction fees.

            I didn’t really look in the beta what kind of fee are they charging on successful auctions?

          • Brun says:

            I haven’t looked (I have an actual beta invite, so I can continue playing until 5/5). They likely aren’t charging fees on the beta – they may not even have the RMAH component implemented or functional.

            They may not charge fees per transaction, they might charge a single fee when you convert the Blizzard Points (or whatever digital currency is representative of real money) back into dollars or euros.

          • InternetBatman says:

            For some games, yes. I was a WoW subscriber and still play LoL every now and again, but WoW and LoL are entirely different games in entirely different genres. This unnecessarily bolts MMOisms into an existing game that was wildly successful without it, and wasn’t designed with it in mind. I have to be an ethical consumer now if I don’t want this crap to spread to all games developed by large companies.

      • kud13 says:

        yes, because I don’t have a stable connection. My entire house (3 PCs and 2 laptops) runs off a single router. Said router is generally stable, but I can’t guarantee there won’t be hiccups in a the signal. And my gaming desktop, seems to be most prone to losing said signal, for whatever reason. And I don’t need Battle.net. to kick me out of my SINGLE-PLAYER game, because my wireless adapter decided to act up for a few minutes. That’s certainly not something I want to pay 60 bucks for.

        Just like I didn’t need Wings of Liberty telling me (once I finished the campaign in it 1.5 times), that since I haven’t touched the game in over 3 months, I can no longer log in offline, other than as
        “guest”. in a bloody game that I bought on launch day.

        • f1x says:

          Of course now that you’ve elaborated, I agree absolutely
          The game is definitely not suitable for you, which is a shame,
          that is one of the points where I cannot defend Diablo3, it definitely could’ve had a fully offline singleplayer option but I can see that if they did that then the online part would’ve suffer in terms of active players

          The other thing you mention about Starcraft 2, I didn’t know that and it sucks, but if you log online you get it “renewed” automatically?

          • kud13 says:

            yes, I can still log in online, no issues. But, apparently, I can’t set my profile to “allow offline play”, except through Blizzard site, logging in wiht my account. Except when i do that, the way to change account settings isn’t there.

            basically, this is how it went:
            buy game, install register. log in, turn off wi-fi, “your computer can’t connect to Battle.net, would you like to play offline (Warning: achievemnt and stuff don’t count)-yes. Play game for 2.5 months offline.
            September-back to school-no time to play. Early december-“hmm, I feel lik playing some SC2” launch. 2 hours of updates log in-use offline profile–nope, can’t do that anymore, either go online, or log in as guest.

        • wuwul says:

          How about using an Ethernet cable instead of wi-fi?

          Wireless = unreliable.

    • Syra says:

      Stick to your guns chaps. I’m sure blizzard will take notice and patch in offline just for you

      Or you could embrace the inevitable change which will be the norm in all games on a few short years…

      • kud13 says:

        except it shouldn’t be inevitable. it’s not done for the sake of the consumer (i,e, me), but rather for the sake of the developers + publishers (like all DRM).

        Why should I embrace and welcome change that makes my life more difficult?

      • Vorphalack says:

        The only thing more despicable than apathy is people who try and spread their own apathy to to others as a way of compensating for their own weakness.

        • InternetBatman says:

          Absolutely. If this is the new norm in the industry, then industry defenders can play those games, and I’ll stick to indies and smaller publishers. I already play them longer and enjoy them more than games from EA/Acti anyways.

        • Syra says:

          I lol’d. That self righteous sense of high entitlement is kind of sad. I embrace change, that’s not weakness that’s evolution. I want a world where changes to tech industries push through a better more highly connected world where high speed broadband connections are homogeneous, and if there’s one thing that gets people moving it’s feeling ‘inconvenienced’. Roll with it, don’t embrace inertia and go the way of the dinosaurs I say.

          Oh snap, people have opinions on the internet.

          • Vorphalack says:

            Not all change is good change, therefore you are stupid. Sorry to be so blunt but i’m just not gonna waste anymore time with you.

          • Eversor says:

            You know what’s inconvenient? Not being able to play a singleplayer game because my internet connection went out.

            I know, I know, I’m so old-fashioned, being bothered by small things like that!

          • FunkyBadger3 says:

            Accepting change and embracing evolution = doing what I’m told by Blizzard.

