Gosh: Diablo III Is The Fastest-Selling PC Game Ever

Blizzard send word that Diablo III sold 3.5 million copies in the first 24 hours on sale. They also point out: “That number does not include the more than 1.2 million players who received Diablo III as part of signing up for the World of Warcraft Annual Pass promotion.” The upshot of that was 4.7 million people had the game on day one, and after a week that as grown to 6.3 million. That is a lot of copies of a videogame.

And this just in: I am the slowest-levelling barbarian ever. Still only level 16! Rubbish. I have got some excellent scythe-hammer things though, so all is well.


  1. MrMud says:

    This is the sound of a million rock paper shotgun commenters crying that D3 has indeed not failed commercially.

    • Hug_dealer says:

      oddly enough just because someone didn’t buy the game or has some criticisms against it, doesn’t actually mean they want the game to fail. weird I know.

      • MrMud says:

        No I know. Its just that the vile hatred that has been spewn out by a few people into the comment threads these last few days directed at anyone and everyone who bought the game have been quite disturbing.

        • DickSocrates says:

          Vile hatred? I’ve seen anger against a company crippling its single player game. I’ve seen legitimate concerns over Blizzard’s and Activision’s business practices. You were distrubed by criticism of a mega-corporation using its muscle to taking gaming in a very bad direction?

          Yeah, I wish the game had failed, because from now on expect alwyas on DRM in every major title. Diablo III may be a brilliant game, most reviewers seem to think so, but the business mechanics it represents are something to be worried about. But what do you care, you got your nice click, click, click game which makes you feel all happy.

          • piratmonkey says:

            Well, calling people who enjoy D3 “gambling addicts”, having “cognitive dissonance”, the “enemy of PC gaming”….those are not legitimate complaints and they’ve been prevalent in every single comments thread about D3.

          • killias2 says:

            “Vile hatred?” – Oh good, you’re the type who can criticize the company without criticizing the fans. That’s good because—

            “But what do you care, you got your nice click, click, click game which makes you feel all happy.”

            Oh.. never mind. You’re a puffed up, overly self-important asshole who looks down on people for playing THIS kind of game rather than THAT kind of game. God forbid somebody spends their GAMING TIME with something that makes them happy. That surely isn’t the POINT of all of this… right?

          • Gnarf says:

            “Vile hatred? I’ve seen anger against a company crippling its single player game. I’ve seen legitimate concerns over Blizzard’s and Activision’s business practices.”

            I’ve seen some pretty retarded stuff as well. Things like “I hope that everyone who gave money to Blizzard gets defrauded ten times that when the RMAH launches.”

          • ukpanik says:

            “you got your nice click, click, click game which makes you feel all happy.”

            We are PC gamers…clicking is what we do on all games, dummy.

          • Brise Bonbons says:

            “Oh.. never mind. You’re a puffed up, overly self-important asshole who looks down on people for playing THIS kind of game rather than THAT kind of game. God forbid somebody spends their GAMING TIME with something that makes them happy. That surely isn’t the POINT of all of this… right?”

            “We are PC gamers…clicking is what we do on all games, dummy.”

            It is difficult to deny that at its core, Diablo is engaging mostly the impulsive, feedback-obsessed aspects of our personalities. It does little to engage us creatively or emotionally, and it presents a familiar narrative built on thoughtless pop-culture fantasy tropes and unthinking acquisition of property. Sorry, it’s just dumb.

            And that’s fine; everyone has an irrational fondness for some dumb, one dimensional product, be it crappy pizza or bad pop music or shitty fantasy novels.

            I don’t agree with the way DickSocrates phrased his initial comment, but I think the quoted sentiments above, while less offensive in tone, are much more troubling in their attempts to imply a single purpose for all gaming, with no possibility that something more meaningful can be aspired to – games that can challenge us in a meaningful way – to think, feel, and learn.

          • Wreckdum says:

            LOL where is your tin foil hat? “From now on expect always on DRM in every title.”

            Just because Blizzard tried it out doesn’t mean other companies are even interested in doing it. Maybe after trying it and the major failings in week one Blizzard isn’t even interested anymore. You don’t know anything. You’re speculating. Which is why a lot of people get frustrated reading comment sections plagued by rabid speculators.


            Yeah we get it. We used to live in simpler times. Gaming used to be niche. Now it’s main stream. Get over it.

            I agree there are a lot of things wrong with the gaming industry. But when you start championing these causes of fixing the gaming industry it makes you look like a jerk off. You will get up in arms and provoked to anger about a video game… What have you stood up for lately that actually mattered? If some people applied half of the conviction they do to fighting about the video game industry to say maybe standing up for human rights and whatnot all over the world… Oh yeah. Screw all that. Just give me my games so I can shut out the real world. Duh.

          • Booch says:

            @Wreckdum while I agree that his statement of “always on in every game” was hyperbolic, you have to acknowledge the massive influence Blizzard (or any massively successful game) has on the industry. Just look at the MMO market, WoW started the gold rush to make MMO’s and the majority of them copied the mechanics right out of WoW’s playbook. All of that because WoW was (ahem) massively successful.

            When you see stuff like ‘fastest selling PC game ever’ you can bet that other companies will attempt to cash-in on the trend.

            Will Always On DRM be in every game from now on? Of course not. Will it become more commonplace? Yeah.

          • Brun says:

            Don’t be so sure. Many companies met with financial ruin when they tried to cash in on the last Blizzard-set trend (WoW-style MMOs).

          • Sardaukar says:

            Planning a character build that is both good on paper, and good in a fast-paced real time fight rather than one in which you have absolute and unfettered control between turns: Not dumb, I hope.

            Tackling a latter-difficulty elite monster group, analyzing what it can do, what you can do to it, and how to best murder it before it murders you, all while it’s probably capable of killing you in seconds: Also not dumb, I hope, though certainly also the SMASH EVERYTHING part of us.

          • RegisteredUser says:


            That retarded comment was from me and I’ll gladly stand by it. There has got to be SOME negative experience created for financial support of this kind of DRM tie-in.
            Obviously just expecting that people can think one step ahead or see the bigger picture around this issue is being bound for disappointment.

            People rail against the ones who bought the game are not angry about their enjoyment of the game itself, nor against the game, nor against those who programmed the _Game_ itself.

            The anger is all about the fact that instead of just selling the game and making it available to everyone, they locked it down with DRM justified by “plausible” excuses and created all kinds of misery with it.
            There are issues ranging from being dictated how and when to play your game(server downtime, being allowed to cheat in a singleplayer game, creating mods, maps, local hacks to your own benefit/enjoyment etc) to all other kinds of content control.

            Now, nobody is saying that we all feel “entitled” to something like that, but the ones who are angry ar the ones who feel that a more open, free and “together” (gamers and devs being on the SAME side – see kickstarter for a good example of one side enabling the other and often getting an open and always DRM free game in return – as opposed to an exploiter-exploitee relationship) gaming business world is preferable to severely getting anally ravaged by the Kotick Krew and dictated of how things are going to work from here on out.

            There are very justifyable and rightful complaints(LAN play/spawn installs, the freedom to play your game when and how YOU want to etc) standing opposed to a horde of “I don’t care, I just want my gaming addiction fed NAO” buyers, and the angry-about-it side is the one trying to tell the other that they aren’t actually against the game, but about how it is sold/marketed/delivered and would actually like to own/play/have an option on the game themselves, but not until this extortion situation is resolved, first.

            So, sure. People feel strongly about it, have vitriol and hyperbole.
            Quite frankly, I much prefer that to the meh-ish dumb “abuse me if you like, just feed me my scraps afterwards” of the buy-it-regardless sheep masses.

            One may find that its always been the passionate few against the obedient masses that brought about major change, and rarely did it not go hand in hand with a touch of radicalism and overly strong conviction. That’s just the characteristic of people who actually want to CHANGE something they perceive as WRONG. As opposed to those, again, who will just take it since “you can’t change anything ever anyhow”.
            Which is clearly proven by history, where we totally never had any radical changes done ever either.

          • mnnzcxivn says:

            As I recall, Dragon Age 2 had a fairly strong opening week as well, because it traded on the name of its predecessor.

            The article above says it has since that day grown to 6.3m.

        • Danarchist says:

          I understand the rage myself. I mean, it wont stop me from buying a game I really love, but I understand it. The problem lies in getting emotionally invested in your stance to the point you are actually angry at others that don’t fall in step with you. It is immature, but very human.
          That being said, I am glad some people are raging against the always on DRM crap. I understand the corporate interest in fighting piracy, but I think there must be better ways to do it than annoying legitimate customers. I work for a security software company, and if our software could be easily pirated I would be stuck back in a server room somewhere consoling sales people that they can’t die from computer viruses.
          Anyways keep up the good fight! I’ll be over here clicking away, one fist in the air.

          • Thirdstar says:

            It may be human but everything I’ve witnessed on RPS over the years had led me believe that the average RPS commentor was above all that. It was jarring to see that this isn’t true.

          • Lycan says:

            That’s true, sadly, but I’m hoping it’s just that a Diablo game brings lots and lots of dormant gamers back into the fray and expands the overall pool of commenters. Betcha the people who signed up to RPS to comment on these threads has spiked in the past 10 days…

            Or well, one can hope :(

            I miss the pun threads and mild jokes about drinking tea and writing strongly worded letters to Twinings *sob*

          • jrodman says:

            Regarding dormant gamers. Many people at work who haven’t bought a game in a few years are talking about Diablo 3, and several have asked my opinion since they know I’m following the gamings and have tried the betas etc.

            I give them a rough outline of what people have thought was well done and less well done about the actual game, and my personal experiences (mostly I say I’m probably burned out on the genre.) And I also tell them about the online-only no single player offline at all aspect. They look at me like I’m talking in greek for a while. And then they say “well I’m not buying that.”

          • RegisteredUser says:

            You can’t be against DRM and then turn around and finance it.
            That’s why people need others to agree with them, because profit is the only thing (Kotick has publically stated to) corporations have come to care about (repeatedly).

            Its not about needing to feel validated; its a raw necessity to elicit _actual change_ for this.
            Its mindboggling that nobody truly seems to understand this core dilemma.

            You can’t have your cake and eat it, too(aka your one hand supporting DRM, other hand fist-in-the-air doesn’t work – at all).

        • Enikuo says:

          I’ve seen quite a few new faces making snotty comments in response to familiar RPS commenters on these threads too, so I think there’s plenty of hyperbolic blame to go around. The first comment on this article is you crowing about RPS commenters crying, and you’re calling others out for being hateful? Really?

