Review Diablo III Plot Analysis at Gamasutra

[Clockwork Knight]

Why wouldn't you analyze the story? Bliz made a bigger deal out of pushing one into D3 than they did into D2 and D1 before it, and the (unanimous?) decision is that it's worse. They put themselves into this mess, now they can wallow in it.

If your story is more of an excuse, it'll be simple and basic but it'll be harder to fuck up. If you try to make a complex story, it better be good (or at least decent), or it'll be herpderp and you'll be laughed at.

 

[suejak]

I really don't get this at all. I didn't feel like the Diablo 3 story was especially good or memorable, but this article is terrible. He bashes on things that it just doesn't make sense to bash on. Was he seriously surprised when Adria cast spells? What the fuck?

The Butcher, Izual, and The Skeleton King was -- they're all intentional nostalgic throwbacks. It's not a mystery and their explanation was sufficient. I really don't get why this guy cares so much. It's like he thinks all he has to do is point to something and say, "Isn't that bullshit?!" and everybody will agree.

The Skeleton King was resurrected by Tyrael falling from the sky. It was an excuse to have players running through the Cathedral fighting undead again, like the good old days. Cool.

The Butcher was another throwback. Most people don't give a fuck -- he's a cool monster, though not as creepy as in D1.

I dunno, just seems weird to care so much.

BY THE WAY, to the dummies claiming that WC2 and Diablo 1 somehow had "minimalist writing," that's just not true. Every mission of Warcraft 2 was preceded by a massive block of text read by a single narrator. You don't remember because you clicked past it. Diablo 1 also had GIGANTIC, LONG monologues, if you ever bothered to talk to the people in town.

The difference is that budgets and trends have brought the story more into the heart of the game. It used to be just on a splash screen or something you could only get if you clicked on dialogue options (I never did). Now it's woven into the game. I don't necessarily think the new way is better, but you're full of shit if you think the previous games weren't chalk full of loads of terrible writing.

 

[SerratedBiz]

BY THE WAY, to the dummies claiming that WC2 and Diablo 1 somehow had "minimalist writing," that's just not true. Every mission of Warcraft 2 was preceded by a massive block of text read by a single narrator. You don't remember because you clicked past it. Diablo 1 also had GIGANTIC, LONG monologues, if you ever bothered to talk to the people in town.

The point is not in the length of a character's dialog, but how the story is presented and how much exposition happens. In D1, there isn't some huge backstory to who you are and where you came from and why Diablo wants to take Tristram and which henchmen he employs and what he thinks of you and whether you both have a history and the tenous relation between the townspeople and shit.

Yeah, you're right. D1's townspeople had huge monologues. But these weren't about "let me tell you about the great war of heaven and hell". It was Farnham wailing half-drunk about his friends getting murdered in front of him, a peg-legged boy acting tough after meeting a scavenger, a barmaid on whateverthefuckyoudontevensellstuff, etc. These weren't there to fill out the plot of the game, but to enhance Tristram's dark atmosphere.

I mean seriously man, if you're comparing goddamn Farnham the Drunk, Gharbad the Weak or any of their dialogs to the crapalicious codex entries they substituted such things with in D3, then something's wrong with your head.

 

[Mrowak]

I really don't get this at all. I didn't feel like the Diablo 3 story was especially good or memorable, but this article is terrible. He bashes on things that it just doesn't make sense to bash on. Was he seriously surprised when Adria cast spells? What the fuck?

The Butcher, Izual, and The Skeleton King was -- they're all intentional nostalgic throwbacks. It's not a mystery and their explanation was sufficient. I really don't get why this guy cares so much. It's like he thinks all he has to do is point to something and say, "Isn't that bullshit?!" and everybody will agree.

Of course most people will agree, but the problem was D3 visibly doesn't want to be bullshit - all those CGIs, voiceovers and stuff signify that they put lots of moneyz in there to make the story more worthwhile... but there's nothing worthwhile in it... at all. Actually I should sue Blizzard for perma IQ loss.

The Skeleton King was resurrected by Tyrael falling from the sky. It was an excuse to have players running through the Cathedral fighting undead again, like the good old days. Cool.

The Butcher was another throwback. Most people don't give a fuck -- he's a cool monster, though not as creepy as in D1.

Except that:

1) it is nothing like in the good old days
2) the monsters - their presentation - in D3 were lame - both SK and the Butcher (well the cage-grill-arena kinda made up for it in Butcher's case)

As a throwback it just doesn't work - because in D3 they are not characterised by anything that made them so iconic in Diablo 1.

I dunno, just seems weird to care so much.

