Blizzard is rather disappointing these days in terms of innovation

[Glorious Leader]

You are confusing what you want with what other people want. I'm sorry that the game doesn't appeal to you and is too much like D2 for your liking, but as Nerraw said, plenty of people simply wanted a D2 reboot. Plenty of people are playing the game and think Blizzard did an excellent job. You lack any sense of discernment or critical thinking in thinking that Blizzard should have made the exact game you wanted it to be. I'm not saying the game is perfect, there is room for balancing, but you should really learn that different people like different things and you are just one person.

That's not exactly quite it but even if that's the case so what? If everyone wants 50 cent does that make 50 cent good? Does that mean 50 cent helps push the rap music industry forward? You can make a game that people will want and enjoy and STILL MOVE THE GENRE MUCH MORE FORWARD than Blizzard did. I'm not sure why they didn't push harder this time, they were complacent I guess? and knew all they had to do was slap Diablo 3 on the box cover and it would sell. I'm not sure that's the right answer either. Maybe they just erred to much on the side of caution this time and were to timid to make changes.

[Nerraw]

See but were back in the 2000 mindset. Yes d2 was crap at start so it's okay that d3 is crap at start because well d2 got better and so will d3. How long was the development of this game? 10 years? 5 years? I hear so many mixed fucking answers. If they didn't listen then what makes you think they'll listen now? Did they not beta test the crap out of this game? Blizzard is usually very good at that. It's shit and the shittiest part is that of course people will still buy the expansions and reward them for it.. The status quo keeps rolling along because everyone is a bit to complacent

In that regard, nothing has changed over the years. The first version is always gonna be inferior compared to what comes later. It's natural. If it was perfect, there would be no need for updates or expansions or anything. But it's not perfect. And anyone fooling themselves to think that it's gonna be perfect right out of the gate needs to step into the real world for a while.

And for the record, beta tests are not about what the users want/need, it's about what the developer wants/needs. Blizzard needed to test core systems, not the game content itself. And they did so. I was in the beta for 5 months, and I thought it was playing excellent and was really polished when I got in. However, compared to what the game is now it was crap TBQH.

[Glorious Leader]

In that regard, nothing has changed over the years. The first version is always gonna be inferior compared to what comes later. It's natural. If it was perfect, there would be no need for updates or expansions or anything. But it's not perfect. And anyone fooling themselves to think that it's gonna be perfect right out of the gate needs to step into the real world for a while.

And for the record, beta tests are not about what the users want/need, it's about what the developer wants/needs. Blizzard needed to test core systems, not the game content itself. And they did so. I was in the beta for 5 months, and I thought it was playing excellent and was really polished when I got in. However, compared to what the game is now it was crap TBQH.

Then they didn't do enough in beta then. Saying it's better than a beta should be obvious and I would hope it was. Is that enough? Well IMHO it's not. I don't expect them to be perfect right out of the gate I just expect them to be further along then they are now. See the thing is they didn't fuck with the formula that much so I have a hard time understanding why it's in the state it is now. If they made radical drastic changes then I could give them some leeway but really they didn't do all that much.

As for d2 to d3 well yes I would hope the game gets improved but that's precisely the point. The amount of improvement d3 has come out with isn't enough to warrent the 60 dollar price tag. Yes it's better than d2 and yes it will get better when they fix things but again were talking about several years of development here and in the end were left with a slightly tweaked and reworked Diablo 2.

[Eroginous]

altho its hard to blame them since fans of their core games seem to want the same game updated to todays standards, and that seems to be what we more or less got between Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3. I'm just not sure if they're over-catering to their rabid online ladder fanbase more than gamers as a whole by repeating the same successful formula to the point the games are almost identical to their predecessors.

Obviously they have Titan on the horizon which will likely be something new but i can't help but be disappointed with their remakes of older games. I'm surprised they spent 7 years doing D3, and however many doing Starcraft2, where they more or less felt like graphical updated versions of their original releases. Granted i'm not Blizzard's typical B.net online ladder player, more than casual gamer that leans single player campaigns. ITs gotten to the point i don't think i'll be buying another Blizzard re-release again, feels like a complete waste of money more than many other games i've purchased. Haven't touched SC2 for a long time after finishing it, and D3 is going to wear out quick from what i can see...i just feel disappointed in how much work they supposedly put into them only for those games to feel so much like i've already played them :P

As a company Blizzard isn't out to try and break the mold in terms of 'things you've never seen before.' If they do a video game, it's based on existing technology and mechanics, and they just push it to a better place that people can't find in other video games. That's the whole premise with Blizzard development. The #1 way to be successful with a business is to provide people with something that they want, and do it well. You don't need to constantly come out with 'new things that no one has ever seen before' in order to be successful. In fact, that's one of the things that kills video game market.