            You go get ’em, Che.

          • InternetBatman says:

            I think you’re confusing resistance to one implementation of technology as resistance to change, and then conflating change with evolution. I played LoL and WoW for a long time, games with far more restrictive models than this. The difference is that the technology suits the gameplay, instead of being bolted on for corporate reasons.

            Also, change does not imply evolution, even though evolution implies change. There are a ton of recombinations, mutations, and the like that make an entity worse, not better. In that case they should be selected against, just as people are doing now.

          • kud13 says:

            inconveniencing me is not a good way to get me to support creating better infrastructure.
            if you make your game always online (thus causing me an inconvenience), I am not going to buy it, be inconvenienced by the always online, and write to my MP demanding more spendings on stronger wireless coverage to ensure I can play the game I paid for.

            I`m much more likely to no buy the game in the first place.

            The scenario you propose only works when the consumer is ignorant, buys the game, and then complains about it.
            In other words, you are encouraging me to a mindless consumer. No thanks.

            just because “it makes business sense”, doesnt mean I have to like it, and it doesnt mean “the publisher is always right”. The mentality of “we have accept what the publishers are doing, because otherwise we won’t have nay games to play anymore”, is probably the worst thing to happen to the gaming industry. especially since every bloody single day we see more and more examples that it’s a total fallacy.

          • Syra says:

            Well that’s a retarded reply vorphalak.

            Anyway lads, not trying to convince you about anything – just pointing out you will make the difference of pissing in the ocean. If it wasn’t obvious that I was laying on some sarcasm before, I actually meant Blizz don’t give a toss what you do with your cash, there’s no shortage of buyers I assure you.

            By all means don’t play D3, I’d rather not meet the kind of narrow minded idiots who think people whose opinions differ from their own are ‘stupid’ in there :)

            On a more interesting point above, you are well informed but the vast majority of games consumers are not and they WILL accept what they are given and this WILL lead to the evolutionary shift I mentioned. Do please wait and see as the future drags along the dinosaurs kicking and screaming.

          • Eversor says:

            You still have good will towards the company, those arguments are common and not really anything new. Nay, youngster, it will be you that shall be eventually dragged into bitter jadedness and dislike, and you will be screaming at your reflection, then crying yourself to sleep, wondering where it all went so wrong. Alas, you will be unable to prevent the demise of your innocence, your bright-eyed wondering for the future, belief in a company you like.

            Laugh at the jaded old men while you can, youngster. Enjoy it for now. You will inevitably join them down the road, and we will understand and accept you. Because That Thing They Dared To Change will come. You will taste the bitter Last Drop. That is the truth you cannot avoid.

          • Burning Man says:

            Oh snap, people are dicks on the internet.

            Wait, people are always dicks on the internet. Carry on with your dicking about then.

      • Jimbo says:

        I don’t much care if they take notice or not, I’m just not buying what they’re selling. No great loss to me, it’s nothing I haven’t seen before.

      • Eversor says:

        Blizzard won’t give a fuck, no. They are too popular for giving a fuck. They know their games will sell no matter what they do, and they just keep on pushing the “no matter what” side, trying to get away with more and more things.

        Sorry, I rather stop playing triple A games than to endorse always on DRM policies. From what I saw in the beta, it’s not even a game I want to play.

  12. ResonanceCascade says:

    Don’t worry, Alec. I’m going to be in Hawaii with nary a laptop for a whole week after release. I guess I’ll just have to make do with the paradisaical beaches and tropical fish. Shame.

    • Alec Meer says:

      I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t be complaining if I was going to Hawaii rather than a budget break to Kefalonia.

      • mondomau says:

        I don’t believe you.

      • ResonanceCascade says:

        Hey, if I’d been the one picking, I’d have much rather gone to Greece. Not complaining though. I just think Greece is neat.

        I hear there’s some history there or something.

  13. Khemm says:

    What, no bitching about always-online DRM? Sorry, I forgot – RPS is where hypocrisy thrives. You get bashed to oblivion for the smallest mistake unless you’re Blizzard or Valve, then you can get away with the worst shit imaginable.

    Anyway, DRM aside, should I stay away from the game if I liked Diablo 1 the most? The art style of D3 screams “World of Warcraft” from the screenshots and the lack of manual assignment of points to attributes sounds like dumbing down things which were already basic and simple.