        • jrodman says:

          And your response was going to help .. how exactly?

          • mncbxhio says:

            Hi guys got my cell phone booster in wolvesfleet.com. Absolutely love it.
            For everyone wanna get a cell phone booster but do’nt wanna pay retail price. Here you go.

            Take up this special offer of $ 298 (save $ 100) in the next 30 days and we’ll also throw in the wolvesfleet.com for FREE (value $ 100).

            Here we go: link to fishurl.ru

      • Bhazor says:

        Speak for yourself.

      • pilouuuu says:

        I want it to fail just because of the single-player always on-line crap! I don’t want other developers think that PC gamers tolerate this kind of DRM. On the other hand I’m glad a PC only game is successful…

        • Joshua Northey says:

          News flash: They do tolerate it.

          RPS readers /= a representative slice of the market.

        • akeso says:

          Diablo 3 isn’t a single player game. This isn’t assassins creed.

          If you can take the items you found playing them alone, sell them on the AH, which can then be resold and resold: it isn’t single player.

          • Aninhumer says:

            That assumes one actually wants to do that. I’m sure plenty of people would much rather turn off that feature in return for a DRM free game, but that isn’t an option.

          • Matt_W says:

            “Diablo 3 isn’t a single player game.”

            I keep seeing this and it just ain’t true. It is possible to play the game through from start to finish, and through all difficulty levels, without interacting with a single other player, and this was a central design philosophy, not an accident. When you are given quests by NPCs, they are never given to your party (even if you’re in one), but always to the individual player. Classes are not balanced to require partying (i.e. there aren’t tank/healer/dps roles), but rather to provide different ways to play solo. And out of a skill roster of 30 or so skills per class, only 1 or 2 provide any benefit to a party.

          • wodin says:

            Can people stop spouting that crap that D3 isn’t single player game and it’s not Ass creed or whatever..it’s the shittest argument I’ve come across. The game was advertised as having single player, the game has single player, so the game is single player or multiplayer, they just put little to no effort into the SP experience nor did they bother catering for them with offline play, but it is a single player and multiplayer game.

          • Werthead says:

            Did you really type that comment with a straight face?

          • Deltadisco says:

            I think it’s comments like these that are responsible for most of the “Vile Hatred”. Most of the time people are voicing legitimate gripes or disappointment and then some member of the Blizzard Defense Force swoops in with “You’re wrong because it’s NOT single player” or “Durr.. why aren’t you complaining about Guild Wars?”.

            Yes, because of many (mostly not directly-related-to-the-actual-gameplay) design decisions Diablo 3 is essentially multi-player only. If you were paying attention you might have noticed that that little tidbit is the root of 99% of the complaints.

            Why can’t people understand that some other people might think it was a terrible idea?

          • psyk says:

            pot calling the kettle black

          • iainl says:

            I keep seeing this. That Blizzard are forcing users to be always online, and spending a fortune on the servers necessary for that, to protect profits from the Real Money Auction House.

            But I also keep seeing people who haven’t used that Auction House complain about how disappointingly easy the game is. Who do they then see spending cash money to make the game yet more simple?

      • Jerakal says:

        Implying that there aren’t several hundred buttmad blizzard haters on here right now.

    • Vinraith says:

      Yup. With D3’s success dies any hope that mainstream PC games might be saved from the (now inevitable) always-online DRM blight. Thank goodness for indies, anyway.

      • Casimir Effect says:

        And thank goodness for legions of unplayed old games and games which beg to be replayed.

      • kororas says:

        I can understand your worry to some extent but the way blizzard has done this is not an easy thing to achieve. Even they appear to have been caught out (problems/hacking). Aside from the big guns (Blizzard, EA) in pc gaming I doubt this kind of thing is accessible to other developers.

        One thing i had considered the other day interestingly enough is Blizzard are running this like an MMO but they arn’t taking a subscription fee. There are banks of servers somewhere all clocking up money in bandwidth and cpu etc in effect just to run some elements of a single player game. When this could be happening client side at a much reduced cost (servers for authentication, browsing etc as is currently the norm now).
        I wonder how long Blizzard will want to keep this up until they decide enough is enough and pull the plug?

        Don’t get me wrong I like the game, including its always online stuff (when it works) but I do wish they had provided another option for offline peoples. I made an exception for Diablo 3 (because its Diablo) but Blizzard (or any other company) wont be getting me to buy something like this again unless they introduce more than one option. I’m sure many other people feel the same way, looking at the sales figures.

        • JamesPatton says:

          I pretty much agree with you – I too would be perfectly happy with the game if it had a singleplayer offline mode. Clearly Blizzard wanted to big up the auction house so much that they were willing to screw over players to encourage them to spend money.

          You say that not many developers have the tech to do this – well, that’s true. But think about this. Ubisoft has only recently started seeing sense and scaling back its always-on DRM efforts. With D3 being the fastest selling game of all time, I can easily see Ubisoft thinking “Oh, we were worrying about nothing. Let’s fire up the servers!” And bear in mind that Blizzard is owned by Activision, who will surely try to implement similar always-online measures in their future titles because it’s been such a massive success here (or has at least made no real difference to sales). So that’s two of the largest videogame companies in the world, who have already demonstrated the inclination and ability to implement exactly this kind of always-online stuff, and who are now doubtless looking at the success of D3 and thinking “Oh, so *this* is how we beat piracy. Great, we have a solution now!”

          I agree with you for the most part but I have a really bad feeling about what this will lead to for the rest of the industry.

          • elfbarf says:

            Blizzard isn’t owned by Activision, they’re both owned by Vivendi. Since the merger they’ve been managed by the same people, Bobby Kotick doesn’t have any impact on their business decisions.

        • Jimbo says:

          The auction house will pay for it in this case. How other games might solve this problem remains to be seen.

          • Werthead says:

            It will pay for it for the first few years (maybe a bit longer if we get an expansion around that time), sure, but after then? Unless Blizzard really put their money where their mouths are and treat DIABLO 3 like an MMORPG, with regular releases of substantial new content even outside of the paid-for expansions, they’re not going to keep players coming back year after year after year, let alone using the Auction House in large numbers.

      • Palindrome says:

        Its not going to come to that. D3 sold so well because it is D3, it could have been a steaming turd and it still would have sold millions of copies. Given just how badly the always on requirement has been received and how badly it has performed other publishers are likely to be wary of forcing always on requirements. There will be other games which force an internet connection, but I think that there won’t be many and that it will be reserved for the likes of CoD and similar cash cows.

      • killias2 says:

        I wouldn’t say this necessarily. Blizzard can get away with things most developers cannot. I mean, there is a whole subset of the population (including both hardcore and casual gamers) that pretty much auto-buys new Blizzard releases. However, other developers don’t have that luxury. The only gamers that even -know- their games exist are hardcore gamers. If some of these lower tier companies try always-on, I think they’ll find themselves getting less than they bargained for.

        • Untitled says:

          I think the problem is it’s very hard to gauge consumer behaviour. What people say and what people do are two very different things. Additionally it doesn’t really help that, love or hate it, review scores for games are very important (see the withholding of Obsidian’s bonus) but the scores rarely consider the whole consumer experience. I hope you appreciate how hard I repressed the urge to make a shitty analogy in this post, like when you buy a car and…. restaurant, the waiter….. sssteal a handbag OHH OGDDDD

      • Lycan says:

        Thank God for Torchlight 2. Been playing the beta quite a bit over the past few days and it’s like good comfort food. Small wonder, I guess, since Runic Games is headed up by 2 of the top guys who made Diablo II whereas Diablo 3 was made by a bunch of people whose main claim to fame is World of Warcraft…

      • wuwul says:

        IT’S NOT DRM, IDIOT!

        It’s a fucking ONLINE GAME that RUNS ON THEIR SERVERS!

        Anyone trying to do the same will have the nice job of managing huge distributed datacenters, and if they do it as badly as Blizzard with all the downtime, they can forget selling their game, since they won’t have the Blizzard/Diablo name to save them despite the horrible press they would get.

        And if it’s just “online DRM check”, then it’s crackable, of course…

        • RegisteredUser says:

          You basically said “Its not a cake! Its a mix of sugar, butter, flour and milk!”.

          DRM is Digital Rights Management. Or, in other words, controlling content and access to it. That is quite literally what they are implementing by necessitating a server side.
          The underlying question is: Do you really need a server to make this game playable as a single player game?
          No, of course not. You could just take the code they cut out of the game to put it on a server and include it back in the actual game. Like, well, every other game ever made that wasn’t always-online.
          Procedurally/dynamic created content works locally just as well as remote. Obviously.

          The measure to actually seperate the creation logic from the game given to people is literally DRM: saying “No you dumb retard f*ck customer don’t get to have all of the product. WE control the product. WE decide how and when you get access. WE control content. End of story.”

          That if you want to play with other people you need to hook up with other people is als obvious and another argument, but even for that you don’t _need_ a server. People used to play via LAN.
          Party sizes tend to be a handful of people. Which, btw, is just more proof that Diablo never was nor ever will be a MMORPG. Because that first M? Stands for MASSIVE. 4 people is not massive. It’s co-op size. Which is something you could do within a living room. Or a LAN party. Or one guy on 10mbit hosting a dedicated server(yes, we used to be allowed to run those ourselves, once upon a time, too!) and the other 3 joining.
          And so on, and so forth.

          So, in short: What you just said was pretty stupid and hollow and shows a clear lack of understanding of how things CAN be done while implying they MUST be done in a way that is obviously a choice of restriction rather than an actual must.

    • Screamer says:

      We’re fucked. Expect on-line singleplayer in every title from now on!

      On a side note, my StarCraft II account was hacked :/

      • vivlo says:

        did you get an e mail when he was hacked, or would you be clueless about that had you not trying to connect ?

        • Screamer says:

          I did not get any notification from Blizzard, so ja, would have been clueless. Not even when the hackers changed my password. When I eventually got in, my friendlist was gone, and RealID was disabled, and Parental Controls was enabled to presumably prevent me from changing stuff back.

          Blizzard resolved it in about 10min though….. but apparently it was my fault :/. Don’t know how that is cause I last played in OCt 2011

    • Lobotomist says:

      Under all the crap Blizzard shoveled with it, D3 is amazingly good game. It easily has the best gameplay among click ARPGs – by far. And art and production values are amazing.

      Question now is , how will they support it ?

      The game has to many problems to count. From balance problems, poor itemization, lag , hacks … the list goes on.