I will tell you a secret: there are actually plenty of people out there who care about story bullshit in Diablo series: if not about the plot, then at least about the setting. Because, quite frankly if you took Diablo 1 and made it all about androgynous weeaboos slaughtering evil demons in the Neverland inhabited by ponies and other moogles, it would be a quite different game altogether. I am not so sure about that in case of Diablo 3.

BY THE WAY, to the dummies claiming that WC2 and Diablo 1 somehow had "minimalist writing," that's just not true. Every mission of Warcraft 2 was preceded by a massive block of text read by a single narrator. You don't remember because you clicked past it. Diablo 1 also had GIGANTIC, LONG monologues, if you ever bothered to talk to the people in town.

So, what's wrong in monologues or a single narrator, if they work and accomplish the goal they were set out to reach?

The difference is that budgets and trends have brought the story more into the heart of the game. It used to be just on a splash screen or something you could only get if you clicked on dialogue options (I never did). Now it's woven into the game. I don't necessarily think the new way is better, but you're full of shit if you think the previous games weren't chalk full of loads of terrible writing.

Ok, so what was the single instance of bad writing in say Diablo 1? Let me remind you: bad writing is when due to inadequacy of skill the writer does not complete the goal he wanted to reach (or the goal his general audience expected he would reach).

 

[DraQ]

Yeah, you're right. D1's townspeople had huge monologues. But these weren't about "let me tell you about the great war of heaven and hell". It was Farnham wailing half-drunk about his friends getting murdered in front of him, a peg-legged boy acting tough after meeting a scavenger, a barmaid on whateverthefuckyoudontevensellstuff, etc. These weren't there to fill out the plot of the game, but to enhance Tristram's dark atmosphere.

Well, there were also tomes of lore in the labyrinth itself, horadric ones and ones written by Lazarus (presumably).

All they did (apart from augmenting the atmosphere) was dispensing the backstory, but the thing is that they only created small windows into the setting itself, relying heavily on implied greater whole instead of spelling shit out.

Remember kids, the best mystery is always one that's never revealed and it's all too easy to make something exceedingly lame by merely trying to show too much of it.

Take Stalker, for instance. It had good build-up and utterly lame reveal.
Simple way to make it better?
Make the decoder broken or the door it opened caved in.
Make character acknowledge it and give player option to either proceed to the Granter or get the fuck out of NPP and continue playing in freeplay mode following short cutscene.

 

[Gragt]

The whole "mystery" was already explained in the manual. That wouldn't be really important these days but back then it was expected to be required reading. I still appreciate the game working without the need of extradiegetic material, but unless you were a pirate or illiterate back then, you'd have that booklet with the game that would explain the whole situation. Interestingly, the manual for Planescape: Torment only contained the rules for the game and pretty much nothing else, apart from a few bits of text at the back of the poster. And then we entered the era were the manual became expandable.

S.T.A.L.K.E.R. was ok. Not exactly earth-shattering but it sufficed. The delivery on the other hand was rather lame, with the hologram engaging in conversation and delivering all the information in one go. The ending was also weak, but again it worked. No need to put a stigma on giving answers or spelling things out, else you might end up with a wan cop-out the kind of which Valve is praised for as daring.

 

[villain of the story]

Interestingly, the manual for Planescape: Torment only contained the rules for the game and pretty much nothing else, apart from a few bits of text at the back of the poster. And then we entered the era were the manual became expandable.

So you are saying that PST spearheaded the decline, The Brazilian Slaughter.

 

[villain of the story]

Hmm ? I always thought the plot of Diablo was about this obsessive compulsive hoarder guy wearing sunglasses that gets lost in a medieval shopping mall who goes on a killing frenzy against shop owners who he sees as demons from hell.

Fixed for The Brazilian Slaughter.

 

[Gragt]

Among many other things, my dear Mr. The Brazilian Slaughter. Let me ominously pet that ferret I have on my lap.

More seriously, the PST manual is quite big but contains mostly rules for the AD&D 2nd edition system used in the game. The Baldur's Gate manual also had all that sort of information but it also featured a kind of a fun travel guide to the region with reviews for the various inns and taverns, which may be similar to the other side of the PST poster but more extensive. It fleshed things a bit in both case but hardly explained anything about the actual story of the game. It always felt like Blizzard wanted to tell so much more in their games but were limited by what they could put in the game, so they offloaded all that to the manual. In Diablo's case, whether it was an accident or not, it actually worked in its favour if you only consider what is found in the game itself.

 

[villain of the story]

I haven't played Diablo 3 but the first two games did a swell job at visually communicating a rough idea of what transpired at most locations without fatiguing the player with retarded quests. Lots of little details in the environment that give you a general idea. Like the piles of dead women in the harem in Lut Gholein and the enemy types. They gave you a sense of the corruption spreading and turning to chaos and mayhem. The Brazilian Slaughter knows what I'm talking about.

