Diablo III Reviews: Batch V


Our fifth news post with a batch of Diablo III reviews is a heavy one, as I just added upwards of 50 more to the already burgeoning DiabloWikiDiablo III reviews article in the DiabloWiki. It’s got more than I can easily count (literally). There are about 129 on the wiki page now, but honestly, I counted while clicking down the page very quickly and I might be off by a couple. MetaCritic currently lists just 66 Diablo 3 reviews, if you wanted a comparison.

These are all proper reviews too; no forum posts or 3 paragraph blog entries. Included in this new batch is the IncGamers Diablo III review from our parent site — a lot of you guys said you found it very fair and intelligent, in comments last week.

No scores on the following bunch, because their opinions and judgments are just too nuanced and subtle to be reckoned with such blunt tools.

  • Sleepy Eye News.
  • The Washington Post.
  • The Guardian UK.
  • Gaming Union.
  • MacGasm.
  • ShackNews.
  • Fearnet.com.
  • SlashGear.
  • RipTen.com.

While collecting this bunch, I saw this article on Gizmodo, which reports on some study of Amazon.com reader reviews of books and concludes that in aggregate they are as good or better than major, paid reviewers. Their scores are similar, and the Amazon amateur reviewers are quicker to rate new authors well, and less likely to give inflated scores to bad books by established authors.

That’s about books, though, and it’s no doubt skewed when it comes to controversial titles, where haters and fanboys and ideologues get involved. Which is certainly a problem you see in the aberrant Diablo III fan review scores on Amazon or Metacritic.

As always, the GameTrailers review was a video feature. It’s well-edited and narrated, but I didn’t feel the writing said anything new or imaginative. It’s pretty though, and if you click through you can watch it embedded.

Get More: GameTrailers.com, Diablo III – Review HD, PC Games, PlayStation 3, Xbox 360

Tagged As: | Categories: Diablo III Reviews

Comments

You're not logged in but can still post comments. Register or login to remember your details.
  1. It saddens me to see so many 100s. How can anyone say this game is perfect?

    • depends on the reviewing site’s policy, but lots of these 100 are five stars out of five converted to percentile numbers, and going by their definition five star is a must-buy, doesn’t mean it’s perfect but well worth the purchase, which I agree 100%.

      If you personally feel that these high scores are undeserved, perhaps you should first look into your own personal bias first. If you are a long time and die hard player of D2, you’ll tend to want D3 as how you imagined it to be, now how it stands on its own merit, and so obviously won’t be able to judge it objectively like other people without emotional attachment to D2.

      • @cozmiccc
        Sorry, but this is D3, THE successor of D2. Blizz built the hype and used the theme on purpose. It SHOULD be better than D1/D2 in every aspect. At least “different”. But not worse. Online-only is worse. Loot is worse. And the game gets max score…?

        • Sorry but overall it is indeed BETTER than D2 in many aspect, although you have to admit that wishing for 100% perfection is pretty much impossible and will just let you down as it happens.

          Again, you look at it from your own judgement and wishes on what D3 should be, that’s an unfair set of judgement you used and obviously will never match with what you have in your head. 

          • @cozmiccc
            “Again, you look at it from your own judgement and wishes on what D3 should be”
            And what’s wrong with that?! In that sense your opinion is as useless and biased.

            “that’s an unfair set of judgement you used”
            Because…? Because it’s my own opinion? Because I’ve played and enjoyed D2?

            “and obviously will never match with what you have in your head. ”
            Why? I’m not asking for anything vague. When you wanted gear in D2 you could do: socketing, crafting, gambling, farming uniques, farming sets. Out of that, gambling was pretty useless. How does that compare to D3? Did Blizz improve? In my opinion not. Therefore I complain.

          • Yes exactly. You are too fixated on your own imagination on what D3 should be, when it doesn’t follow your personal wants then you whine about it and can’t judge it as it stands. That’s why a more neutral critics can see better D3 high points and improvements and award its high scores it deserve.