    • f1x says:

      Well, you must’ve been away for the last 20 Diablo3 or Torchlight 2 threads if you think people is blindly fanboying Valve and Blizzard

      There is a lot of points of view as it should be
      There is also a poor level of english, but thats mostly my fault

      • Skabooga says:

        What you lack in grammar you more than make up for in reason.

      • Khemm says:

        Lies, I say. One swallow does not a summer make. If it was any other company, especially Ubisoft, the comments section would be FLOODED with sentences along the lines of “arrgh DRM, what idiots, no sale”.

    • Alec Meer says:

      Not to mention that, three posts earlier today, I’ve got half the world telling me off for being too mean to Blizzard. But trying to reason with Captain Furious Exaggerated Inaccurate Rage Paranoiac Misery Man here is futile, I’m sure.

      • Calculon says:

        I dont quite understand how people can be so passionate about a game developer or publisher quite frankly.

        There are far far more important things to be concerned about like paying for ones mortgage, rather than worrying about whether Blizzard got a fair shake in an article…

        Who gives a f*ck. Dont like it? Dont read it. But then again, I suppose there are so few internet sites to choose from these days….

        • FunkyBadger3 says:

          Blizzard in general, and D3 in particular, get a much easier ride than, say, any Ubisoft atrocities.

          Squealing about bias in the comments threads is more than a little churlish, mind.

        • Sarkhan Lol says:

          The internet. That’s basically it. People could be disappointed or even feel betrayed by a company, but it’s always the internet-posting masses preemptively telling them that they’re stupid for liking something/not liking something that invariably fan the flames

    • Brun says:

      Actually Blizzard gets bashed quite a bit on RPS.

    • TNG says:

      I played Diablo 1 a lot and really enjoyed the time I spent in it. When 2 came out, I bought it on release and got bored after 1 week, something just didn’t click (see what I did there?) and ended up selling it. Played 3 during the open beta and have to say that I really liked it (when I finally managed to connect Sunday evening… then it was 5am and I had to get ready to go to work).
      As you mentioned, they streamlined the levelling up but I didn’t miss it as I would in a “real” RPG and I shared your concerns for the art style but it remains true to the original Diablo look. It felt like playing a ‘true’ Diablo game, with all it’s dark vibes and left clicking galore (with some right mouse button pressing to mix things up).

      I’m still not buying it due to my crappy internet connection (never had a problem with steam offline mode and have to use it quite often, unlike others) and the €60 tag (similar games abound on the marketplace at much lower prices).
      But to recap: Played 1, really liked. Played 2, didn’t like. Played 3, liked again.

    • mondomau says:

      Oh hai Khemm.

    • Harvey says:

      Khemm, don’t worry, there’s a petition to change the art direction in Diablo 3, you and all your friends from 2008 can sign it. But where were you in September of 2011 when we discussed Diablo 3s DRM at length? Did you somehow miss that?

      Oh, wait, you didn’t
      There you are.

      link to rockpapershotgun.com

      Khemm says:

      I have high hopes for Grim Dawn too.
      I’ll probably get Diablo 3 anyway, I love the series and hope Blizz won’t fook it up like they did Starcraft 2 – worst single player campaign they’ve ever made, Metzen can’t write good stories for sh!t anymore.

      Where hypocrisy thrives, indeed.

    • Harvey says:

      Did you somehow miss the 12 page thread discussing Diablo’s DRM? LMGTFY:

      <a href="link to rockpapershotgun.com; Oh, look, there you are, page 7!

      Khemm says:

      I have high hopes for Grim Dawn too.
      I’ll probably get Diablo 3 anyway, I love the series and hope Blizz won’t fook it up like they did Starcraft 2 – worst single player campaign they’ve ever made, Metzen can’t write good stories for sh!t anymore.

      Where hypocrisy thrives, indeed.

    • Azradesh says:

      Read this post if you are worried about dumbing down Khemm.

      link to us.battle.net

      As for the art style, it’s nothing like WoW, apart from being 3D now rather than sprites. Maybe wait till the game is out and play the starter version so you can get a feel for the game.

    • Azradesh says:

      Read this if you’re worried about dumbing down Khemm.

      link to us.battle.net

      It may not change what you think, but it should answer all your questions.

