Okay, so these are two completely different titles, right? Yeah… almost.
Diablo II was a great game and it certainly deserved a proper sequel, but I don’t think that Diablo III was the generational leap that the title deserved. Going from dark 2D graphics to completely 3D graphics with a hint of Azeroth isn’t the hurdle I’m talking about—it’s the conflicted and crippling week of the game’s release that really killed it for me.
When the game was scheduled to be released, I couldn’t play it. Even when the game cooperated enough to let me log in, I still had issues completing the earliest parts of the first quarter of the game where I disconnected, it seemed, for the sake of disconnecting.
I forced myself to finish the game with my Wizard and try to play it through a second time on the more difficult game mode, only to abandon it when I happened into a Playstation 2 so that I could replay some older titles such as Ace Combat V, Ace Combat Zero and Front Mission IV. Three games that I definitely consider better experiences than Diablo III.
A side note on better experiences—regardless of Ace Combat Zero’s short story mode, the dynamics of how you complete the game due to a crude alignment system changed how the story was presented in ways that felt impactful than what Blizzard offers in Diablo III. Diablo III’s story is merely successful in pulling the rug out from under you near the end of Act I and at the end of Act III. That’s about it.
I’ve not even completed Borderlands 2 yet, and I have to hand it to Gearbox, I can’t simply label them that one studio that developed some Half-Life games anymore.
Borderlands 2 is just great because it’s such a fucking great game. I DON’T GIVE A FUCK IF I PLAY IT ON A CONSOLE.
Perhaps this is a sign that Blizzard has gone past its prime?