      Will Blizzard take all that money and invest it into making the game better, or just laugh at us until they shovel new expansion ?

      • Roshin says:

        Why would they spend money and resources to make it “better”? Millions bought it and they wont listen to anything resembling criticism. Better to produce some DLC and make even more money.

        • Joshua Northey says:

          Have you played Blizzard games before? Nothing you said makes any sense in that context.

          • derbefrier says:

            typical blizz hater. lets ignore the fact they have had awesome support for all their games (whether you like them or not is a different matter) D2 is still up and going strong more than 10 years later. WoW despite its rough release is extremely well polished and continues to get better in that respect(again whether you like the game or not is not related to support). so i must ask what are you basing this assumption on? your silly liberal views that all big companies are evil and out to make you suffer? or does this have some basis in reality.

          • zeroskill says:

            @derbefrier: Waiting years for class balance is good support now? Wow, we must have really different opinions on what “good support” means. Not mentioning the years of ignore Dota and once somebody else has picked up on it ,screw them over by trying to steal the name.

          • lordfrikk says:

            I don’t want to get in a stupid debate, but the original argument was that Blizzard won’t support the game. Diablo 2 and World of Warcraft (maybe even Starcraft 1/2, I don’t know) is still supported years after release.

            P.S.: There will never be any balance. No such thing when so many factors need to be taken into account in addition to the most complex one – human input.

            P.S.: I don’t even play Dota and know that the story played out totally differently.

          • veelckoo says:

            Yeah, we did play Blizzard games until ONE starcraft 2 became THREE starcrafts 2.

          • vivlo says:

            @veelcko : that’s wrongly wrong : if you look at it this way, there was actually TWO starcraft I, starcaft and broodwar, because yes ! Starcraft II is ONE game, with TWO expansions. Instead of just ONE. Not all that tragedic.

        • Reefpirate says:

          Actually, because they have taken security of their economy into account in the design of their game, and they get to make a bit of money off of that economy, they have more than enough vested interest in continuing to balance and improve the game.

          Their ‘DRM’ ain’t all about anti-piracy, you know…

          • RandomGameR says:

            In fact, I would argue that it’s almost entirely about economy and longevity of the multiplayer game.

          • RegisteredUser says:

            *profit for them.

            Fixed that for you.

    • Milky1985 says:

      Most of us commenters with even a partially working central Nervous system knew that it was going to be a runaway sucess. Hell a lot of us even have the game via some method or another (free with annual pass for me, makes me a bit more tolerent of the issues actually,as it has no “real” value to me, its effectivly a freebie)

      Doesn’t mean we are not going to hold blizzard up on there stupid design decisions and stupid server decisions and possible security issues. Oddly enough its called being a good consumer, we raise objections to the deficencys in a product.

      Hopefully this way the next game will be better for us and not have these issues (and thus better for them as we will say to others “this is great, buy it”), and hopefully other developers publisher will see the fallout from this and decide that they don’t have the goodwill to lose.

      Lots of people I respect have pointed out that actually blizzard have had quite an easy ride over this, any other company would not have the goodwill, imagine if ubisoft did this :P

      • byteCrunch says:

        The problem is those who have complained instead of being supported by their fellow gamers, they get shouted down by people whose only purpose it seems is to defend Blizzard.

        If you believed a lot of the defenders, your not entitled to complain about the game which you just paid a sizeable amount of money for.

        • Milky1985 says:

          You speak the truth unfortunately :(

        • Joshua Northey says:

          You are absolutely entitled to complain, and other people are absolutely entitle to tell you that your complaints are off base and ill conceived.

          • SkittleDiddler says:

            “You are absolutely entitled to complain, and other people are absolutely entitle to tell you that your complaints are off base and ill conceived.”

            By using “that” instead of “when” in your little statement there, you’ve pretty much confirmed byteCrunch’s point. Most of you Blizzard fans are more interested in simply reaffirming your own ingrained beliefs about Blizzard’s products than you are in actually making logical rebuttals.

            What’s good for one side is good for the other, right?

          • byteCrunch says:

            Edit: SkittleDiddler put it much better than my follow up point.

          • Joshua Northey says:

            I think you are reading a little much in the grammar of a sentence I spent .05/sec composing. This isn’t a oral exam, it is a discussion of a video game.

            Not to mention your point is just plain wrong because when I have phrased comments in the form “I agree with points X,Y, and Z you made, but think L, M, and N are mistaken I get no acknowledgment that I am not some “schill for Blizzard” (which is frankly laughable).

          • Lycan says:

            I have to say I’m very disappointed with the inflated critic review scores that the game is getting. I am playing the game and enjoying it, certainly, but scores in excess of 8/10 are frankly baffling. I still can’t understand why a Blizzard game is not allowed to be marked down for a poor consumer experience such as difficulty logging in, frequent disconnects, etc. I enjoy the game *when I can log in and it works*. It wasn’t me that asked for or made the decision that the game should require an always online connection with some AI processing being done server-side, so I certainly expect Blizzard to be taken to task and the game marked down accordingly for a poor design decision. I mean, IGN gave the game a 9.5 – on that scale, what is Skyrim ??? 11 ?

          • mispelledyouth says:

            You lose just on the grounds that you are using your real name on the internet. I consider myself absolutely entitled to tell you that.

        • RegisteredUser says:

          The problem is that if you buy it and THEN complain its like buying a pack of smokes that says “This will likely give you cancer” and then complain when you get cancer.

          You are getting shouted down by DRM opponents, because the _only_ thing corporations will listen to and consider making changes for is the bottom line.

          Buying = supporting what they do. Doing that first and then expecting to still have leverage with a product you cannot return, ask for cash back or really do anything about is, well, I don’t want to be insulting, but this is how I feel it to be true: stupid.

          A truly “good” consumer would understand and identifiy a problematic product(like genetically manipulated stuff or products sold by a corporation known to abuse their livestock etc pp) and then boycott the product financially. They would not buy it regardless and then go “But golly well do I ever feel bad about it now! I sure hope that after giving them full price for it they get the message that they need to change something!”.

          • wu wei says:

            This. The only thing that angers me about D3 is how easily people will give up their consumer rights for something bright & shiny.

          • byteCrunch says:

            Wow, another defender who only looks a part of the picture.

            No, there are numerous people who fully accepted what Diablo 3 was, it doesn’t suddenly excuse the fact Blizzard screwed up the launch and left a lot of people unable to play the game, this is no consumer at fault, this is entirely the domain of Blizzard.

            Why do people insist of pretending it is the fault of the consumer for buying a game they wanted, they bought a game it didn’t work as intended, this is the fault of Blizzard, not the consumer, stop making excuses for them.

            On top of that your analogy to smoking is frankly absurd.

    • Stevostin says:

      Well before jumping to conclusion I’ll wait for 6th month of sales figures.The reason is that all the bad press from launch didn’t impact those day one sales, which just tells us “the hype” and “growing PC market”. Now comes the time of sales earned by reputation. Maybe it will still be strong. Maybe not. SWTOR sold pretty well day one… Now ? Not that much.

      • Dances to Podcasts says:

        The article above says it has since that day grown to 6.3m.

        • Milky1985 says:

          Yes, but its an unsual week as it was sold from tuesday. So really the only figure to concern yourself with is the 6.3 (as that includes people who buy stuff on friday ready for the weekend, which is a big time i think numbers wise).

          Good numbers yes but the next couple of weeks will be the interesting ones. Then the RMAH (although that will be propped up by goldfarmers/scammers :P)

          • Lycan says:

            As I recall, Dragon Age 2 had a fairly strong opening week as well, because it traded on the name of its predecessor. I wouldn’t bet on Diablo 3 not reaching 7 million copies sold, but if Blizzard don’t get their act together then I think sales will drop sharply after the first month.

    • hosndosn says:

      Crap or not, Diablo III selling well actually sends a very positive message about non-MMO/F2P PC-exclusive games still being profitable.

      • danielfath says:

        So now it’s not MMO? People really need to figure out what it is :P

  2. Greggh says:

    Man, I played the beta with Monk and got to level 10 in like minutes…

    Jim, you’re officialy the worst barbarian I’ve ever heard of.
    Now go back to writing!!

  3. pkt-zer0 says:

    Ragetrain arriving to station in 3… 2…

    Anyway, there was supposed to be a new XCOM article up today. With Chryssalids. Put that up already please.

  4. Godwhacker says:

    That means roughly 126,000,000 hours of rather dull gameplay on Normal difficulty before the game allegedly starts.

    • CaspianRoach says:

      I completed the game on Normal and enjoyed it. Did not want to start Nightmare a bit and called it done. I feel cheated off 60$ but oh well that’s my fault for believing in Activision-Blizzard.

      • caddyB says:

        Me too. Finished normal, finished nightmare act1, finished with the game.

        • Snakejuice says:

          Finished nightmare, playing hell act 1 having a blast, not done with the game at all!

          • piratmonkey says:

            +1 same here :D

          • pitak89 says:

            I breezed through normal, had a tough time in nightmare, then my barb became a killing machine, and now I can’t wait for hell to challenge me again. I love this game.

          • nrvsNRG says:

            half way thru nightmare, playing with friends, random public and sometimes solo and i’m enjoying it tremendously…..my wizard is already a walking nuke….cant wait for hell!

      • lordfrikk says:

        You bought a wrong game.

      • Azradesh says:

        You finished that game on normal and enjoyed it, and then you chose to stop playing. You *completed* normal and *enjoyed* it, and you feel cheated? You enjoyed it and you feel cheated?!?! Huh?!

  5. Strangerator says:

    It must be a good game, if so many people bought it.

    • Monkey says:

      Thats true, as the number of people grows so does the collective intelligence….

    • mjig says:

      Absolutely, I’ll purchase it and put it on my shelf next to my The Big Bang Theory box sets, Transformers DVDs and Nickelback albums.

      • Sensai says:

        This comment made me physically ill.

        Even if there exists one person who actually believes this, the world is a dark place.

      • MrMud says:

        I dont know why you list the big bang theory in that list…

        • mondomau says:

          Because it isn’t funny, and it isn’t actually aimed at nerds. Which are the two most annoying recommendations I hear.
          It’s a amalgamation of ‘Insert technology / physics / Maths reference here’ jokes and lazy, hackneyed generic american sit-com plots.

          • radioactivez0r says:

            I was afraid nobody else out there thought this. My nerdy friends told me I need to watch it; I tried a couple episodes, found it to be Every Other Sitcom Now With More Nerds!, and gave up. I haven’t figured out the appeal at all.