    • FunkyBadger3 says:

      The Beta was silky smooth, but the gameplay is less interesting than D2 – which in itself was pretty different to D1, if I can remember that far back…

  14. squareking says:

    The trailer excited me more than the open beta weekend did.

  15. Thecreeperskg says:

    Welcome to Hell! On a side note, Tristram is in better shape than Greece nowadays…
    But don’t sweat it, we STIL have PC’s, internet, net cafes here, so you can join in on the fun.
    For more information about DIII and my opinion for it, check out my blog

    link to geek-enough.com

    (oh yes, I just plugged this on RPS :D, one of my “to-do-things-before-dying” fulfilled)

  16. sneetch says:

    Evil is back? Where was it? Somewhere nice? I bet it was somewhere nice. Evil is just coming back, Alec is going away, everyone’s on holidays except me. :(

    • Soon says:

      Evil is back! In his craaaziest adventure yet! That’s right! It’s EVIL, as you’ve neeever seen him before! And he’s about to find out that being Evil… Is. Harder. Than. It. Looks.

      • Burning Man says:

        I love how well your name delivered the punchline to your post.

  17. Prokroustis says:

    Believe it or not the game will be available even after its first week post release..

  18. MythArcana says:

    I’d much rather go to Greece as I won’t be buying this version in the classic series.

  19. Hug_dealer says:

    That might be the most unimpressive trailer ever released by Blizzard.


    Oh my god, not EVIL. whatever shall i do.

    Their attempts at making the plot of the game seem important also does not come across well. We all know Blizzard cant do good dialogue, why not focus on what the people really want. Just put pictures of loot.

    I’ve personally played all the diablos and expansions, but i don’t remember a single thing about the plot, which there was very little of to begin with. I do remember loot though.

    • kud13 says:

      yes, except this time, they got one of the writers from Vampire: The Masquerade: Bloodlines in charge of the lore + plot + quests and such.

      this was one of the things that excited me about D3 in the first place. It’s also the only reason I’m still considering purchasing this towards the end of the summer, when I go back to uni with its 24/7 DSL connection.

      • Hug_dealer says:

        wow 1 person. I’ll care when it was the entire team.

        Lets not forget that bioware……………. was once BIOWARE!!!!

        Nuttin in the beta impressed me enough to buy it. they need to atleast get you hooked.

      • FunkyBadger3 says:

        Is he the one that wrote the hilarious black man witchdoctor?

        • Azradesh says:

          Oh right, he’s black and tribal and therefor racist, right? Please.

          • FunkyBadger3 says:

            You didn’t find him a little uncomfortable? That’s fine, I did…

          • Azradesh says:

            Not in the slightest. Maybe growing up in a South Africa surrounded by all sorts of tribal cultures, weird, wonderful and sick, managed to unburden my of this silly white guilt.

            I’ve seen real racism, and it’s not a black man with a mask and an accent. Basing the witch doctor on tribal african culture and customs is no more racist then basing the monk on russian and shaolin culture and customs.

            Save you concern for something that needs it.

          • RakeShark says:

            I have to agree with Az, but I can understand you’re not comfortable with the image of the witchdoctor. Fo the most part, the image of a black witchdoctor hasn’t been romanticized as it has been mystified and stereotyped well before this incarnation. It’s actually a much more inclusive figure, as not only is the witchdoctor a figure of African history and mythology, but also in the Caribbean and in Creole America (Louisiana/Mississippi/East Texas). I’d also mention the solid rendition of a black witchdoctor in Disney’s The Princess and the Frog.

            The image of a black witchdoctor is not in of itself a racist stereotype. It all comes down to execution and characterization.

    • Azradesh says:

      Diablo 2’s story was very well told, did you just skip the cutscenes?

    • caddyB says:

      Oh. I hated the Diablo3 beta but I’ll still get it for the story. Each his own, I guess.

  20. smeaa mario says:

    I understand the frustration Alec. Exactly the same thing (except that the location is not Greece) will happen to me too.

  21. rocketman71 says:

    I could be out a year and Diablo 3 would still be the last thing on my mind.

    If I uploaded a sound, it would be more like “meh”.

    Edit: The trailer is titled “evil is back”. Is Kotick the final monster?.