 

[Gragt]

You can never go wrong with piles of dead women. Piles of The Brazilian Slaughter also have the advantage to by hygienic.

 

[DraQ]

The whole "mystery" was already explained in the manual. That wouldn't be really important these days but back then it was expected to be required reading. I still appreciate the game working without the need of extradiegetic material, but unless you were a pirate or illiterate back then

Hello? Poland.

It's hard to find someone who wasn't a pirate back then here.

S.T.A.L.K.E.R. was ok. Not exactly earth-shattering but it sufficed. The delivery on the other hand was rather lame, with the hologram engaging in conversation and delivering all the information in one go. The ending was also weak, but again it worked. No need to put a stigma on giving answers or spelling things out, else you might end up with a wan cop-out the kind of which Valve is praised for as daring.

The delivery was weak, but the reveal itself was much smaller than the build up, the mystery didn't exactly follow from the supposed explanation and overall it's caused me much dismay.

Compare the explanations of Zone's existence from game and from Roadside Picnic it was inspired by.

 

[suejak]

BY THE WAY, to the dummies claiming that WC2 and Diablo 1 somehow had "minimalist writing," that's just not true. Every mission of Warcraft 2 was preceded by a massive block of text read by a single narrator. You don't remember because you clicked past it. Diablo 1 also had GIGANTIC, LONG monologues, if you ever bothered to talk to the people in town.

The point is not in the length of a character's dialog, but how the story is presented and how much exposition happens. In D1, there isn't some huge backstory to who you are and where you came from and why Diablo wants to take Tristram and which henchmen he employs and what he thinks of you and whether you both have a history and the tenous relation between the townspeople and shit.

Yeah, you're right. D1's townspeople had huge monologues. But these weren't about "let me tell you about the great war of heaven and hell". It was Farnham wailing half-drunk about his friends getting murdered in front of him, a peg-legged boy acting tough after meeting a scavenger, a barmaid on whateverthefuckyoudontevensellstuff, etc. These weren't there to fill out the plot of the game, but to enhance Tristram's dark atmosphere.

I mean seriously man, if you're comparing goddamn Farnham the Drunk, Gharbad the Weak or any of their dialogs to the crapalicious codex entries they substituted such things with in D3, then something's wrong with your head.

I don't know why you cherrypicked a flavour character and a random monster and their dialogues as representative of D1's dialogue. Here, I'll quote some of the absurdly long backstory monologues in D1...

Here's some of the endless babbling:

Griswold:

"Stay for a moment - I have a story you might find interesting. A caravan that was bound for the eastern kingdoms passed through here some time ago. It was supposedly carrying a piece of the heavens that had fallen to earth! The caravan was ambushed by cloaked riders just north of here along the roadway. I searched the wreckage for this sky rock, but it was nowhere to be found. If you should find it, I believe that I can fashion something useful from it."

"Greetings! It's always a pleasure to see one of my best customers! I know that you have been venturing deeper into the Labyrinth, and there is a story I was told that you may find worth the time to listen to... One of the men who returned from the Labyrinth told me about a mystic anvil that he came across during his escape. His description reminded me of legends I had heard in my youth about the burning Hellforge where powerful weapons of magic are crafted. The legend had it that deep within the Hellforge rested the Anvil of Fury! This Anvil contained within it the very essence of the demonic underworld... It is said that any weapon crafted upon the burning Anvil is imbued with great power. If this anvil is indeed the Anvil of Fury, I may be able to make you a weapon capable of defeating even the darkest lord of Hell! Find the Anvil for me, and I'll get to work!"

Both of these "advance the plot." Jesus, and you have to watch that shit scroll by a snail's pace, and all he's doing is giving you a quest.

Cain:

"The Gateway of Blood and the Halls of Fire are landmarks of mystic origin. Wherever this book you read from resides it is surely a place of great power. Legends speak of a pedestal that is carved from obsidian stone and has a pool of boiling blood atop its bone encrusted surface. There are also allusions to Stones of Blood that will open a door that guards an ancient treasure... The nature of this treasure is shrouded in speculation, my friend, but it is said that the ancient hero Arkaine placed the holy armor Valor in a secret vault. Arkaine was the first mortal to turn the tide of the Sin War and chase the legions of darkness back to the Burning Hells. Just before Arkaine died, his armor was hidden away in a secret vault. It is said that when this holy armor is again needed, a hero will arise to don Valor once more. Perhaps you are that hero..."

