The Diablo series is known for its dark, gothic atmosphere and its revolutionary contribution to the ARPG (Action Role-Playing Game) genre. Blizzard Entertainment released Diablo II in 2000 for both PC and macOS, just four years after its predecessor. At the time of the 2000 release of the Guinness Book of World Records, it was the fastest computer game ever sold. Needless to say, it was a commercial success. Just a year later, Diablo II: Lord of Destruction (LoD) was released that added two new classes, balancing changes, as well as a new act. Diablo III was released in 2012 that expanded platforms available from just PC and macOS to Xbox 360 and PS3, although later the game became compatible with Xbox One, PS4, as well as the Nintendo Switch. Later, the Reaper of Souls (RoS) expansion was added that introduced a new class, a new act, and an improved leveling (paragon) system. This post will analyze the efforts Activision Blizzard took to modernize Diablo III: RoS, as well as what elements were inspired by Diablo II: LoD in terms of artstyle, story, and gameplay.
Art style
The primary colors in the Diablo series are very dark and contrasted with lots of red, typically creating zones covered in ash and flame. These visual elements are meant to have some connection with the classic Christian interpretation of Hell and this is shown well in both games. Many zones include rivers of lava and all of them include menacing demons. However, it is no question that these elements are more prominent in Diablo II.
One of the most outstanding takeaways in the differences between Diablo II and III is the use of primary colors in the Diablo boss fight. The images below both show the final fight with Diablo (guess which game is which) and these images alone show the polarizing contrast of visuals. This point of the game, disregarding the expansions, is the climax and the end campaign goal for the player to achieve. It could even be argued that the final boss fight of any game is its most exciting part. Blizzard intentionally chose to make the final fight with Diablo in the High Heavens of D3 and in Hell of D2. So why did they want to make the D3 fight look like it could take place in a more light-hearted game and why does the D2 fight look like some Cannibal Corpse artwork? One could make the argument that Blizzard public relations did not want the players of 2012 fighting on top of a pentagram surrounded by fire, but then again the Diablo series is well renowned for its dark atmosphere.
The final fight with Diablo is an extreme example of the visual differences between the two games, but in actuality, both games share a lot of the same zone similarities. The second acts of both games take place in a desert-like atmosphere, as shown below in Lut Gholein of Diablo 2 and Caldeum of Diablo 3. The harsh desert climate likely represents some hopelessness or a struggle for survival, so it certainly contributes well to both games.
Story
The stories of both Diablo II: LoD and Diablo III are pretty cliche — evil beings trying to kill everything in the world of Sanctuary because they’re evil. In both games the player fights the forces of Hell, defeating some Prime and Lesser Evils along the way. The real dividing line, however, is the method the story is told. In short, the story of Diablo II is told with cutscenes at the end of each act and Diablo III is told as the player completes objectives throughout the act.
In Diablo II, the player is trailing Diablo and cleaning up whatever mess he makes along the way in his efforts to reach his final form and resurrect the other Prime Evils. There is very little addition to the plot during the gameplay, other than defeating the boss at the end of the act. In between each of the four acts is a cutscene that shows what Diablo is doing next, hinting at what the player will be fighting within the next act. Once Diablo is defeated in Act IV, the player progresses to Act V once they realize that Baal, another Prime Evil, is still kicking around. Defeating Baal is the essence of the Lord of Destruction expansion. He is shown below.
It’s worth noting that in Diablo II the player has virtually no backstory and it doesn’t matter who the player is. In Diablo III the player is the Nephalem, a half-demon, half-angel, being capable of great power, regardless of what class is chosen. It’s possible that Blizzard wanted to increase the importance of the player in an effort to make the story feel more personal, as was done in World of Warcraft.
The Nephalem is warned in Act I that two Lesser Evils, Azmodan and Belial, are in Sanctuary and must be stopped. Diablo is later resurrected and the Nephalem defeats him in Act IV. There are a few twists and betrayals in Diablo III, likely because Blizzard wanted to deviate from the traditional Kill the Bad Guy kind of story, but it is ruined by the medium it is told. Throughout the entirety of the first three acts, the player is spoon fed information, sometimes by their enemies, during gameplay that foreshadows the story. Azmodan, the baddie of Act III, literally points the player in the right direction numerous times. The souls of all Great Evils are captured within a Black Soulstone, which is stolen by an angel named Malthael at the beginning of Diablo III: Reaper of Souls. Malthael intends to destroy the Black Soulstone and kill all of humanity along with it, introducing a unique enemy to the Diablo series.
Gameplay
In both Diablo II: LoD and Diablo III: RoS, the player is abundantly outnumbered and must fight through hordes of undead and demons. The combat is fast-paced, the player is always moving, and it is never clear what lies behind each corner. Each map is mostly randomized so there is no way to know the fastest route, and each zone contains a random number and quality of enemies. This introduces a lot of replayability and a unique experience for every playthrough. Additionally, each enemy has random loot drops ranging from common, useless items to powerful uniques. There are seven classes available in both games that have unique skills and talent trees, which were/are regularly balanced.
As a dungeon-crawler with such a heavy emphasis on replayability, once a player completed the Acts I-V in D2 on Normal difficulty it would be repeated again in Nightmare difficulty and then in Hell difficulty. In D3: RoS, the player completes Acts I-V and then has the option to complete Bounties and later Nephalem Rifts in Adventure Mode on all characters. In Bounties, the player is assigned 5 random tasks within one act to complete, receiving a reward upon completion.
The endgame of the Diablo series has always been its weak point. In D2 it is best described as killing Uber Diablo, which takes an astronomical amount of time to do. This was improved in D3: RoS with the Nephalem Rift system, which allowed the player to scale the difficulty of a given zone to increase the chances of better item drops.
While both games have gold as the in-game currency, it is, by all means, useless in Diablo II. The only reason to use gold in D2 is to purchase items from NPC’s, except all items purchasable by NPC’s are either really cheap or obsolete. In fact, it is so useless that players use runes, which can be socketed within items to improve them, as their in-game currency instead when trading with other players. D3: RoS, however, ended the ability for players to trade with one another in the vanilla version of the game. Fortunately, gold has much use in D3 in its crafting system and most items can be recycled to create new ones, which allows the player to progress on their own.
As the player levels, they unlock new skills unique to their class. In Diablo II, skill choices are featured on a talent tree as shown below. The skill choices are permanent, with the exception of one reset per difficulty upon the completion of a particular quest in Act I. Typically, if a player wanted to try a new build they would need to create a brand new character because these resets would be used during leveling. In Diablo III, the player can change skills at any time since they are no longer offered within a talent tree. This means that if one has a maximum level character of a class they can play every build available to that class.
The overall experience of the game is affected by the freedom of skill choices. There were many build paths available in D2 that differentiated one Barbarian from another. Unique build choices were lost once Blizzard chose to make all skills available in D3, where a Barbarian is just a Barbarian. This was an effort by Blizzard to cater to casual players, which epitomizes was Diablo 3 became. In all honesty, it’s too easy to say that D2:LoD was a better game through rose-tinted glasses because there was no ARPG competition. Blizzard took a lot of risks to stand out from other games that were ironically inspired by Diablo II and created a different experience in the process. However, the main elements of Diablo remain and both games deserve the commercial success they received.
This review is very informative and easy to read. This is my first exposure to the Diablo franchise and this is very helpful if I wanted to purchase one of these games as to which one I would chose. I am curious now to know more about the franchise and see which direction they went with the following releases based on the reception of the differences between these two versions.