Diablo® III

{SPOILER} Sorry, but the Story is BAD

88 Human Death Knight
4460
Posts: 287
06/03/2012 06:58 AMPosted by Melyria
Him falling and raising the dead is not a bad explaination


yes it is

06/03/2012 06:58 AMPosted by Melyria
The fallen star, the stranger, was a good way to start the story off by giving us a reason for the dead rising.


but its a BAD reason

06/03/2012 06:58 AMPosted by Melyria
Are you faulting the story for that?


YES!!! The story IS AT FAULT, because its clunky and doesn't make sense. Tyrael's fall from heaven wakes the dead and kills people? STAY IN HEAVEN TYRAEL!!!!!!!! I mean, what purpose did he serve?

06/03/2012 06:58 AMPosted by Melyria
As for the sword pieces, we give them to the Stranger in an attempt to jog his memory. Which works, as this allows us to find the last sword piece in Wortham


well it works until it gets Deckard Cain killed because we easily get duped by a silly bug witch

06/03/2012 06:58 AMPosted by Melyria
Cain being killed by Leah would've first made Cain look stupid for ignoring all the signs he KNEW about Leah (the reason why they killed him so early) and would've been a cliche as hell device.


perhaps a silly bug witch that is meaningless to the story at large IS a better way to go. I was throwing that idea as a FOR INSTANCE. They could have done any number of things better for Cain's death (or, I dont know, NOT KILL HIM)

Are you just going to ignore anything decent just to pan the game?


No, I said I liked some stuff

06/03/2012 06:58 AMPosted by Melyria
Azmodan had a fully fledged army that was waiting to be unleashed on Sanctuary.


Waiting for? Why WAS he waiting? He was waiting for the player character to come along and do everything. Its called lazy writing.

06/03/2012 06:58 AMPosted by Melyria
Events occuring specifically to flesh out a character happen all the time in literature... and you're questioning this?


oh come ON. I am referring to this specific storyline, not ALL OF LITERATURE. Stop trying to make this about ME and argue what I say about the game itself. I swear, nobody can debate these days without trying to bash the person they are debating against. JUST ARGUE THE POINTS AND STOP BEING CUTE.

06/03/2012 06:58 AMPosted by Melyria
The Cinematic was pointless and would've been better showing off the actual betrayal, not a fight between Imperius and Diablo.


I call bull!@#$, the cinematic was cool, end of story

In my huge post I make one passing comment about how the previous games had more conventional, dark, and heroic storylines and you jump all over it. What are you a Republican?
Edited by Draegore#1112 on 6/3/2012 7:34 AM PDT
90 Night Elf Rogue
11905
Posts: 13,320
06/03/2012 07:32 AMPosted by Draegoe
yes it is


Why? As a literature student you should be providing reasons for why it is bad. Not just because you think it is. Answers like this would earn you a failing grade on your paper.

06/03/2012 07:32 AMPosted by Draegoe
but its a BAD reason


Same as above. Why is it a bad reason? Just saying "Its bad" is not good enough.

06/03/2012 07:32 AMPosted by Draegoe
YES!!! The story IS AT FAULT, because its clunky and doesn't make sense. Tyrael's fall from heaven wakes the dead and kills people? STAY IN HEAVEN TYRAEL!!!!!!!! I mean, what purpose did he serve?


So, again, you're faulting characters and story for events that they could not percieve at the time? These sort of things happen all the time in books, movies, plays, etc.

You're using information you glean after these events to judge Tyrael in hindsight. This sort of logic would earn you minus points on any essay you were writing.

06/03/2012 07:32 AMPosted by Draegoe
well it works until it gets Deckard Cain killed because we easily get duped by a silly bug witch


It works, period. Without the shards we wouldn't have gotten the sword piece location. The fact that Cain dies because of this has no bearing on the actual sword. You're not judging the events because of how much they make sense, but rather because a character you loved died as a result.

06/03/2012 07:32 AMPosted by Draegoe
perhaps a silly bug witch that is meaningless to the story at large IS a better way to go. I was throwing that idea as a FOR INSTANCE. They could have done any number of things better for Cain's death (or, I dont know, NOT KILL HIM)


Characters die. Characters have their stories told or outlive their narrative usefulness. You're faulting a story for ending Cain's arc? An 80 year old man?

This is why I question you're credibility as a 'literature student'.

06/03/2012 07:32 AMPosted by Draegoe
No, I said I liked some stuff


And yet you gloss over them. You are not offering a fair and unbiased outlook. This would earn you a fail on any essay deconstructing a story or novel.

06/03/2012 07:32 AMPosted by Draegoe
Waiting for? Why WAS he waiting? He was waiting for the player character to come along and do everything. Its called lazy writing.


