Have Blizzard Lost Their Way?
By David Kay

1996. That was the last time Blizzard released an original game. That game was Diablo. And what a game it was! Diablo, and Baldur’s Gate soon after, helped the computer games producers of the world notice that millions of RPGers were still interested in buying computer games. The ripples from Diablo are still being felt, and it bears at least part of the credit for paving the way for the current phenomenon of the MMORPG. Make no mistake, it is a phenomenon, a multi-million dollar one, which is why there are so many MMOGs in development now. Everyone wants a piece of the RPG pie. Back in 1996 Blizzard took a chance, and were handsomely rewarded for their efforts. The other original element that came along with Diablo was Battle.net. A free (and still free) Internet service catering solely for Blizzard products. A great idea, and one that ensure Diablo lasted longer than it otherwise would have on most people’s hard drives. While it became harder and harder to play Diablo online due to the prevalence of hackers and cheats, Blizzard still deserve top marks for this visionary move.

So what happened? Since Diablo, Blizzard have taken no chances at all. They’ve been on the sequel train, and show no signs of getting off any time soon. ‘What about Starcraft?’ I hear you say. Starcraft was just Warcraft 2 with sci-fi graphics. It contained little in the way of original elements, nothing that had not been done before. I think the release of Total Annihilation (remember that?) a few months before the original Starcraft release date had Blizzard scared, and was responsible for Starcraft not looking totally like a Warcraft II makeover. They couldn't disguise it completely, though. Watch those little humans collect the crystal. Watch them bring it back to base. Now crank up Warcraft II and watch your peons gathering gold. Yup. Nothing’s changed, except the graphics. Starcraft was not all bad of course. But original? Hardly. A refined game in the RTS stable, but one that does what has previously been done a bit better. Starcraft is not a title that offers anything to the genre in the way of innovation. If you’re looking for something original in the RTS stable, I recommend Giants: Citizen Kabuto. For fast online play, try Red Alert 2.

Let’s now talk modern. Diablo 2. My first thoughts, having played the game for less than an hour, was ‘they took 3 years to make this?’ It was the same damn game! The monsters were just as stupid, rushing towards you, waiting to be hacked down. ‘Maybe this is just the early, weak monsters using the rush as their only tactic,’ I hoped. Not so. Every monster in the game exhibits the same level of stupidity. Once again, the graphics had changed, but little else. Instead of wandering though dungeons, you wandered across plains and desert. Big Deal. Of course, there was more of everything. More scenery, more monsters, more characters, more weapons, but so what? That’s what add-on packs are for. Waiting three years and paying full price of Diablo 1.5 wasn’t what I had in mind. So I didn’t.

I seem to be about the only one, though. Diablo 2 has been a best seller. But you don’t need to be original, or even that good, to be a best seller. Just ask Britney Spears.

After the Diablo Battle.net experience, Blizzard had to address issues of hacking and cheating, which they did. They also introduced the one good thing about Diablo 2: hardcore mode. I’m a big fan of perma death in role paying games. The only other RPG I can think of offhand that had this is feature Wasteland, that venerable predecessor of Fallout. Permanent death is a great feature, and you don’t have to play it if you don’t want to. But it makes the game a lot more fun, because you give a damn about the damage your character takes, your actions become a little more ‘realistic’ because you have a care for your virtual life, when it’s the only one you have. So there you have it- no game is all bad. Diablo 2 is just mostly bad.

I’m sure we’ll see Diablo 3 in three or four years. Want to know what will be in it? Six acts, eight characters, and monsters that stupidly rush forward to die in a frenzy of mouse clicking. You wait.

While Diablo 2 was in development, another game, called Warcraft Adventures, was on the board. Eventually, the project was cancelled, and when you cut through the PR message, the reason was that it was just too different. Imagine that, trying something different. Good thing they caught it in time.

Now we have Warcraft III to look forward to, and, sometime in the distant future, Starcraft 2. Warcraft III does not excite me, mostly because every news item about the game these days concerns features that are being dropped. These are all features that weren’t in Warcraft II, or Starcraft. Now they won’t be in Warcraft III either. It looks like Blizzard are stuck on the ‘more’ trail. More races (though they’ve dropped the two most interesting ones), more missions, etc. All I want to know is; are they making a good game? I have my doubts. What is telling are the things we are not hearing about. Improvements to unit AI. Units with different movement patterns, tactics, and so on. We have heard little to nothing on the actual mechanics of this title. Is this because they have nothing new to tell us?

Blizzard have changed their role from being a developer of original titles, to a developer of ever increasing sequels. Nothing original, nothing that bad. Just was the market wants. The trouble is, I’m not a fan of Britney Spears.

Back to main page