You can literally think back to any period in gaming history (especially with console exclusive games) and the games you remember and played the most were the staple game franchises that have multiple releases (Zelda, Final Fantasy, Resident Evil, Halo, Call of Duty, ect). In between all those big name releases there are countless new and innovative games that are put out by small or new developers that sell a handful of copies but never really become big giant hits. Sometimes those new devs strike gold with a game, but it's rare.

Blizzard knows this, that's why they don't try to push the envelope when it comes to a new game. They take a look at the market for the genre they wish to make a game in, and they make sure to assess all the pros, cons, and features other games have, so they can put out a game that succeeds where other games fail, shining in all the areas where they succeed.

Diablo 3 isn't the only action rpg on the market. I can think of at least a dozen different games released since D3 was announced which are all action rpg hack n slash games that share many similarities with the Diablo series. Many of them are great games in their own right. However, Diablo 3 has pretty much taken all the best features and mechanics of all of them, and combined them into one game.

There are definitely minor things within D3 that need to be looked at for improvement, but the core of the game is very good and well polished. And this is what Blizzard does. They don't care about being the next big thing, because they can quietly develop it's competitor and launch with a superior game. This is why Blizzard is the best developer in the world atm.

[Fencers]

That's a bit disengenious. IF ANY DEVELOPER has enough favour with their audience it's Blizzard. They could have turned d3 into anything as long as it was fun people would support them. It's Blizzard. It's Diablo 3. Even if what you say is true that's no excuse for doing a meh job and not pushing themselves or the game forward enough.

That would not have been what I and seemingly many fans of the Diablo franchise wanted however.

D3 adds a few twists to the Diablo franchise, at the core it gave me [and millions apparently] exactly what I wanted in a Diablo game.

I didn't want a shooter Diablo, a 3rd person action Diablo or PVP centric Diablo MOBA. Just not interested in playing the Diablo license in that context. What I did want out of D3 was monsters vs. player centric gameplay, high degree of grind, revamped graphics and less cumbersome supporting systems to what was established in the previous games.

It's like Baldur's Gate or Might & Magic Heroes. Placing BG3 in the context of a Dragon Age/Mass Effect is NOT what I want out of Baldur's Gate 3. Heroes of Might & Magic with platformer elements is NOT what I am interested in at all.

[Glorious Leader]

That would not have been what I and seemingly many fans of the Diablo franchise wanted however.

D3 adds a few twists to the Diablo franchise, at the core it gave me [and millions apparently] exactly what I wanted in a Diablo game.

I didn't want a shooter Diablo, a 3rd person action Diablo or PVP centric Diablo MOBA. Just not interested in playing the Diablo license in that context. What I did want out of D3 was monsters vs. player centric gameplay, high degree of grind, revamped graphics and less cumbersome supporting systems to what was established in the previous games.

It's like Baldur's Gate or Might & Magic Heroes. Placing BG3 in the context of a Dragon Age/Mass Effect is NOT what I want out of Baldur's Gate 3. Heroes of Might & Magic with platformer elements is NOT what I am interested in at all.

Millions who bought the game on advertising and PR. Even if what you say is correct and that's what every diablo fan wanted (which is not true I can assure you) their is still room to innovate between that margin which they didn't. Essentially they took stale bread and put it in the toaster so you wouldn't notice as much. Except it's still stale and dated..

[Fencers]

Millions who bought the game on advertising and PR. Even if what you say is correct and that's what every diablo fan wanted (which is not true I can assure you) their is still room to innovate between that margin which they didn't. Essentially they took stale bread and put it in the toaster so you wouldn't notice as much. Except it's still stale and dated..

Many fans != every fan. Don't make that leap.

I am correct in saying the majority of fans did not want a Diablo too far afield from what the original games were in style. Proof of this is littered all over these forums, official forums, blog posts and nearly every where Diablo and III appear.

Good gameplay can never be stale. If D3 is stale by means of gameplay than that would have to apply to HOMM6, BG2, SC2, TL2, etc. Which is foolish.

What sort of innovations would you have liked to see? Give me something specific.

[ZenX]

That's not exactly quite it but even if that's the case so what? If everyone wants 50 cent does that make 50 cent good? Does that mean 50 cent helps push the rap music industry forward? You can make a game that people will want and enjoy and STILL MOVE THE GENRE MUCH MORE FORWARD than Blizzard did. I'm not sure why they didn't push harder this time, they were complacent I guess? and knew all they had to do was slap Diablo 3 on the box cover and it would sell. I'm not sure that's the right answer either. Maybe they just erred to much on the side of caution this time and were to timid to make changes.