          • Lycan says:

            Well, quite frankly Sheldon Cooper is the only reason I’m still watching – but even if I stopped this week, the fact that the show introduced me to the elegant “Lizard-Spock expansion” for Rock-Paper-Scissors is by itself sufficient justification for its existence in my life :P

          • Lemming says:

            Well, I consider myself a geek and I think TBBT is rather fun. In fact, it made me wish I’d been a physicist. The nerd culture stuff is amusing as an outsider looking in for the non-nerds and amusing references to the fellow nerds. It’s harmless.

        • mjig says:

          Because it’s the highest rated (maybe second highest rated, two and a half men may be higher) comedy show in the US and it’s godawful.

          • JFS says:

            Seems to be a negative relation in that list, because Two and a Half Men is incrementally worse than Big Bang Theory. Maybe they just switched it upside down by accident.

          • RegisteredUser says:

            Mike and Molly is actually higher than either.

            All three are Chuck Lorre sitcoms and basically identical with a few things switched around.

            You either like his kind of mix of “sweet, sickly syrup BS for the masses, cynical dark char that kinda reflects my(=Chuck Lorre) view on life stuck in for good measure” stuff or don’t. He also worked on Roseanne.

            (My theory is that all of his sitcoms have a Grouch/Weirdo/Chuck Lorre Character, often a cynic and likes to drink: Roseanne: Darleen, 2.5 Men: Charlie, TBBT: Sheldon, Mike&Molly: The mother.)

        • danphango says:

          It’s a geek Minstrel Show.

          • Screwie says:

            That is an excellent way of putting it. I’ll have to remember that.

        • Milky1985 says:

          I agree with the rest but I enjoy Big Bang Theory so if the boxset is going free i’ll have it :P

          • kororas says:

            You can have it after i have tied it to a stake, burnt it and done a demonic war dance on its ashes in sacrifice to Diablo himself.

    • dmadrfe says:

      I guess Call of Duty is the best game ever, right ?

    • Gnoupi says:

      Billions of flies can’t be wrong, also, so I changed my diet.

    • Booch says:

      The market has spoken! (to be read in your best Colbert impression)
      Edit: impersonation? *shrugs*

  6. radioactivez0r says:

    I can see that my boycott on principle had a large effect. I’m not sure I’m stoic enough in my beliefs to just skip it altogether now that so many of my friends are enjoying it. Damn.

    • Hug_dealer says:

      What fully convinced me to hold out is i just moved into my new house on friday. So no internet for a while. That means i couldnt play if i wanted, but i,have every other game i own still available to play

    • Dances to Podcasts says:

      Obligatory xkcd: link to xkcd.com

    • DrGonzo says:

      Remembering that my Blizzard accounts last about 5 days before they get locked put me off buying it entirely.

      • elfbarf says:


        • Dances to Podcasts says:

          Sounds like he’s got keyloggers on his pc and instead of contacting customer support and securing his pc he just makes new accounts. Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

    • wu wei says:

      I felt exactly the same way and was even in the process of ordering it online the other night when they suddenly went into 8 hours of server maintenance during Australian peak time.

      As a working father, I simply don’t have the luxury of letting a company determine when I can enjoy their product.

  7. hatseflats says:

    “Pc gaming is dead” -Everybody, always.

    Guess not. Good news. Even though I don’t care in the slightest for the game itself. Kudos to Blizzard for selling so well and (apparently) releasing a PC only game (that’s not an MMO).

    • Premium User Badge

      Hodge says:

      PC gaming isn’t dead, it just can’t connect to the server.

      • MikoSquiz says:

        I wish this site’s comment system had a “like” function.

        • Dances to Podcasts says:

          I wish this site’s comment system couldn’t connect to the server.

      • Eversor says:

        When I’ll be able to find my sides, I’ll commend you on a job well done, sir.

      • Jubaal says:

        Sir, I tip my hat to your comic jape.

      • Milky1985 says:

        Where do I send the bill for the keyboard? That comment caused me to spit my drink out!

      • RegisteredUser says:

        I fully approve of this humorous appropriation.

    • Terragot says:

      it’s optimised for macbooks.

      Blizzard getting some of that sweet hipster gold.

    • Bhazor says:

      That awkward moment when you find out they’re making a console version.

      link to eurogamer.net

      • zeroskill says:

        They called me crazy when I said all those dumped down mechanics is just in preparation for playing the game with a gamepad!

        • Maktaka says:

          Please explain to me the complex mechanics and controls of Portal and Half Life.

        • f1x says:

          I still dont know whats the relation between complexity and “being a good game”

          I know you will hate me but, ….Super Mario Bros (1, 3 or super mario world), are still in my heart one of the best games ever, and its freakin simple
          of course, we are talking different generes, but I never got why games played with a gamepad would be better if the gamepad had 103 buttons

          Of course I do agree, Diablo3 is perfectly designed for a gamepad (therefore, designed with consoles in mind) but you know what, The Witcher 2 is also perfectly designed for a gamepad and that is not a problem at all

          A fan of gamepads

        • Dances to Podcasts says:

          “dumped down”


      • djbriandamage says:

        But I’m so tired of console players whining about shoddy PC ports!

      • Brun says:

        That article is a bit out of date. I don’t have a source on hand at the moment, but I’m certain I read a later article stating that Blizzard had put their D3 console plans on hold and were currently in the process of deciding whether they wished to move forward with them at all.

      • Beelzebud says:

        The first time I played DIablo was on a Playstation. Your argument is invalid.

      • Joof says:

        They haven’t done any actual work on it though. =/

        link to gamespot.com

      • Psychopomp says:

        Just like they also worked on console versions for Half Life, Half Life 2, Portal, TF2, Diablo, Starcraft, The Witcher 2, Max Payne, Doom, Doom 3, Morrowind, Dragon Age: Origins, Hitman, and Baldur’s Gate 1?

        Y’know, just off the top of my head.

    • Fincher says:

      PC gaming may not be dead, but if Blizzard continues paving the way for the platform it will be better off dead.

      • f1x says:

        As much as this Always-online thing is harmful, and myself I’ve suffered from it,
        Blizzard has done much for PC gaming, and what will save PC Gaming is the fact that PC games are actually selling good
        If you think that something like “PC Gaming without DRM and without sales” can exist you are fooling yourself, I’m not saying that DRM is necessary to sell, on the contrary, I’m saying that sellinng copies will ALWAYS help the media

        Another different thing is calling the consumers to be responsable with what they buy, to support independant developers and to not buy games with abusive DRM

  8. Zeno says:

    Like five hours of play will get you past level 16.

  9. NathanH says:

    There are 5.1 million enemies of PC gaming.

    • Brun says:

      As someone who bought and enjoyed Diablo 3, and who values PC gaming, I deeply resent that comment.

      PC gaming is facing multiple threats. DRM is one of them. Bad, shitty, consolized games are another. Diablo 3 carries only one of these threats.

      • zeroskill says:

        I think you are wrong. Diablo 3 also has really bad DRM.

      • AlwaysRight says:

        I bought Diablo 3, but I also bought ArmA 2 just to play DayZ.

        Do I love PC gaming or do I hate it?

        I can only do one apparantly… Unless there is some third synthesis option where I combine the DNA of hating and loving PC gaming… Then the mass relays explode.

        • NathanH says:

          You love and hate PC gaming, just as you love and hate yourself. AlwaysRight’s life is a sad story. Yes, AlwaysRight you were once called. Before PC gaming found you. Before it drove you mad.

      • RegisteredUser says:

        If you buy DRM, you are financially supporting it. Its as simple as that.

        Doesn’t mean you have to hate PC gaming, just means you’re fine with / oblivious to having it locked the f*ck down.

        Also had a LOL at the zeroskill comment. :)

    • Beelzebud says:

      I bought it. I’ve been a PC gamer since around 1995.

      • Brun says:

        Begone, heretic! Your sinful ways have driven you from the pure faith!

        • mispelledyouth says:

          I’m proudly supporting PC gaming on my iMac.

          So there.

          • MrTambourineMan says:

            Did you write any novels on your iMac in starbucks yet?

    • Psychopomp says:

      “You were a PC gamer, Jondar!”

  10. rustybroomhandle says:

    Glad to be in the hipster camp on this one.

  11. Zanchito says:

    I’d be interested in knowing how many players keep playing after 3 months, relative to the number of sales.

    • Niymiae says:

      That will most likely depend on how fast and how good the game team will be addressing the obvious balance issues, expecially on Inferno difficulty. The first hotfix patch came out today – and that’s a good sign.

      Actually, i find D3 to be a very good game – just not “great”.
      Lacks some polish to be great. Patches can do it, as most of the game “bad” things are just numbers.

      To be honest, it’s the exact same feeling i had from Diablo 2 on day one, after years playing the first chapter of the series. Back then, polish came with patches and LoD. I hope this will be the scenario again.

      • Milky1985 says:

        So far the hotfixes are just making it so that inferno can’t be cheeseily farmed, no hotfix on inferno itself :(

      • Brise Bonbons says:

        I’ve always been under the impression Blizzard games only become “great” (as such) with expansions: Starcraft > Broodwar, Warcraft 3 > Frozen Throne, etc. I never played D2, so I don’t know if that was the case there.

        Perhaps I’m wrong?

        • Lycan says:

          Nope, you’re not wrong. Vanilla D2 was nowhere near as polished as D2:LOD – the increased stash size alone made a huge difference… definitely any expansions have potential, but I would be wary of DLC or a regular subscription fee. Certainly no pre-orders and a “wait and watch” approach may be in order.

    • Furius says:

      It’s not an MMO. there aren’t many non-mmo games that I play after 3 months. 3 months is a pretty good lifespan for a game. is it not?

      • lordfrikk says:

        I played about 45 hours and this makes it my top 10 most played games easy. Sure there are big gaps between individual games, but still, definitely worth it even if I didn’t ever played it again. I bought DX:HR on day one and while I don’t feel “robbed” in any way I don’t think I clocked in even 30 in that one.

        • Lycan says:

          If my characters in Diablo 3 moved as fast as my characters in Torchlight 2 do, then I would be clocking less than half the hours I currently log in the Blizzard game.

          Time spent in hours /= measure of a good game.

    • Drayk says:

      From my experience, Diablo is the kind of game you play by phase. Most will play it for 1-2 month, then get borred, only to return to play it in maybe a year or so… It doesn’t matter.

      • NathanH says:

        I think you’re right. I rarely play Diablo 2 significantly for more than a few weeks at a time, but I always know I’ll be back.