    • MythArcana says:

      Yes. Kotlick the Conjurer and his Underpants Gnomes make an appearance in Act II. For $60 you will get front row seats for the event.

  22. Meldreth says:

    Azrael ? Gargamel’s cat ?

  23. Fiwer says:

    That was a really bad trailer, the kind that makes me embarrassed that people know I play PC games.

  24. cassus says:

    Make or break time for Blizz. No doubt the Blizztards will be OK with the always online, maybe others as well, the problem lies more in the gameplay. For blizzards sake I hope crapping out sequels with very little new to offer pays off, cause their ideas for new games seem to either get quashed by Activision, or they’re just a dried up well at this point. Sent WoW down the crapper, made a 3d version of starcraft, and now this Diablo thing that seems a bit simplistic by todays standards. I would be happy to buy it if it’s actually any good, but after blowing 60 bucks on SC2 then playing it for 3 hours and going “eeh..” I’m going to be very cautious about this one.

    • Psychopomp says:

      “For blizzards sake I hope crapping out sequels with very little new to offer pays off”

      That’s right folks, the first hack’n’slash since Diablo 2 that isn’t just trying to emulate Diablo 2, instead opting to completely ditch and rework fundamentally broken genre norms is a “crapped out sequel with little new to offer.”

      • Hug_dealer says:

        apparently you havent played dungeon siege 3, which is hack and slash, and definately has little to nothing in common with diablo games, but diablo 3 has alot similar to DS3 oddly enough.

        Sorry pal.

  25. Hug_dealer says:

    A good reason to not buy this game is because they require you to unlock difficulty levels.

    I’m sorry, I simply refuse to play through a game on normal difficulty just so i can get to a difficulty level that suits me and is a challenge.

    It is just absolutely terrible game design. Difficulty levels are there to meet the skills of various players. You dont force people to play at levels below their skill, because its boring.

    • HothMonster says:

      My impression was that easy, normal and hard would all be unlocked from the get go. The even harder difficulties require a playthrough because the monsters are scaled to fight a toon that has played through the campaign once and even the lowliest enemy would one shot an actual lvl 1 character. I maybe wrong though.

      • Hug_dealer says:

        can you find a link to that?

        The only thing i have found regarding difficulty levels it that its the usually diablo, normal, nightmare, hell, inferno. And they have to be unlocked. I dont want to play through 3 times to have it get tough.

        Ill be quite frank when I say that normal difficulties are not tough enough for me. Now im not saying this to sound elite or awesome. Yes im good at games, big deal. What i want is for every encounter to potentially be a deadly encounter. I would say that dark mode for the witcher 2 is a decent difficulty level for me, not frustrating, but i get punished for my mistakes and not thinking about the combat.

        If i ever got to design a game. It would be designed around every time you encounter combat, its gonna be a life and death fight.

        I remember when mmos did not artificially gimp your character. Nothing makes me quit an mmo faster than when you can trash a mob 5 levels higher than you, but that 6 level higher mob absolutely trashes you because of generic gameplay mechanics beyond your control.

        • HothMonster says:

          I understand your complaint. I also set games to hard by default. Let me see if I can find the info that lead me to that idea, don’t worry op will deliver :b. It would be lame if level 1characters could only access normal mode. I guess you could handicap yourself by playing with 3 morons since the enemies scale.

          edit: No i am wrong. According to this which is apperently slightly dated since they say inferno will not be a flat difficulity and will ramp up in the last two chapters according to this

    • pkt-zer0 says:

      It’s a pretty dumb thing, but since levels are also factored in, it is somewhat unavoidable. In the beta, I’ve found that speedrunning the game was a good enough solution to this: with no gear and low levels and dozens of monsters running after you, things can get challenging even in the early dungeons.

    • Neut says:

      Have you played Diablo 2 before? I haven’t played Diablo 3 yet but if it’s anything like D2’s system, “difficulty level” is a misleading term – it’s not an indicator of player skill and more an indicator of the player’s progression in character levels. Each difficulty level is more like a revamped version of the world for higher level characters. So you can’t really choose difficulty levels as your character won’t have the necessary gear and level at the start to tackle that level.

      It would be like creating a level 1 character and wondering why you can’t just jump straight to the final level 85 boss fight or something. It’s a fair enough question (Guild Wars lets you create max level pvp characters from the start). However, the whole game is designed around the progression of levelling up and finding better loot, and the other difficulties levels are just the next step in that linear progression.