There are two steps to innovation in a product line that Blizzard generally followed except in some of their titles:
1- Release the new product as the blockbuster to a know genre with your style being their polish: Diablo 2 and WoW are the primary examples(SC2 as well)
2- Extend the gameplay to new frontiers through expansions: D2: LoD, WoW: TBC, WoW: WotLK

Right now D3 is the first step is introducing the updates to what they had done in D2-series and they had actually cut-off some of the newer aspects similar to how they had seperated SC2 into WoL, HotS and LotV.

As far as polishing up D2 to today's standards the game plays out in an excellent manner and graphics as well as the physics engine is a vast improvement as well as being on par with many other titles in the market, however, it is not realizable to many due to how its camera pans and how the direction they had adapted removes the critical points that we use to evaluate anything that is blended with realistic graphics.

[Melodi]

What exactly did you expect out of Diablo 3? The game certainly isn't a reskinned D2, but the core mechanics are more or less the same. But, if Blizzard were to change those, then it wouldn't really be Diablo, would it? I'm perfectly happy with it. It's a great game. I can't speak for Starcraft 2, however, as I do not play it. But, it sounds like it's just you.

Hits the nail on the head. Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3 are very specific franchises of games, if you changed the core mechanics to be "innovative" then it would be a completely different game. If anything, you'd alienate the fan base that they have built up over the years and you'd have a LOT of unhappy people. They aren't recycled content by any means and have added little things here and there to improve upon already successful franchises. That's like complaining that every single Mario Bros. game has to be vastly innovative from the previous one. Guess what, we're still fighting the Koopas and trying to save princesses.

Also, while you might be mainly a single player type of person you have excluded effectively half of each game mentioned by simply going solo. Part of the fun in them is that you can play with others when you want to, but also solo if you'd like. Maybe it would feel less stale if you went into some games with your friends. Personally, for D3 I have enjoyed it a lot more playing with friends than I have solo. That's not to say that the solo experience isn't good, but it makes things a lot more interesting in a group dynamic.

[Profyrion]

There are plenty of ways to innovate outside of core gameplay mechanics. It's interesting that you mentioned Mario. The franchise has done a pretty respectable job staying relevant over the last 20 years, and making the transition to 3D. Part of that is because it stayed true to its core, and part is because it found compelling ways to reinvent itself.

That's the kind of innovation people in this thread, myself included, are looking for from Blizzard. You've completely missed the point.

[Deleted]

Normal guys logic - This company is rather dissapointing these days. I'm not going to buy their games.

OP's logic - This company is rather dissapointing these days. I'm going to buy their game anyway, and then proceed to cry about it.

[Glorious Leader]

Many fans != every fan. Don't make that leap.

I am correct in saying the majority of fans did not want a Diablo too far afield from what the original games were in style. Proof of this is littered all over these forums, official forums, blog posts and nearly every where Diablo and III appear.

Good gameplay can never be stale. If D3 is stale by means of gameplay than that would have to apply to HOMM6, BG2, SC2, TL2, etc. Which is foolish.

What sort of innovations would you have liked to see? Give me something specific.

Any new and interesting game play mechanics beyond click click click click click click click click click. The truth is the majority of fans would be happy if Blizzard did more with Diablo as well. As long as it's fun. I'm not surprised the masses like Diablo or bought it any rate. The model was fun at one point for me to and while I feel it's stale it's probably held up well for most. That however doesn't exempt Blizzard from doing more with it and the fans would be just as happy if they had done more and pushed the envelope a bit. Gaming has evolved alot since diablo 2 and it doesn't feel like they've kept up with that at all. Yes yes it's an Arpg but that doesn't exempt it from history. It should progress and grow to and should be influenced by games around it from every genre. Instead it feels like they made a retro game. Which is fine for some I guess but I'm a tad disappointed that they didn't feel the need to contemporize a bit more.

I posted this example earlier but Il'l do it here as well because it's pretty interesting and I'm glad someone is taking this stale model and giving it some fresh life. Again gameplay can get stale especially in something like an Arpg which is already fairly repetitive to begin with...


Skip to 4:50 in the video. That's new. That's interesting. That goes beyond click click click click click and adds some innovation into the genre. That game feels like it adds so much more depth to the genre than d3 does. Drag skill, much more usability and interaction with the environment, different stances for each class. It really feels like their trying to do more than simply toast the stale bread.