      • Skabooga says:

        Admittedly, every two or three years I’ll revisit the original Diablo and take a character from beginning to until I get bored (usually in the 3rd set of dungeons, but sometimes I’ll make it to Diablo himself).

  12. Wizlah says:

    Fie on Blizzard-loving RPS. Shamelessly repeating statistics from a marketing department without questioning their legitimacy. Perfidious games journos. I bet you someone paid them.

    • Bhazor says:

      Well Jim Rossignols don’t come cheap.

    • PodX140 says:

      … This HAS to be satire, right?


      Seriously, have you red their reviews of the game? they’ve been scathing .

  13. zeroskill says:

    Good job Activision marketing department!

  14. PearlChoco says:

    Misleading article.

    Since there are about 300 million PC gamers (source: link to tinyurl.com ), that means 293,7 million gamers did NOT buy the game.

    Launch FAIL.

    • Unaco says:

      Going by that logic… There’s never been a successful game, ever. PC Gaming is dieing, is what you’re saying?

      • HothMonster says:

        It is long dead by his standards. In fact I believe it never even existed.

    • lordfrikk says:

      Can’t honestly tell if you’re just being stupid or trolling.

  15. Jhoosier says:

    As someone who played (my friend’s copy) of D2 on summer break from vacation so much that I purposefully didn’t take it with me so I wouldn’t fail uni, I’m proud that I’ve been avoiding this game like the plague. I don’t know if my tastes have changed, or what, but I have no desire whatsoever to play.

    • Lycan says:

      Hmmm… methinks you have deeper issues there. If you simply did not have any desire to play the game, then shouldn’t you just be ignoring it rather than “avoiding it like the plague” ?

  16. Drayk says:

    you’re not the slowest player… I am still level 13 after 5hours of play with my wizard. Didn’t die once, just took my time cleaning zones, reading, listening, etc.

  17. The Sombrero Kid says:

    DayZ is a better diablo than diablo 3.

    • desolateshroud says:


      I have been trying to get into diablo 3 to write a review and I just can’t do it. Finding a compass in Dayz is so much more rewarding than coming across ‘the boots of marginal superiority’ in diablo 3.

    • Moraven says:

      I am not sure. I have no problems other than the first 2 days connecting to Diablo.

      DayZ is pretty hit or miss. At least I can play Diablo!

      Unless black screens is your way of playing.

    • lunarplasma says:

      Isn’t DayZ’s single-player quite boring?

  18. Bhazor says:

    A couple questions
    How much did D3 cost?
    How much will the bullshit DRM cost to maintain?

    Given the length of development in one of the most expensive studios in the world I’m imagining it would be pushed closed to the 9 figure region. Certainly well into 8 figures. Thats without considering the xx million spent on marketing it.
    Now depending on the setup of the servers they could be costing between $5million and $50million a year. For reference Guild Wars is rumoured to cost around $9million a year.

    Point being I’m beginning to think Torchlight 2 may actually end up turning a bigger profit. Certainly a much better percentage return.

    • Unaco says:

      But all of those numbers you give are simply vague speculation. I doubt T2 will even touch the profit of D3. D3 is an entirely different scale of sales and moneys than T2 will.

      Doubt the intelligence of the Designers and Developers at Blizzard, but don’t doubt the Accountants. D3 will be raking in the money for them.

    • InternetBatman says:

      You’re forgetting about the RMAH. People will be using that for years if Diablo II and WoW were any indication. Anyways, if the average price was $60 (it’s probably higher), then they have already made $306 million.

      If the number of active people playing falls by 80% and one percent of those use the auction house enough to give Blizzard $10 a month, that’s still $1.5 million a year.

      How many active subscribers does Guildwars have?

      • Reefpirate says:

        No, no, no… You’re screwing everyone here up… The online-only thing is only to prevent piracy, and the RMAH is just a secret evil plot by Blizzard to make money by exploiting people. There’s no way they will try to balance the RMAH to make the economy stable and profitable for both them and the players.

        • Lycan says:

          And you’re saying there was absolutely no way to implement a single player offline mode with characters and items you were not allowed to take online ? Where only items you earned online could be sold in the auction houses ?

          I’m sorry, I’m prepared to take a balanced view on this – but I have yet to hear a convincing argument about why a gamer playing a single player offline game (as statistics say the majority of Diablo II players did) should be kept awake at night by the thought that some other gamer was doing item duping and save game hacking or blatant cheating on his/her single player offline game.

      • Malk_Content says:

        Guildwars has no active “subscribers.” Though they get by more than fine on microtransactions and expansion sales and I agree that I think D3 will be able to do the same.

        • InternetBatman says:

          I meant active players. It would give you a good idea of how much it costs per player.

    • Jimbo says:

      “Point being I’m beginning to think Torchlight 2 may actually end up turning a bigger profit.”


    • Hug_dealer says:

      torchlight will do well, but wont touch the numbers sold.

      Keep in mind that probably 4 million of the sold are azn market. Torchlight doesnt have that kind of penetration.

      Then you have the real money auction hall that will have blizzard laughing all the way to the bank. Which is another reason im not buying, not only does the real money auction hall not belong in the game, an actual auction hall has no place either. This is a game about gathering your loot, not buying it off an auction hall.

      • jaheira says:

        “This is a game about gathering your loot, not buying it off an auction hall”

        Then don’t use the auction hall. It’s not as if the game doesn’t work without it.

        • Lycan says:

          I’d be happy to forget that a RMAH (or any kind of auction house, really) exists if there wasn’t some w***er posting text ads every 5 minutes on the General chat for mmowin.com and other sordid websites.

  19. piratmonkey says:

    Well that’s pretty cool. I’ve been thoroughly enjoying D3 on my WD and Monk.

  20. fuggles says:

    Barbarian is like the only class not being nerfed, so don’t worry:
    link to pcgamer.com

    • Hug_dealer says:

      its pretty funny how things like that can get through beta testing. Esp when its blizzard the supposed makers of the most polished games in the WORLD.

      • piratmonkey says:

        So since Blizzard is known for polish, there should never be a need for balancing ever? Or if there is beta testing, the final product should be perfectly balanced already?

        • Hug_dealer says:

          considering the game is a closed environment and they know all the variables. yes it should. Esp if balance is as bad as claimed.

          • piratmonkey says:

            Ah well, considering your previous posts regarding D3, I think I’ll go ahead and call it quits right here. Good day.

          • lordfrikk says:

            Yes, it doesn’t matter if you got 10 or 1000 variables to account for, as long as you have “closed environment” you can balance the game perfectly. Where do all you dumb people flow in from?

          • Hug_dealer says:

            your mom’s vagina.

  21. woodsey says:

    ‘You Maniacs! You blew it up! Ah, damn you! God damn you all to hell!’

    We’re all fucked now.

  22. KilgoreTrout_XL says:

    The game is rather excellent, so good for them. I missed the rage train on this one, but I will do my best not to miss the one where everyone hates Valve when they release HL3 because of [omg we hate this bit] and eschewed HL2’s [we love the way we remember this bit].

    • Hematite says:

      Don’t worry, there’ll be another train leaving about the time the RMAH opens. They’re very punctual.

  23. pilouuuu says:

    Now, PC gamers, do this for Torchlight 2!

    • nanowired says:

      You know, I wasn’t really that interested in Torchlight. But then I got into the beta…Wow. Everything that they chopped from Diablo 2 to fit it into the console experience of Diablo 3. And fun.

      It also feels like they pulled a Blizzard and waited for Diablo 3 to release so they could steal some features, like looting gold as you walked by.

    • Moraven says:

      Would you not want this so the matchmaking service does not get blown up?

  24. Unaco says:

    PC Gaming is alive and well then… as if that was ever in doubt, truly. Well done Blizzard! Not my type of game*, but good to see a PC title selling so much.

    * I dl’d the Starter Edition at weekend, made a Barbarian, called him “Karsa Orlong”, smacked some undead, then they told me to go talk to someone in the first town. I stopped playing there because I imagined Karsa shouting “Talk? Talk? Too many words! Witness!”

    • Skeletor68 says:

      Ha! I also have a Barb named Karsa. We are now friends.

      Also, if they ever make a Malazan game…

      • Unaco says:

        Greetings friend! What sort of game would a (good) Malazan game be though?

        Personally, I always thought about making a Zangband variant with Malazan features (races, warrens, munitions, etc), but only so I could use the name “MalaZangband”.

        • NathanH says:

          Given that the Malazan series tends to be about loads of powerful characters randomly showing up all over the place and then generally being dicks to each other, a fantasy version of EVE would probably be suitable.

          • Unaco says:

            It’s called Convergence, and there is nothing (or not much) actually random about it. I’d also contest that the series is just about ‘being dicks’ to each other… there are just as many (if not more) redemptive, sacrificing, heroic, selfless, innocent, decent plot lines and characters as there are arseholes through the series. Think of the whole Anomander Rake/Hood/Dessembrae deal, the sacrifices there to bring Mother Dark back to her children, and Dessembrae’s ultimate fate… or Bottle and his dome… Quick Ben’s promise to Burn… Kilava Onos and her need to set right what she went and f*cked up at Morn… Apt, Panek, Shadowthrone and the crucified children… Cotillion and Apsalar… Tehol Beddict and Bugg… Toc and Onos T’oolan and Hetan… Mappo and Icarium… Bent and Roach and Stormy and Gesler. Bringing tears to my eyes as I type this.

            There are plenty of arseholes and plenty of people being dicks to one another (Chain of Dogs, the fate of the Wickans after 7 Cities, Mallick Rel and the Jhistal, the Pannion and the Tenescowri, the Forkrul Assail, at least half of what Karsa does), but there is just as much redemption and generosity and decency in there as well.

            Apologies for the rant… I’m in the middle of rereading the series, and find myself effusing over it at the slightest opportunity.

          • NathanH says:

            I was just being flippant. They’re the only fiction books I will read, so I obviously like them. Although I am bogged down in the unrelenting tedium of Toll the Hounds.

        • kud13 says:

          There was an RPG a la Oblivion (this was before Skyrim) being worked on. One of the Malaz forums Admins was the main guy behind the project. Not too sure what happened to it.

          If I ever decide to buy this game, I shall play a WIzard. His name shall be QuickBen

  25. Jimbo says:

    I find a lot about Diablo 3 to be pretty gross, but that is a game-changing amount of copies sold.

  26. PC-GAMER-4LIFE says:

    ….but PC gaming is dead according to many big name developers/publishers!