      • Hug_dealer says:

        I have played them, and thats the problem. They are to easy at all difficulties.

        What i am talking about is making the 90% of the hack and slash you do not trivial.

        Torchlight did it, Dungeon siege did it. Why cant diablo?

        What diablo calls difficulty levels is actually just starting the game over with your original character and the world leveled up to them. The difficulty basically stays the same. Easy is win is still easy to win regardless of whether its labeled nightmare or infernal.

        Now i could start torchlight at lvl 1, and choose easy,medium,hard. And then the world was ramped up accordingly and on hard and very hard, small skirmishes would quite often be fatal.

        I dont want simply difficult boss battles………………I want a difficult game. Something that diablo 1 and 2 didnt deliver much of. Sure they had a few moments but 90% of the game was spent fighting things that have no chance of beating me.

        Do you comprehend now? I want real difficulty levels. Not the fake diablo ones, and i dont want to be forced to unlock them.

        There is no reason i shouldnt be able to select a higher difficulty level for lvl 1 characters than normal. Something that ramps up the damage and health of enemies that i would normally face, just like real difficulty levels in other games do. Such as oh every one out there.

        I am simply tired of easy games. I want nothing to do with them now. I want a challenge. I want to say after i beat the game. Man i got my ass handed to me over and over and over, but i made it. Nothing says i’m playing a game like fighting the ultimate evil of the world, and it being easy.

        I absolutely loved the fact that in the witcher 2, the first time you meet letho, he is an absolute monster and requires tactics to beat. Its like your eyes suddenly are opened to the fact that witchers are absolute badass mofos that dont mess with. Rather than simply being another push over like most other creatures and people in the game. it lends credibility to the story and world that i dont walk up to diablo and smite him like was simply a fat kid who just got done on the treadmill.

        • Azradesh says:

          Both Torchlight and Dungeon Siege are mind numbingly easy on all levels, what the hell are you even talking about?

          • Hug_dealer says:

            not the point.

            The point is they offer it. Which is also why torchlight had mods that further increased the difficulty levels even further.

            THEY OFFER IT. Diablo doesnt, to even start getting a remote challenge out of diablo, i had to dumb dozens of hours into it. That isnt fun.

            Seriously, how do you not know what a difficulty level is. They have been offered in games since, well gaming started.

          • HothMonster says:

            Hugger you make a comment about every fight being life or death if you designed a game, have you checked out the dark/demon souls games yet? If not I recommend it.

          • Hug_dealer says:

            yep, played em, enjoyed them. Had things i didnt like about them, but those had nothing to do with difficulty, which i enjoyed. Just like ninja gaiden back in the day.

          • Azradesh says:

            Why don’t you just play on hardcore mode then? Surely that’ll give you the feeling you crave. And Blizzards own testers haven’t even managed to finish the game on inferno.

            Edit: Oh and there’s a few changes that will make hardcore much harder in D3.
            1. You can’t potion spam.
            2. You can’t insta teleport away.

        • Psychopomp says:

          “The difficulty basically stays the same.”

          Spoken like someone who never actually tried them. Monsters get more resists, abilities, and straight up are more likely to kill you. By Hell you’re facing things that will straight up instagib you if you don’t have a perfect build.

          • Hug_dealer says:

            yeah……………..no they didnt………..

            Once again, another one who doesnt get it, but is on the right track. Properly geared, the challenge wasnt really there, it definately had its tougher moments, but the fact is that regardless of normal/nightmare/hell. 90% of the game is just slaying unimportant mobs that really dont stand a chance against you. Yes all the monsters got tougher, but guess what, so did your character.

            I shouldnt have to play through the game repeatedly in order to the the challenge you just described, i should be able to get it out of the gate, by selecting it as an option.

        • Neut says:

          Oh right I gotcha, you mean to say you’re too badass and hardcore for this game and you wish all games knew how badass and hardcore you are, sorry I didn’t “comprehend” before. Cool story :)

          • Hug_dealer says:

            nah. I just dont like to play games that are easy, i play for entertainment, and part of that entertainment for myself and many others is to play something difficult.

            I dont pride myself on playing video games. Its my hobby that i enjoy. I pride myself on other things that actually important.