            Yes in D3 you can still farm, gamble through crafting, gemming, trading, etc. I can’t see why you couldn’t. Unless you just expected broken quick results and overpowered loots to drop right away. Sorry mate but a good  game doesn’t work like that.

          • @cozmiccc
            In D3 anything execpt rares is useless. I don’t care if you don’t mind paying for an unfinished game. But luckily I still can have my own opinion on that.

        • Loot is worse. Nearly everything else is better. If the extremely flawed D2 deserved high scores (and it did) than the somewhat flawed (but easily fixed) d3 deserves high scores (and it does).

          • Seriously, Diablo 3 is better in EVERY inch of its design and implementation than D2.

            Imagine D2 would be launched today: it aged NOT wel, it is on the brink of being unplayable in mechanics, graphics, copy past lands. Only die hard fans would still play it, not the general public.

            D3 is very much a response to spoiled MMORPG players since 2004, while D2 was very much a prequel to mmorpg’s.

            As such D3 stands MILES above D2. And 12 years of on line play shows this evolution to anyone with a critical analysis.
             

          • @yovargas
            @Thrall
            Ever heard of inflation and devaluation? Yes, it’s 2012 and we expect more from the games! Obvious story, boring loot and non-existent social aspect of online games… But hey! Let’s give it 9/10 because it has better graphics than D2!

          • @rhaye: Apparently an important line was not read by you …
            “D3 is very much a response to spoiled MMORPG players since 2004, while D2 was very much a prequel to mmorpg’s.”  As such D3 succeeds greatly.

            D3 is an on line game stripped to the BARE minimum that can be found in an MMORPG , but at the same time it blows these latest MMO duds and WOW copies complete out of the water in challenge , fast and FUN game play. You fight, group, find loot, craft and trade on STEROIDS with D3 (and compared to these MMO’s). No downtime… at all.

            D2 lacked the economics because they were played OUTSIDE of the game. Not any more. The on line economics and extreme fast grouping AND playing with real life friend ALL on ONE server is dynamite on a 2012 internet.

            I am sorry if you didn’t see this coming. 

          • @Thrall
            So they should’ve called it “World of Diablo”. Nobody would have mistaken this game. I never played MMOs and don’t intend to. But they called it D3 for a reason…

      • “perhaps you should first look into your own personal bias first.” – cozmiccc
         
        Well here we go again. Attack attack attack anyone that isn’t jumping up and down like a happy bunny about D3. We are all very sorry about jumping all over your pride of this game but as you can see not everyone agrees with you. So maybe you should be having a look at your ‘personal’ bias.
         
        Again we start to see some more matured reviews of the game now that its been out for a while, at 75% we get intelligent criticisms of the game. A game that is a sham. Will the 6.5mil owners of this game bother going to Inferno or will that be relegated to only those that have truly been waiting an eternity for this game, a game that likes to call itself a sequel to the best arpg to date.

        • So according to you only reviews that awards 75% is the only ‘intelligent’ and ‘correct’ reviews right?

          Man, perhaps you should look up the definition of opinion and bias again… You are much worse that what you accuse fanboys of 

  2. btw there’s also a 95 review from IGN

  3. IGN : 95 %… Why was it not included ?

    I think IGN is still the biggest site in the gaming world.

    And really if you would compare Diablo 3 on pure game play with other games it belongs UP there.

    Out of 100 games published, you rarely see 5 who are worth it.

    For example the Elder Scroll series is a very beautiful game setting in looks, but it completely fails on fluid combat and some very basic video game play. Perhaps some players prefer surroundings and full world settings, but mostly these games fall flat in the pure video game department.

    I think nintendo and blizzard and very few others create game play. The rest of the bunch not so much.
     

    • Agreed, I just wish they’d hired a dialogue writer that doesn’t try to include every Hollywood cliché there is.

    • Nintendo. Lol. Made my day.

       

    • Note the first 2 paragraphs of the post. And the title. 