    Diablo3 sales figures are one of many reasons why PC gaming is still relevant. Publishers especially know if they make a decent PC game with a large enough fanbase the rewards are vast like Diablo3 levels ((6.3m x $30=$189M & thats assuming only on average $30 goes back to the publisher its probably slightly higher).

    Shame so many previously PC exclusive developers cannot make some DX11 only PC titles if they did I am sure with the right DRM scheme the sales would be in the millions (not hundreds of thousands for console ports they take right now).

    • AltF4 says:

      That’s not how it works, first, only blizzard and valve make a killing, everyone else making pc exclusives barely keeps afloat. Next, you can’t make a game selling as well as established franchise like diablo or half life, or even introduce new IP expecting these sales unless you are valve or blizzard. Best you can expect is whore yourself to consoles like bioware or bethesda, and even then pc sales don’t account for more than 10% of box sales.

      • Grygus says:

        It’s not as restrictive as you make it out to be. Bethesda and BioWare can also sell millions of copies of PC-only games. EA can, too. And none of them made Minecraft.

        Kickstarter has PC games making millions of dollars before they even exist.

        PC gaming is fine. There are two problems: you have to actually make a good game, and you have to make PC gamers aware of it. 99% of the products on the market right now fails at one of these two things, and so they do not sell well, but that’s not an unhealthy market.

      • subedii says:

        I’ve heard this argument before: “Unless you are Valve or Blizzard”.


        Seriously, what’s so special about Valve or Blizzard that makes it so that their games must be successful PC-side, but nobody else’s can be? Nobody sprinkled pixie dust on Valve and made Half-Life 2 a better FPS than others on the market. No magic made Starcraft 2 one of the world’s leading e-sports games. The companies respective titles have no fantastical reason to do better than everyone else’s other than the standard: Quality and Marketing. And those are areas where anyone else can compete.

        Heck, go one step back. Why is it that those two companies were even able to establish themselves PC-side. They started off the same as everyone else didn’t they?

        I don’t need to mention companies like Bethesda since others already have (although I will note: The fastest selling game in console history? CoD. The fastest selling game on Steam? Skyrim). But then what about CD Projekt? What about the STALKER series, so incredibly buggy, and yet even then each iteration has sold over a million in itself? ArmA? Total War? Why does anyone even buy Relic RTS’s (incidentally, the DoW series are million sellers as well) when the unassailable Blizzard is there and makes the killer app?

        I mean If you want to say it’s about size and presence, then definitively it’s Microsoft that should freaking well own the DD space by now, and PC gaming as an entire whole.

        • danielfath says:

          Two words: Nostalgia/Reputation and Fanboys. Mostly fanboys.

          Ok, it is a bit simplistic but games they make are really superb, except Blizzard has been chugging down the “DRM” pill a bit, so now their games as good as they are (gameplay wise, story wise latest Blizz games have performed worse than predecessors, not that they were good before) get loaded with tedious DRM. I can barely tolerate Steam/SC2 but this straw is what breaks the camel’s back for me.

          Plus Valve and Blizz have a reputation of delivering good games constantly. Well, mostly Valve. Blizz has somewhat dropped the ball on D3. And SC2 (region locking/DRM/lack of LAN/lack of some social features).

        • Hematite says:

          I’m pretty sure its because both companies have a strong and well realised artistic direction. Regardless of whether their games are innovative or unique in other ways, you can bet that they will be consistently presented so that they feel like a luxury item.

          Like Apple. Whether you like the products or not, you can be sure they won’t be half assed.

          (although D3 launch might be breaking this trend for Blizzard – they strangely seem to have failed in some areas that they should have nailed based on experience from WoW)

      • mispelledyouth says:

        Alt + F4 is my favourite keyboard shortcut sir!
        That is all.

  27. jaheira says:

    I wonder if this would have sold so many copies if it had an offline single player mode that would have been pirated day one? Alas, we will never know unless we find a way to spy on alternate realities. I’ll get to work on that.

    • Jimbo says:

      We can’t know, but let’s face it: we do know and the answer is no.

    • BatmanBaggins says:

      My guess is that sales would have been lower, but not by any drastic amount. A quick glance out of curiosity at certain corners of the internet shows that even now, many people are downloading torrented copies and waiting for unofficial servers.

    • NathanH says:

      Alas, I suspect that the number of people who wouldn’t have bought it and immediately pirated it instead will greatly outnumber the righteous defenders of PC gaming / tedious smug bastards like me who haven’t bought it because of the DRM issue.

      When you add to that the RMAH moneys and the long-term strategy of getting PC gamers used to this sort of thing, I’m forced to admit it’s a pretty good idea from their point of view.

  28. reishid says:

    They’ll need all the money that they could get because I’m pretty sure that no one would touch Diablo 4.

    • Joshua Northey says:

      This is so stupid. Take off the rage glasses and acquaint yourself with reality.

    • BatmanBaggins says:

      Oh please. Regardless of your personal opinion about D3, assuming that Diablo 4 would fail (or that Blizzard “needs all the money they could get”) is just naive.

      • mispelledyouth says:

        They certainly don’t need the money. But they sure as damn want it.

        I’m equally as certain that we’d all buy Diablo IV despite its transparent plot, shoddily realised characters, terrible B-movie dialog ( even WORSE than D3! Can you imagine! ) and the subtle acknowledgement that these things are irrelevant to us.

        This makes me sad.

  29. AltF4 says:

    rightly deserved, apart from itemization bullshit of blues better than rare drops this game roxors soeme boxors

    • Joshua Northey says:

      Yeah I barely use rares at all. Which is kind of odd and sad.

      • Brun says:

        It’s because the rares usually have the same primary stat distribution as blues, except with useless stats like “Increase gold/health pickup by 5 yards” and “Monsters grant +4 XP” tacked on. The only good rares are where those auxiliary stats are things like Lifesteal or extra crit damage.

    • BatmanBaggins says:

      Wait, how are blues better than rares? Aren’t rares just blues with more +thing slots?

      • Brun says:

        The stat distribution can be somewhat random, and depending on the stats you may get something like these: (using Wizard stats, since that’s what I play)

        Robust Battle Sword of Focus (Blue)
        70 DPS
        +40 Vitality
        +50 Intelligence

        Soul Cleaver (Rare)
        80 DPS
        +20 Vitality
        +30 Intelligence
        Increases Gold and Health pickup by 5 yards.
        Monsters grant 5 additional experience when killed.

        In this case, the loss of vitality and intelligence negates the 10 DPS gain, while the additional “+ stats” are pretty much useless.

        I guess the summary here is that useless stats like gold/health pickup range and and per-kill XP are weighted far too heavily vs. core stats like Int and Vit.

        • BatmanBaggins says:

          So you are saying that the stats on an item are weighed with the other stats on it? I had assumed that rares just rolled 4-5 attributes instead of 2, and that the +numbers of those attributes fall within the range of the ilvl, respectively. In which case a rare would always be -potentially- better than a blue, even if any particular rare happens to get crappy rolls on its attributes/numbers.

          • Brun says:

            That may be the case. However, I’ve seen plenty of Rares of better “armor type” (i.e. higher item level) that are actually worse than rares I picked up 15 or 20 levels previously because of issues like the ones I described above. It seems to happen more often with armor than weapons.

          • Joshua Northey says:

            I think the problem is that a blue rolls say 3 attributes and a rare rolls 5, so in theory the rares should be better. But two things negate this.

            A) You encounter easily 20 times more blues than rares

            B) But there are like 25 attributes and for any particular character only about 5 are useful.

            So of your twenty blues it is easy to find one where all three attributes are things you need, a 3/3 so to speak. Meanwhile you only have 1 rare so it is very likely a 1/5 or 2/5 which is more or less worse than your 3/3.

            Make sense?

          • Reefpirate says:

            And this is where the Auction House comes in… You can harness the power of a million other gamers gathering rares they don’t need but might be really good for you rather than farming them yourself. This way you can find the rare with the 5 good stats that you need that will be better than some magical items you can find on your own.

          • Joshua Northey says:

            Except why bother when the game is a cakewalk anyway :)

          • Lamb Chop says:

            The auction house is predominantly an endgame tool where the content is decidedly anything but easy. Yeah, it would be pretty silly to buy items in normal/nightmare mode when later that night you’ll have leveled out of its usefulness.

      • pkt-zer0 says:

        Aren’t rares just blues with more +thing slots?
        Well, that would already be a problem. You don’t get better random rolls for those slots, just more of them. Except you get to roll the dice for the contents of those slots way more often with blues, because they drop more often. If the slots are independent, then having 2 awesome stats on the same item is also more likely than having 4.

        • BatmanBaggins says:

          But that’s still misleading to say that that makes blues “better”. Unless you mean that they’re better because you’re more likely to roll a blue with two good stats than a rare with four good ones.

        • Grygus says:

          Stats are not independent; a piece can roll +Str twice, for example. That’s why you’ll see that pieces with very high bonuses have fewer bonuses overall.

          Rares aren’t worse, they are simply more rare and so the frequency of getting one with decent rolls is a lot lower, which means you end up wearing mostly blues.

  30. derbefrier says:

    this doesn’t surprise me at all behind the shitty launch and peoples apparent inability to not let their accounts get hacked there is a great game here. I will admit i wasn’t expecting numbers that big, no wonder they had such a tough launch. i would like to see any company try to handle almost 7 million players trying to log on at once no wonder the launch had so many issues

  31. Hardmood says:

    15 million flies can´t…
    the amount of sold copies doesnt prove anything, neither if its bad nor if its good. players who want a good game should start to get a more distinctive and souvereign judgment.

    i prefer to get a steak instead of a cheap flat hamburger with no taste at all, but if a hamburger in a fancy hip fastfood restaurant is what people want, because its hip…oh manson

    • BatmanBaggins says:

      Not sure I see what you’re…

      Oh wait, I get it. You’re saying that Diablo 3 is the cheap flat hamburger and that whatever game you prefer instead is the steak. Clever.

    • trjp says:

      It proves one of two things – perhaps even both

      1 – that the much vaunted and widely known ‘online only’ thing didn’t deter anyone (who matters)

      2 – that people are massively, massively stupid and didn’t know about the online thing despite there being tribes in Africa who’ve never met another human but who knew that D3 was an online game…

      I love that people think ‘voting with your wallet’ works – it almost never, ever does because you need massive awareness of your campaign AND to defeat the lazyness which affects most of the population – see also sweatshop users (from Apple to Nike and beyond), tax-dodging companies (few don’t) and even kiddie-killing companies like Nestle!!