"I know of only one legend that speaks of such a warrior as you describe. His story is found within the ancient chronicles of the Sin War... Stained by a thousand years of war, blood and death, the Warlord of Blood stands upon a mountain of his tattered victims. His dark blade screams a black curse to the living; a tortured invitation to any who would stand before this Executioner of Hell. It is also written that although he was once a mortal who fought beside the Legion of Darkness during the Sin War, he lost his humanity to his insatiable hunger for blood."

"This does not bode well, for it confirms my darkest fears. While I did not allow myself to believe the ancient legends, I cannot deny them now. Perhaps the time has come to reveal who I am. My true name is Deckard Cain the Elder, and I am the last descendant of an ancient Brotherhood that was dedicated to safeguarding the secrets of a timeless evil. An evil that quite obviously has now been released. The Archbishop Lazarus, once King Leoric's most trusted advisor, led a party of simple townsfolk into the Labyrinth to find the King's missing son, Albrecht. Quite some time passed before they returned, and only a few of them escaped with their lives. Curse me for a fool! I should have suspected his veiled treachery then. It must have been Lazarus himself who kidnapped Albrecht and has since hidden him within the Labyrinth. I do not understand why the Archbishop turned to the darkness, or what his interest is in the child. unless he means to sacrifice him to his dark masters! That must be what he has planned! The survivors of his 'rescue party' say that Lazarus was last seen running into the deepest bowels of the labyrinth. You must hurry and save the prince from the sacrificial blade of this demented fiend!"

I can keep going as well. By the way, you claimed "in D1, there isn't some huge backstory to who you are and where you came from and why Diablo wants to take Tristram and which henchmen he employs and what he thinks of you and whether you both have a history and the tenous relation between the townspeople and shit," and that's just not true at all. I don't know if you played this game or what. It's true that there's no relationship between you and Diablo, but there's a lot about Diablo's henchmen and the "tenuous relation between the townspeople."

 

[EG]

He played the game.

He just skipped talking to anyone -- like most gamers.

This creates the reputation of Diablo lacking a story -- while there were many points delivered in dialog or lore books. It's a shame the story isn't interactive in any way that I can recall, though.

 

[crawlkill]

it just seems relevant that it's all so clearly secondary. if you're feeling involved in the Diablo universe, you can let the monologues scroll. they're relatively well-delivered and certainly fit into the world, bursting with grimdark fantasy cliches though they be. if you're not, it's pretty plain that you're not missing anything important by clicking off and wandering away. it's one of those "background to taste" things, like the fucking godawful books in the fucking godawful Elder Scrolls games (seriously have you ever tried reading any of those books I will never be whole again). sitting around in Tristram with the eerie music playing and getting a slightly ominous monologue handed to you by, let's face it, a kinda hot little innkeeper dude sprite doesn't drag you--or didn't drag me, and continues not to, when I go back--out of the game.

let's compare this to such classic Diablo 3 lines as:

"Adria! When did you decide to betray us?"

and the incomparable

"Diablo will never have the sword piece!"

SWORD PIECE? That's not even ENGLISH. You can't even SAY that. And yet this fairy person we don't give any kind of a fuck about feels compelled to do so. And the worst part, the -worst- part, the part that takes the game from anesthetizing to waking-up-in-the-middle-of-surgery, is the way you have to experience it every time. Every single time your characters will pass these asinine remarks. Every time your screen will go black for a momentary loading screen then laboriously load back into the actual product after you've hammered escape once too often and end up with your menu open. You never get that cleared lootable world impression there was in Diablo 2. You have to see the same loathsome characters time and again, and not just to murder them, but to hear them monologuing. About the sword piece.

The plot in Diablo 1 and Diablo 2 was -inoffensive.- People could like it or dislike it as they chose; the presentation allowed for more or less absolute snub if you didn't give no fuck. Maybe if they'd had stories you had to be reminded of so constantly every time you went down to wrench a maul out of a scavenger's belly we'd hate their narratives just as much! Maybe if they insisted on our Getting To Know our cartoonish cackling villains and the completely failing to deliver on them (...why was the bitch following us around all of act 1 just the act 2 miniboss, again?) or on acting like people we'd only seen once or twice were people we knew well (what the FUCK was up with Act 2) or having recently-appeared story characters suddenly and unaccountably betray us (ADRIA WHEN) or on having bosses scream long-winded and more than a little self-conscious threats all the way through fights (what was Diablo's line? "NO ONE HAS EVER ESCAPED FROM THEIR OWN TERROR?" or something completely certifiable like that?)--maybe then we'd hate it just as much! Maybe all of the content really is the same.

But the presentation ain't the same, and it's the whole product that matters.

(I switched from Facebook-style no capitalization after periods to rant-style correct English somewhere in there, sorry if that dissonates anybodyeh)