    • Azradesh says:

      Have you even played a Diablo game? You can’t skip difficulties because they are balanced for different levels. Diablo 3 works the in the same way as the other games in this regard. Finish the game one normal then take *the same character*, with everything you’ve unlocked, to the next difficulty level until you hit “Inferno” in which everything is always a higher level then you because you’ve already hit the level cap.

      And if that isn’t hard enough for you, start a hardcore character, one death and that’s it. This isn’t new.

  26. Bursar says:

    You need to start praying to your Deity of choice for another Volcano to ground all European traffic. Then you get a refund and D3 and no stress from any significant others who may otherwise frown upon you.

  27. Harvey says:

    aagh RPS keeps shotgunning my paper and rock comments!

  28. ShrikeMalakim says:

    Aah, Diablo 3. The game that finally proves people will, in fact, pay to be used as product rather than to become customers.

    • HothMonster says:

      Ill be a product? I hope they sell me to a hot girl. But if not I hope it is at least not an old lady with a lot of cats.

  29. wuwul says:

    Just cancel the vacation?

  30. ultimafrost says:

    Don’t worry I m sure you will find numerous cafeterias with free wifi here (if your motel does not provide one). Although with such a damn fine weather i think you should invest your time
    @ the beach… really…

  31. JCCIII says:

    Diablo III: Blizzard Entertainment’s requiring customers to have an Internet connection is an obscene effort to compel obedience not liberation, which is ironic because games are to be fun.

    Blizzard Entertainment, run by people like CEO Michael Morhaime, is monitoring users’ activity with profits in mind, rather than the rights of its paying customers owning his or her copy. A single player campaign, such as is in Diablo III, should not require forced Internet.

    Knowing Mr. Morhaime cannot reasonably blame it on DRM, he wants you to sympathize with his reaction: “I’m actually kind of surprised in terms of there even being a question in today’s age” (idiocy); later he confesses he does not care about the people who will be unable or unwilling to play the game do to its online requirements.

    Blizzard and company want to know everything they can about who, when, how, how long, where, how frequently, and the people behind the company do not need your name to get a good idea from an IP address. Furthermore, there will be multiple trackers, pinging and pressing in on anyone’s IP while connected to Blizzard’s servers, monitoring and logging personal activity, stealing your bandwidth, fun…, right?

    This is a violation of privacy, thievery, and it is by no means going to be the norm, unless, of course, you, I, and our friendly journalists accept Blizzard’s behavior. However, Blizzard Entertainment, with its Mr. Morhaime, would have you believe there is no choice.

    Joseph C. Carbone III; 15 May 2012

    P.S. ★”˜¨¯¯¨˜”ª¤(¯`*•.¸(¯`*•.. The Hon. Dr. Ron Paul for 2012 ..•*´¯)¸.•*´¯)¤ª”˜¨¯¯¨˜”★

  32. JCCIII says:

    Diablo III, under Blizzard Entertainment’s requiring customers to have an Internet connection, is a threat to society.

    Some say they are happy with Blizzard, but how can anyone be happy about an invasion of privacy? Hackers, dupers, and exploiters are also obviously in the real world. Therefore, should we monitor everyone every day to stop hackers, dupers, and exploiters in our non-virtual world?

    Should we forget the Constitution and except Blizzard’s new model of society?

    If demonstrating there is no way to stop cheating were possible, the company could offer two modes, one for those who do not mind living in a totalitarian country and take down the Star-Spangled Banner if one is flying in the yard, and another for those who are in love with principles essential to America and its freedom.

    For play, two network worlds of implementation would be necessary, one for those who would play online and be monitored even while playing single player and another for those who would not participate in off-line monitoring willing to cope with those hackers, dupers, and exploiters as a price worth paying for freedom.

    Setup one’s character for online, which requires an always on connection, even while in single-player mode, and set up one’s character for off-line, which allows him or her to participate online when desired.

    There are several other possible options that protect privacy and respect customers’ rights to use what he or she purchased.

    How can a thinking person find comfort knowing that a company has chosen a lazy, money-hoarding, and reckless way to say its focuses is your benefit?

    We are living in a country stealing what is at stake when people do not understand the principles of America. Do you understand what you are willing to lose?

    Sincerely, Joseph C. Carbone III; 21 May 2012