    • Grygus says:

      The amount of copies sold means that it got good word-of-mouth, which proves that people are finding it fun to play. I suppose that if fun is not your primary judgment of a game’s worth then this metric will indeed be meaningless, but surely you can recognize that this is a minority stance.

  32. Hirmetrium says:

    Whats that online games distribution platform that’s always online?

    I forget its name. Damn, whats it called? Something to do with boiling water? and has a completely non-functional offline mode?


    • Unaco says:

      Offline mode works perfectly for me. I have Steam on my Desktop and my Netbook. I keep it connected on the Desktop permanently, and haven’t connected on my Netbook in several months now. Works fine. Not really fair to claim it’s “completely non-functional”

      Even if it didn’t work so well, a fair number of games bought through Steam can be run without running Steam… just by running the exe in the Steam folder.

    • Arglebargle says:

      I don’t think non-functional means what you think it does….

    • lordfrikk says:

      Yeah, you probably don’t even have Steam because you’d realize that the famous non-functional offline mode actually works. Obviously there will always be someone with problems and that’s who’s going to shout the loudest. It doesn’t make the problem OK or non-existent but as an anti-Steam argument it’s weak.

      • NathanH says:

        It’s a bit more complicated than that. There are basically three situations where you want offline mode:

        1) You have steam running, and you know that tomorrow you won’t have connection. Before you shut down today, you restart Steam in offline mode. This pretty much always works fine.

        2) You had steam running yesterday fine, but today you have no internet. You start steam and try logging in in offline mode. As long as you had your stuff saved, this will usually work, but yesterday steam may have decided it wanted to update or do some other mysterious business. In that case it will usually refuse to start.

        3) You’ve just lost connection while steam is running. My experience here is that usually trying to restart in offline mode will not work.

    • lordfrikk says:

      No, you just need to have your credentials saved. I use Steam like that on my netbook and it always boots into the offline mode without me screwing around with in advance.

      • Shooop says:

        Yeah, but can you set it in offline mode while you’re offline though? That’s my problem.

        I can set it into offline mode after I’ve logged into it, but that really doesn’t serve any purpose. I need to be able to tell it “Stop trying to log in and just go to offline” when I start it up because it automatically logs me in. If it can’t connect, it’ll just stick at the logging in note. Canceling it shuts Steam down entirely, no option to just go to offline mode.

        • Unaco says:

          Try disabling any internet connection on your machine, before trying to run… then, if you’ve saved credentials and it can’t find a connection, it should ask if you want to Restart in Offline Mode. For me, on my netbook, I just start Steam before I connect to a wireless network in my office or whatever. There is no option to start in offline – if you start Steam with a net connection, it will try and login, go online. If that’s not possible, it will give you the option to restart offline though.

    • Narzhul says:

      Stop confusing always-online with online to log in.

    • kud13 says:

      except it does.
      Yeah, I’ve heard about the “windows keeps thinking you’re connected even when you’re not”

      THing is, on a laptop, there’s a usually a button to turn off wireless adapters.
      SInce my desktop uses a Wireless adapter that’s hooked into a USB slot, I can just unplug it.

      Windows can’t trick itself into seeing a non-existant connection, when it has no viable means to connect.

      In any case, offline works flawlessly for me. As I don’t give a whit about achievements, my Steam is offline 90% of the time, unless i’m browsing the store, or downloading a game.

  33. zagor says:

    its has always been like this with Blizzard games
    At start everyone are complaining about their game…
    ….after a while no one can stop playing.

  34. Unaco says:

    Indeed… The people have voted with their wallets here.

  35. drspaniel says:

    In my opinion, Diablo 3 is going to be an amazing game (once they finally fix the multiplayer) and I’m glad to see that their sale figures have gone through the roof! However, I do think the game is a little pricey and I didn’t feel like paying $70 at the time and neither should you! Instead, I have actually found a great site, which will compare the offers from multiple well trusted websites, and find you the best offer for your game of choice. link to allkeyshop.com

    It is thanks to this site that I got my copy of diablo 3 for just $40 instead of the extravagance of $70!

  36. Kestrel says:

    I’ve bought virtually every Blizz PC game but I’m just not all that intrigued by DIII, DRM or no.

    Oh well. Back to Dwarf Fortress.

  37. Nameless1 says:

    Yeah, 6.5kk! And now let’s admire the always online DRM spread out like a cancer in future titles.

  38. BreadBitten says:

    So much for voting with your wallet…

    • Shaneenee says:

      Just because people voted against you with their wallets doesn’t mean people aren’t voting with their wallets.

      • alundra says:

        These people didn’t vote against him, they voted against themselves and ultimately against PC gaming itself, and to think PC gamers place themselves so above console gamers….

        Ah the sarcasm of it all.

    • Unaco says:

      People have voted with their wallets. They might not have voted the way all the people saying “Well, I’m going to vote with my wallet against Diablo3, and you should all do the same” would have wanted them to vote. But they voted, in large numbers. Millions of them in fact.

      • BreadBitten says:

        Whoa, calm down gentlemen…! It was just a jab at this, now popular, phrase–I couldn’t care less about a game selling well despite any form of invasive business practices or otherwise…

      • GH Moose says:

        I know this originated as a joke – but you know why voting with your wallet doesn’t work? When you tie somebody’s bread and/or circuses to something they don’t like – surprise surprise, most of them will still buy.

        You aren’t gonna starve because you don’t like mass food production and can’t afford to avoid it – you’re just gonna eat it – and probably complain about it later, when you can afford better. Similarly, most people aren’t going to be bored and/or miserable just because their entertainment object of choice has something negative attached to it…and the people who are willing to forgo entertainment are going to complain.

    • Shooop says:

      People did. Problem is many more of them voted yes than no.

    • RegisteredUser says:

      The sad part is, they aren’t really voting for laggy/locked out DRM shit gameplay, they are voting for the fact that they are pathetic gaming crack addicted weaklings willing to bend over to Koticks big one in exchange for another sweet sweet fix.

      Perversely enough to then also sometimes mumble “Boy, but I sure do hope this selling like hotcakes and tiny % of forum complaints sends them a signal that all the people having trouble isn’t that great mh yea uh.”

  39. Hug_dealer says:

    who here doesnt know that the majority of sales where from the Asian market. Just like WoW.

    Thats where blizzard makes their money. The Asian market. Something most western studios have no chance at. No one making an ARPG expects those numbers, because they know they dont have that kind of penetration into that market, and probably never will.

    If all PC games had the same kind of penetration into the Asian market as Blizzard games, every single game out there would be multi million sellers and making bucket loads of cash from it.

    • Crimsoneer says:

      Except Diablo hasn’t been released in China, so I wouldn’t assume it’s all Asian. It’s selling like crazy in France and Germany, and 2nd in the all format charts in the UK. So…yeah. Mainland Europe had a serious hardon for D2.

      • Hug_dealer says:

        I’m not assuming. Its fact. China is not the biggest market for games. Not even close.

  40. MythArcana says:

    Welp, folks…you heard it here first! Crap is King in our beloved game industry; it’s now official!

    This is a sad day in history indeed. Even worse than EA critically crushing Bullfrog. More disgusting than playing Postal 2 naked. Even worse than Duke Nukem Forever. At least we expected that to blow.

    • Hug_dealer says:

      thats a bit drastic.

      The game is far from crap. What it does, it does well. What it doesnt do or try to do are its biggest failings, and a game this big, and popular, shouldnt be missing things that other smaller ARPGs have managed since d2 came out.

      • MythArcana says:

        Excuse me, sir. Can you point out the strong suits of this game for us all and enlighten the masses? I’ll go ahead and mount some counter-points for your convenience for you to spend all day defending.

        ** I.C.R. – Single player game with Internet required.
        ** No LAN – Or frankly any other game mode other than Battle.net
        ** Battle.net 2.0 – If you haven’t been reading the problems with this, then you better axe someone.
        ** Account Hacking – Because everyone is in a rush to lose 40 hours of items and gold in 10 seconds.
        ** Hosed Item Pool – Uniques and Legendaries are weaker than common white drops. It’s a mess.
        ** Boss Custscenes – EVERY SINGLE !&*#ing time. Even with a skip button, this kills momentum.
        ** Character Customization – Pre-rolled dudes with skill unlocks later with very little user input at all.
        ** Homogenization – Everything is now generic. One weapon fits all! Wizards will LOVE pole vaulting!
        ** No Pets – Back to town every 8 minutes to sell 99.999% of what you find. Redundant game “play”.
        ** Blizzard Forums – I won’t even comment on this one. Fanboys, absent manager support, holy shit.
        ** Price Point – They mounted this at $60, which is insane for the lack of features and bugs.

        Alright now, sir. Your turn. Retort time, and you better do some quick ‘splainin’ now.

        • Brun says:

          -Satisfying ARPG gameplay.
          -Good art style.
          -UI that isn’t complete garbage.

          Just three off the top of my head. A lot of the good things about the game are rolled up into the first item.

          I also disagree with several of your points including:

          ** Character Customization – just because it doesn’t have WoW-style skill trees doesn’t mean it’s simplistic or “dumbed down.” The player input comes from choosing which skills to put on their bars, like in Guild Wars.
          ** Homogenization – Why should my Wizard be FORCED to wear Wizard hats and use wands? I think the ability for me to use swords and plate armor is a good thing.
          ** Hosed Item Pool – I’ve yet to see a legendary be weaker than a common white item. Of course that varies by class, but that seems to be a gross exaggeration.
          ** Blizzard Forums – I don’t see what this has to do with the game.

        • Reefpirate says:

          Dude. You’re on a Crusade. Every bit as annoying as the immature banter that happens on the Blizzard forums, and equally irrelevant to how much I enjoy playing and watching this game develop.

          Diablo 2 was a single player game. Diablo 3 really isn’t. And I’m glad the economy is fairly well protected because to me that’s the most fascinating part of this game.

    • Shooop says:

      More accurately, “name brand recognition is king”.

      It’s been working for the now-yearly CoD releases, it’s worked for Battlefield 3, and it works for Diablo.

  41. Belsameth says:

    As much as I despise always on DRM, Blizzard is one of the few companies I trust with it. They’re still running D1 servers. It’s not likely they’ll pull an EA and take em down barely a year after launch.

    Granted, they messed up the launch, but that’ll get sorted eventually.

    I’m mostly worried more companies follow suit. Companies, like EA, that *do* pull servers down because “only” a couple of thousant are still playing.