[khalltusk]

Wrong. Since there's two innovation threads and this is more Blizzard related that my OP in the other thread was about, I'll just copy paste it here too. No reason to write the same with different wording twice!

---

Ah, Blizzad innovation. Discussion I've always loved. I really feel like that they've dropped the ball of this game long ago as a company that shows the way (as they used to) to a company that takes from others and improves over it.

Now don't take me wrong, the very basic Blizzard doctrine has always been, take from something and improve upon it. But in the past improving upon something in Blizzard's terms meant expanding to a territory that wasn't there yet, while nowdays it's more about just making that what exists "better". Better being in ""'s because it is relative to one's viewpoint. To bring examples

Warcraft I, the first RTS game to bring a robust unit based skill system that could change the tide of battle if used right for the populace (And ability to select more than 1 unit at the time if I remember right, Dune lacked this feature)

Warcraft 2, the first RTS that let you drag over the units with mouse to select multiple units at once, also including improvements to their previous system of unit abilities and controllability of them

Diablo, originally intended as roguelike turn based item hunting game but at later stages developed into a an action hack'n'slash that would create entire genre of new games that to the date still spreads further

Starcraft/Brood Wars, the first RTS to really introduce heavily tied in narrative to a RTS games with well developed world shared along 3 faction that went through a progressive story one by one

Warcraft 3, the final stage of Warcraft "evolution" of unit abilities with controllable heroes being able to level up and improve skills on the way (Did you know Warcraft 3 was originally planned to be an RPG?)

World of Warcraft, the first MMO to introduce huge open world MMO without loading screen (Yah yah, continental differences), downplayed by EQ devs saying it was impossible for hardware demands, yet pulling it off. Also the pioneers of the modern instancing system we have in every MMO. It was really in it's child's steps at the time WoW was released. Some of the MMO's of the time tried to copy it while WoW was in beta due to their immense succees.

And now?

Starcraft 2 that plays exactly like SC, but with a bit more variation to the single player missions and new units
WoW expansions, adding new content but hardly anything new and innovative in the terms of gaming scene that wouldn't been done before, just iterating
Diablo 3, the same hack'n'slash as before with remade skill trees that has yet to show that they can sustain the game for as long as Diablo 2's replayability through leveling for different specs did.

From my point of view, it looks really grim and for last 8 or so years, Blizzard has done nothing more but trying to play it sure to keep sales, instead of pushing things forward that really gave them the reputation they have and what us who grew with Blizzard games have known to learn to expect from them. Sad times from my PoV.

(And for personal opinion remark, can't even start to comprehend how low their storytelling capabilities has gone with all these retcons, saturday morning cartoon enemies and Indiana Jones spoofs)

Just to nit pick but about your point on starcraft. Do you mean it was the first RTS to bring in a heavy story focus (if so you're wrong warcraft 1 and 2 had a heavy story element to them and cnc and red alert both had quite story heavy elements (less so while in mission). I do agree that sc had a nice touch with having the story progress from playing terrans zerg and protoss showing the story progress as you played from one race to another.

If you want a good example of innovation look at valve, half life and half life 2. They took half life and ripped up the whole FPS genre (having a really heavily scripted FPS experience based on a story) half life 2 smashed it up again. They then released portal (I believe it was another team who started work on it and got bought by valve who then released portal?)

Again you're wrong on warcraft 2 being the first RTS to use the mouse drag, that was CNC 1 (wc2 was dec 1995 and cnc was august 1995, although I think wc2 may have been out in august 1995 on MAC but dont quote me on it either way it was not the first game to pioneer it), You could say though it was the first RTS with a skirmish mode (well you had stand alone scenarios) it also shipped with the mad editor which was a very clever idea.

[Fencers]

Any new and interesting game play mechanics beyond click click click click click click click click click. The truth is the majority of fans would be happy if Blizzard did more with Diablo as well. As long as it's fun. I'm not surprised the masses like Diablo or bought it any rate. The model was fun at one point for me to and while I feel it's stale it's probably held up well for most. That however doesn't exempt Blizzard from doing more with it and the fans would be just as happy if they had done more and pushed the envelope a bit. Gaming has evolved alot since diablo 2 and it doesn't feel like they've kept up with that at all. Yes yes it's an Arpg but that doesn't exempt it from history. It should progress and grow to and should be influenced by games around it from every genre. Instead it feels like they made a retro game. Which is fine for some I guess but I'm a tad disappointed that they didn't feel the need to contemporize a bit more.

I posted this example earlier but Il'l do it here as well because it's pretty interesting and I'm glad someone is taking this stale model and giving it some fresh life. Again gameplay can get stale especially in something like an Arpg which is already fairly repetitive to begin with...