      This is the 5th news post collecting D3 reviews. Lots have been posted previously and all are on the wiki page. IGN is there, along with about 80 others not in this update.

       

  4. } aberrant Diablo III fan review scores on Amazon or Metacritic

    Think that falls under the “less likely to give inflated scores to bad books by established authors” qualifier. If an unknown studio had made this same exact game by another name, no one would care about it. It’d be as obscure as Titan Quest and Torchlight. Moreso actually; $60 for a $20 title? Get. Out.

    • Flux is correct.  All of you saying that you should go by user reviews must have been living under a rock during launch week.

      …You do know that there was a “petition”, whereby if you could not connect to the game in the US at 12:01 PDT, you were to rate the game a zero, right?  The game launched about 65 minutes late… by that point hundreds of 0s were registered.  The next few days during rolling restarts hundreds of more 0s were registered.

      So no, these are not VALID reviews.  They are a “protest” against online only, and were a punishment for the servers being slammed with 6+ million players.  You. Get. Out. 

  5. Here’s another review that I don’t see appearing in that wiki article. It’s from GameInformer.
    http://www.gameinformer.com/games/diablo_iii/b/pc/archive/2012/05/22/review.aspx

  6. Waaaay too overrated. The 100’s are just a joke. The problem is that no paid gamereviewer is going to rate the game under a 70 for obvious not wanting to go broke reasons, so there are no ratings that will balance against these retarded 100’s. It’s disgusting to see that a game with this many flaws still get’s 90’s easily, just because it’s a known brand of a multimillion dollar company.

    • Well give the name of the games that were better in 2012 … so we can ALL have a laugh…

      D3 is an extreme good game, with extreme game play for hundreds of hours for all kind of players. If you can’t live with the fact it sold 6.3 million copies in just one week: go play something else.

      But your taste is certainly not in line with the professional reviewers who give it an average of 90 % ALL over the web.

      Now tastes DO differ, but in this case only the hating idiots came up with 0/10 without substance on fake created accounts on  Metacritic, just like in ALL successful games.

  7. User reviews are the only way to go. Why on earth would a user review lie if they are the one’s whom actually had to pay for the game. The guys writing these ridiculous 100%’ers played the game for maybe 1hr if your are lucky, in their lunch, and at no cost to themselves, at work, and with deadline’s and people hanging over them telling them what the game is rating on competitive sites.
     
    Do you honestly believe, sincerely that is, that by sucking all the shit out of blizzards asshole that you are going to encourage them to make this sinkhole of a game better? I DON’T THINK SO!!!

    • The problem is that most user reviews come from people who didn’t even play the game. 8)

      I mostly see it by their “review”: copy/paste from something they read and just start slamming the success.
       

      Why would they lie ? Because they have another game to push, because they hate a successful company, because they simply have other agendas… but please scrap those 1500 “reviews” of 0/10 on Metacritic as coming from sincere players.

      Look at those ridiculous scores: the MORE games sold, the MORE haters who give 0/10 on Metacritic. COD series: 2.2/10 really ? DA 3.6/10 really Diablo 3 4.1 really.

      All because some FEW hundreds (with double or triple or quadraple accounts) gave 0/10 just to down vote a successful game.

      Don’t even search anything behind it: people in general are XXXX in real life too.   

      6.400.000 (probably more by now) >>> 400 triple accounts on Metacritic any time.  

      As for all successful games:    they are hated by some random dudes who hate … a game and create fake accounts to put 0/10 on it.

         

    • Read my post above about the 0-rating protest on days 1 and 2 of launch.  You don’t know what you are talking about.

  8. Biggest thing ppl miss about a review is its there to give opinions. you are allowed yours as well. like or hate if you have bought the game a review should mean squat to you if you are debating buying it by all means read the reviews they are there for you if you bought it don’t complain about something that has nothing to do with you it’s an opinion publish your review then let ppl know what you feel don’t complain about other reviews 

    Plus one for thrall

Comments are closed.