Because the Soulstone was filled now with 6/7 Evils, Azmodan decided now was the time to strike. Prior to these events, Azmodan was able to rally his army for as long as he wanted, making it stronger and stronger. Yet, now that there is a greater prize at stake, he launched his attack prematurely.

In other words, he was always going to invade, you sealing 6/7 Evils in the stone just makes him attack you sooner.

06/03/2012 07:32 AMPosted by Draegoe
oh come ON. I am referring to this specific storyline, not ALL OF LITERATURE.


You are faulting a storyline for giving a character some depth. You are unfairly judging the storyline.

06/03/2012 07:32 AMPosted by Draegoe
Stop trying to make this about ME and argue what I say about the game itself.


I am making this 'about you' because your citations and comments are so biased that you cannot be taken seriously. You puff yourself up as a 'literature student', yet this deconstruction of the story would earn you multiple fails.

06/03/2012 07:32 AMPosted by Draegoe
I call bull!@#$, the cinematic was cool, end of story


Cool has no ties on the story. A cool event can be completely against the grain of a storyline. Cool has no relevance here, in a discussion on plot.

06/03/2012 07:32 AMPosted by Draegoe
In my huge post I make one passing comment about how the previous games had more conventional, dark, and heroic storylines and you jump all over it. What are you a Republican?


No, you made more than a passing comment. You inherently tried to raise the specter of Diablo 1 and Diablo 2. If this was purely about D3's storyline you wouldn't have even mentioned the past games or how this game 'doesn't feel like Diablo'.

You betrayed your intentions by brining the past games up. You were not deconstructing this plot as a literature student. You were doing it as a raging fanboy of the previous games.

That is what I take issue with. Because you are so biased, so intent on panning the story, that your comments about being a 'literature student' don't even come into play. All it is is an attempt to sound smarter than you really are.
Edited by Melyria#1246 on 6/3/2012 7:50 AM PDT
90 Worgen Death Knight
6125
Posts: 32
Agreed. The OP was so focused on giving a bad review he completely ignored key and obvious things.

No one human or angel knew the consequences of tyreal ripping of his wings would be.

Belial and azmodan were in place long before the start of the story, and as far as act 2 being less epic you could argue that, but belial is more of a deceiver than a war mongerer. Throughout out the entire act he attacks you with illusions and lies which is what he does.

You kept calling Adria a stranger. Adria is Leah's mother which is plainly stated in act 1. And there is an immediate trust because of that. Family is family. We didn't know diablo had his way with her.

Maghda was working for belial, and getting the sword pieces from him. Nothing is said what he wanted to do with them.

As for just hacking up the prime evils as an alternative you suggested instead of dealing with the soulstones. They're demons and immortal. You can't kill them. You can only beat them into submission, and then imprison them.

One thing I don't get about the story is how did all the evils get inside the black soulstone? Didn't they have their own? It's been a while since I played the other diablos. Also, this takes place 20 years after diablo 2.....How is Cain even still alive from the stat. He hasn't
changed at all. He drove the plot in the past diablos, so blizzard wanted something something else to drive the plot, so you have tyreal, Leah, and Adria.

Maybe should wait till you're awake so you can have a full understanding of the story, and try and write a review at four in the morning.

Also, I have never been a fan of blizzards story writing. It always feels contrived and unoriginal, however, this review is just bad.
I think the biggest problem with the story is with the soulstone itself.

What it comes down to is we're basically trying to do the same thing as in Diablo II: We destroy the soulstone so the evils inside will be gone forever. But why? This obviously didn't work in Diablo II as the souls of Diablo, Mephisto and Baal are still around in DIII.

We as the player character can't know that this plan isn't going to work as our hero now isn't the hero of DII, but two characters in DIII obviously would know: Cain and Tyrael. The black soulstone story begins in act II so that does it for Cain. But why doesn´t Tyrael at least question Adria´s plan and just follow like a sheep?

Obviously DIII doesn't finish the entire storyline with all the unresolved things (Adria, Imperius, Malthael, etc.) But the only thing that would make sense to me know is if in the expansion(s?) it will be revealed that Tyrael is not as nice as he seems, otherwise he's really dumb for the new archangel of wisdom.

One other thing i don't see mentioned here is nobody think it strange that the Skeleton King is back. He was defeated in Diablo I. Him returning basically means he can come back in every game/expansion as we don't seem to do something special to finally kill him this time.

But why is he back at all? If Tyrael turning mortal brings back the unjustfully slain shouldn't he remain dead? After sending a kingdom in chaos, killing thousands (including his own wife) i would think if anyone's murder would be justice it would be Leoric's.

I very much hope that things get put right in the expansions but this game as a story in itself has far too many contradictions. You can explain them all you want which is fun to do, but I think the game itself should explain more.
Edited by Dirach#1299 on 6/3/2012 7:59 AM PDT
90 Worgen Death Knight
6125
Posts: 32
The reason the fallen star woke leoric was because blizzard wanted to bring back an old boss/character for nostalgia.