    • subedii says:

      Not that you need to be concerned when the RMAH effectively guarantees the game’s continuing profitability but…

      The real question isn’t that, it’s how far would you trust Activision?

  42. Alexrd says:

    The tag “pc gaming is dead” is correct, when we see that people don’t care about this kind of DRM.

    • UncleLou says:

      Or to see it from a different point of view: PC gaming is dead when only a game that can’t be pirated manages to make sales on day 1 that no other PC game has managed in years, if ever.

    • alundra says:

      They couldn’t possibly comprehend that, all the fanboys can see is that blizvis filled their pockets with their stupidity, and be proud of it.

  43. Taorgax says:

    This is a bit off topic, but… about Torchlight 2.

    I tried the Torchlight 2 beta, and honestly, I can’t see why so many people like it more than Diablo 3. The skills feel weak (watch out monsters, here comes my Rapid Firing of rubber bullets), the talents are boring (+1% damage per point spent! woo!), hitboxes are small and make it difficult to click on enemies sometimes… I enjoyed it, yes, and I’m going to get the game, but I can’t, for all the hatred I may have for the always online DRM thing, say that it’s a better game than D3.

    Honestly, I’m even liking D3’s skill system compared to that. It might kill the need to have more than one character per class (which is, apparently, a really bad thing in some hardcore players’ book. Not mine, though) and decrease replayability in the long run, but I do like the fact that you can test all of your skills without rerolling, experiment, get a nice skill set going and try it out.

    And there’s also the combat. I’ve seen a lot of people going on how combat in Torchlight 2 is “the best” and “so smooth compared to everything else”, and so forth. I seriously doubt these people ever played Diablo 3. If there’s one thing I absolutely adore about D3, it’s the combat. Every skill feels powerful, and you can clearly see the effects of that on enemies. Kill something with Bash, and they’ll be sent flying backwards. Kill something with Hammer of the Ancients, and they’ll fly into the air, team rocket style. Do people really miss basic auto attacks that much?

    Can someone please enlighten me on this? What is it about T2 that truly appeals to so many people? Or is it just people looking for an alternative, given the whole “hipster war” on D3?

    • Hug_dealer says:

      t2 does everything D3 does, but at a fraction of the cost. I features difficulty levels from lvl1 making the game a challenge for everyone if they want it.

      It also allows modding, meaning infinite amounts of levels and new monsters, and new skills, and pets, weapons. Everything.

      It lets you play offline. It lets you create your own personal character. My engineer will be designed entirely different from your engineer, by how i place my stats, and armor, and weapons. I can turn my Engineer into a caster, while another can be a 2h aoe dealer, and another a straight up hp tank, and another single target high damage glass cannon. Your character in diablo will be the same as most peoples.

      Is T2 a better game. For me it is, For others perhaps not. The fact that T2 allows modding is one of the biggest bonuses, anything can happen to T2. People will create entirely new classes and skills. It has no limits. D3 will always be the same game.

      The trouble clicking on monsters is a skill based problem. If you can aim. You can attack fine. Just like in an FPS, if you suck at aiming, you suck at the game. Sure they could lessen the amount of skill required. But thats where D3 and T2 break apart.

      yes everything feels powerful in D3, which makes me laugh. part of that is because of how easy the game is. Put T2 on easy if you want to be powerful. D3 is made for casuals, auction halls so people dont have to earn loot to progress, easy difficulty levels. Every skill available to everyone, which means that you are going to run into players with identical builds.

      Different games for different people. Neither is better than the other.

      One thing i can guarantee though is this. Torchlight 2 will be an entirely different game a year from launch because of mods. It will more awesome than you can ever imagine. Think Skyrim. The amount of mods that added new things and fix old problems. That will happen with Torchlight, just like it did for the first game.

      • Taorgax says:

        I really can’t argue with the price, it’s part of the reason why I’m gonna get the game!

        I’m gonna keep an eye on Torchlight 2’s modding community. I must admit I kinda forgot about that, and I’ll be looking forward to what they can do :)

        Regarding character customization, I can’t really say I agree. Both games are eventually gonna give birth to a metagame, and with that, cookie cutter builds will come. Our early characters in either game will be total deviants compared to what the meta will eventually dictate, but in the near future, the majority of characters of any given class will be using one of a few “peer approved” builds, as it always happens with these kinda games, with a few exceptions of course.

        Taking Diablo 2’s history as an example, I can’t really expect the game to remain “the same” in the coming months. Between patches and expansions, the game will probably be unrecognizable in the near future. We shall see :p

        I do admit I’m not the best player in the world or part of the “elite”, but the hitbox thing is a known issue that has been mentioned multiple times in the beta testing forums. You get used to it, but it’s annoying nonetheless.

        I do think you misunderstand me when I talk about the whole “feeling powerful” thing. It’s hard to describe really. Borrowing vocabulary from TotalBiscuit, it’s how “meaty” the combat feels, and I honestly feel that D3 has T2 beat in that regard.

        Regarding difficulty level and casuals and so forth. I do agree that D3 should give people the option to set a difficulty level starting the game (Elite in the T2 beta was a lot of fun, though the boss fights did get a bit tedious). However, D3 does get significantly harder in the later runs (Hell and most notably Inferno). I really can’t see either of those being as casual friendly as you describe, given how ridiculously difficult some of the champion/Elite combos can become (unfairly so, at times, especially if you’re playing a melee class).

        In the end though, I agree. I’m wrong in calling D3 a “better” game than T2, just as most people doing the opposite are. They’re both great games, and us aRPG fans should be happy about the many great games we’re getting this year (can’t forget about Path of Exile or Grim Dawn either). Thanks for your reply!

        • Lemming says:

          On your point about the ‘meaty’ combat…

          From the Eurogamer Torchlight 2 preview:

          “You hack and you thrust at your attackers, scattering your enemies with your powerful blows. Bigger weapons feel bigger, and shotguns and cannons thunder in your hands, sending the hordes reeling. The game makes you feel like a hero, like the ultimate authority in arse-kicking, and it’s this satisfaction that keeps you entranced, draws you further and further into the game”

          • Taorgax says:

            The combat in TL2 is very much “meaty” or whatever way you wanna call it. I was just addressing the people who place it several levels above Diablo 3’s, which I honestly do not agree with. They’re at the very least at the same level when it comes to that, especially considering the difference in their respective budgets.

        • zeroskill says:

          “I do think you misunderstand me when I talk about the whole “feeling powerful” thing. It’s hard to describe really. Borrowing vocabulary from TotalBiscuit, it’s how “meaty” the combat feels, and I honestly feel that D3 has T2 beat in that regard.”

          Funny that you quote Total Biscuit, because he has quite the opposite opinion of yours. He said in this video that the combat feel much more “meaty” in Torchlight 2.

          Mr.Biscuits words right here from the video at 7:30. “Why do I prefer Torchlight 2? Let’s think. Well, combat is a hell of a lot better for one thing. It feels meatier, it’s faster, it’s more responsive.”

          • Taorgax says:

            I know, I’m just borrowing his vocabulary ’cause I can’t really find any other way to describe that. I love his work, but I don’t really agree with him this time :p

      • MrMud says:

        I take it you never played D2 because allowing you to put points into stats and skill trees doesnt mean that everyone will have unique builds. There will be a metagame that describes the currently best way to play and most people will shift towards that meta.

        • Hug_dealer says:

          We are not talking about D2. But the fact you bring it up proves that it was a broken element of the gameplay. There should have been better alternatives. All stats should be important to a character in different ways. Oddly enough, thats how T2 deals with it. They fixed a broken mechanic.

          Blizzard instead of fixing a broken element, simply removes it.

          • Taorgax says:

            This is true, each stat seems meaningful to every single class, as far as I could tell (e.g. autoattackers can benefit from high focus, as it increases both their elemental damage and their execute chance). This doesn’t mean there aren’t stat priorities though, and really, the birth of a metagame in a popular multiplayer game is very much inevitable. The customization options are still there, though. It just doesn’t mean everyone will be a unique snowflake, far from it.

            However, I’m not so sure they’ve gotten it right as far as skills go. I’d be inclined to say the way the skill “tree” (more like a tiered system, restricted by level) was laid out is even worse than D2’s, given that some passives and skills that enable certain playstyles are very far down (e.g. individual weapon mastery passives having seemingly arbitrarily high level requirements), not to mention the ridiculously small increases each point would yield sometimes (+1% damage per point in a few cases..)

            Runic DID say though that the skill layout that we saw during the beta isn’t final and that there will be changes in the final version, so here’s hoping they improve it.

  44. lomaxgnome says:

    This just in, internet rage means nothing.

  45. wodin says:

    If I have to suffer shitty always online in my single player games from now on I blame the nobheads who couldn’t make a stand for a change and forgo buying it. Thanks.

    • Neut says:

      Sorry for buying a game I wanted to play and for not being inconvenienced by the DRM :(

  46. Vorphalack says:

    Proud to be one of the 7,008,000,000 people on our planet that don’t own a copy.

    Sales figures don’t sound quite so impressive when framed like that.

  47. V. Profane says:

    Oh thanks a lot, dicks.

  48. IJ says:

    One of the things I haven’t seen mentioned with regards to Diablo III being always online is how it ties up to (what I perceive as) Blizzard’s attempts in its games to encourage players to participate in the multiplayer aspects of their games – having better items and some of the added end games content only available in online play in D2/LOD, pushing easier means to participate in instances and then raids in WOW, the introduction / rank based matchmaking for multiplayer in S2. In WOW particularly you get the feeling they’re engaging in a degree of social engineering to encourage their player-base to participate in raiding. Maybe I just feel like that cos I’m a little shy – yet to play any multiplayer in D3 cos I’m working on my confidence in playing solo successfully – I died quite a lot in normal despite having played a fair amount of D2 – though once I realised the importance of vitality on items my survivability went way up. Just a though that there may be other motivations to always online other than just feeding more people (and cash) to the RMAH.

  49. alundra says:

    Ah, the legion, who had been silent until now is back with a vengeance.

    And what do they take pride upon?? The stupidity of 6.3 million and the report we all knew, that stupidity is so massive that D3 would be a huge hit.

    In the most mediocre and pathetic way, they don’t take pride in blizviz fixing anything that is wrong, they take pride in blizvis pocket’s exploding and the direction of gaming they all help to fund.

    Kids say thanks to the blizvis fanboys and boneheads, they just helped kotick murder PC gaming a little more.

  50. Lemming says:

    Furbies sold alot as well, didn’t they?