Skip to 4:50 in the video. That's new. That's interesting. That goes beyond click click click click click and adds some innovation into the genre. That game feels like it adds so much more depth to the genre than d3 does. Drag skill, much more usability and interaction with the environment, different stances for each class. It really feels like their trying to do more than simply toast the stale bread.

Ah, I see your argument is based more on your personal dismay with the mechanics. There is no conversation to be had here then.

Also, I hate having to draw all over the screen to play games. There were 2 dungeon crawlers that had that mechanic and I despised them.

You enjoy cake.
I enjoy pie.
End scene.

[Profyrion]

Skip to 4:50 in the video. That's new. That's interesting. That goes beyond click click click click click and adds some innovation into the genre. That game feels like it adds so much more depth to the genre than d3 does. Drag skill, much more usability and interaction with the environment, different stances for each class. It really feels like their trying to do more than simply toast the stale bread.

Great example, and very cool vid. Thanks for posting it.

[Demithio]

Blizzard has been a little light on the "epic" innovation in recent years. They aren't quite the company they used to be in terms of game development, for various reasons. IMO mainly because they've become too corporate, they were much better as a smaller company, as most are. There seems to be a somewhat of a trend with gaming developers these days, the larger they get the more cookie cutter their games become.

---------- Post added 2012-05-23 at 12:15 PM ----------

Skip to 4:50 in the video. That's new. That's interesting. That goes beyond click click click click click and adds some innovation into the genre. That game feels like it adds so much more depth to the genre than d3 does. Drag skill, much more usability and interaction with the environment, different stances for each class. It really feels like their trying to do more than simply toast the stale bread.

Amazing looking video, this has me highly interested, but of course we will need more details. Looks really hot though, and its nice to see someone may still believe in adding depth to a game.

[DeadmanWalking]

Ah, I see your argument is based more on your personal dismay with the mechanics. There is no conversation to be had here then.

Also, I hate having to draw all over the screen to play games. There were 2 dungeon crawlers that had that mechanic and I despised them.

You enjoy cake.
I enjoy pie.
End scene.

Unfortunately that won't end scene, Atrahasis gets bored at work and spends his time entertaining himself by coming here and bashing Bliz and Diablo. Soon after the launch hubub has passed (It has died down to an awkward moan now) all that will be left is those who are currently playing the game ....... and Atrahasis.

[Glorious Leader]

Unfortunately that won't end scene, Atrahasis gets bored at work and spends his time entertaining himself by coming here and bashing Bliz and Diablo. Soon after the launch hubub has passed (It has died down to an awkward moan now) all that will be left is those who are currently playing the game ....... and Atrahasis.

If only I were the only person disenchanted with diablo 3. Then your parade could carry on without any rain. Sadly that's just not the case...

---------- Post added 2012-05-23 at 08:50 PM ----------

Ah, I see your argument is based more on your personal dismay with the mechanics. There is no conversation to be had here then.

Also, I hate having to draw all over the screen to play games. There were 2 dungeon crawlers that had that mechanic and I despised them.

You enjoy cake.
I enjoy pie.
End scene.

You may not like the mechanic but it's SOMETHING. I'm sure other developers who aren't as complacent will come up with different stuff to keep you interested. Just because Blizzard is a mega company and seemingly can get away with what is no better than their brother company releasing tired rehashes of the cod franchise over over and over again doesn't mean every company does this. Really what did you think the argument was? Yes I personally am dismayed by the lack of mechanic evolution in diablo but I happen to think that if more people actually took the time and thought about it they'd realize pretty soon that the game didn't really evolve much and that they paid 60 bucks for Diablo 3: Modern Warfare. Only difference is the 12 year interval..

[Highangel]

Wow was new and interesting...

D3 and SC2 was just old wine on new bottles, if you ask me... still tasted great, but already tried it.

[Afrospinach]

People always seem confused by what innovation actually means. The rune system in Diablo is an innovation, it is a new way of doing something. It has not necessarily brought anything revolutionary to the game but it is new. Polishing the game and adding these features is innovating. Innovation does not mean invention. Taking a coke can and adding the foil/plastic widget from an orange juice carton in place of the aluminium widget would be an example of innovating without inventing anything. What Blizzard lacks right now would be called revolutionary innovation, since all they are doing at this time is incremental innovation, at least as far as we are concerned. Titan is being made, they can't just blink these things into existence so I would even challenge anyone saying they lack the former. Also - moving in a direction you don't like does not mean lack of innovation either.