They do this constantly.
90 Night Elf Rogue
11905
Posts: 13,320
What it comes down to is were basically trying to do the same thing as in Diablo II: We destroy the soulstone so the evils inside will be gone forever. But why? This obviously didn't work in Diablo II as the souls of Diablo, Mephisto and Baal are still around in DIII.


In part because the Three knew how to corrupt their soulstones because of Izual's information. The Black Soulstone does not have the same properties.

06/03/2012 07:54 AMPosted by Dirach
But why doesn´t Tyrael at least question Adria´s plan and just follow like a sheep?


Now this is a general problem. And it is a valid concern.

Best I can see, Tyrael assumed that Adria had noble intentions and that she had sealed away the 3 Evils that Tyrael couldn't. So he may've given her the benefit of the doubt.

06/03/2012 07:54 AMPosted by Dirach
But why is he back at all? If Tyrael turning mortal brings back the unjustfully slain shouldn't he remain dead? After sending a kingdom in chaos, killing thousands (including his own wife) i would think if anyone's murder would be justice it would be Leoric's.


Leoric viewed his death as unjust. You see this in the short 'animation' of Lachdanon killing him in the crypts (you have to click the ghostly sword).

It doesn't matter if his death was just or not. Just that Leoric thought it was unjust.
Edited by Melyria#1246 on 6/3/2012 8:01 AM PDT
The reason the fallen star woke leoric was because blizzard wanted to bring back an old boss/character for nostalgia.

They do this constantly.


Obviously, as they also brought back (a) butcher and Izual, but that's no explanation storywise.

As for the butcher and izual. The first get's the (IMO rather lame) explanation in the form of cain's lore entry explaining that there are more butcher demons.

But Izual also makes a completely unexplained return. This way we can keep killing these guys in every game/expansion. Don't get me wrong I like these characters but if they bring them back that should be properly explained.
90 Night Elf Rogue
11905
Posts: 13,320
06/03/2012 08:05 AMPosted by Dirach
As for the butcher and izual. The first get's the (IMO rather lame) explanation in the form of cain's lore entry explaining that there are more butcher demons.


Yes, some people disliked this. Frankly, it was either this or have them revive the old Butcher. Or not use him at all. And, yes, some would prefer the last option, but Blizzard wanted a bit of nostalgia. Can't entirely fault them for that.

06/03/2012 08:05 AMPosted by Dirach
But Izual also makes a completely unexplained return.


You get a journal on Izual. After you kill him in D2 he should've been reborn throught he Crystal Arch. He was not. Instead, Izual was fully aware of what he was and decided to permenantly join Hell, thus taking on a new demonic body.

Basically, Izual's corruption was so complete that he permenantly defected to Hell's side.
70 Blood Elf Paladin
1125
Posts: 229
Even without his wings Tyrael posses abilities which put him beyond most mortal men so it's a good thing he came down. ("Justice falls upon the world of men") Though he wasn't observant enough to become the incarnation of wisdom at the end so... that was weird.

I don't get why the Archangel of Justice's power bringing back those unjustly slain is a bad reason for the dead rising. Leoric was killed because he was possessed (partly possessed), it wasn't his fault so he would want vindication...

Adria was so aggressive during Act II that it was easy to tell that she was CLEARLY evil. The story isn't horrible (it's pretty bad), it's just so easy to predict that it feels horrible.

Belial is a poor excuse for a lord of lies sadly... He was the one who had the best chance of stopping the main character who is on par with the strongest Nephalem that ever existed (according to Itherael that is, he said something along the lines of "there has only been one Nephalem who equaled you in power). That Nephalem had the power to take on both heaven and hell but chose not to and sacrificed his own life to protect sanctuary (causing Tyrael to change his tune and become pro human).

Do you get that? The main character basically has the power of a GOD. Azmodan, Belial, and Diablo didn't wrap their heads around that quickly enough so if you want to talk about lack of foresight, the villains are just as guilty as the protagonist.
Edited by Disismyhappy#1495 on 6/3/2012 8:17 AM PDT
06/03/2012 08:05 AMPosted by Dirach
But Izual also makes a completely unexplained return.


You get a journal on Izual. After you kill him in D2 he should've been reborn throught he Crystal Arch. He was not. Instead, Izual was fully aware of what he was and decided to permenantly join Hell, thus taking on a new demonic body.

Basically, Izual's corruption was so complete that he permenantly defected to Hell's de.


OK, missed that one, just looked in-game and it indeed says that 'his replacement never emerged from the crystal arch', which could indeed explain why he's back as a demon (still I think it's a bit simple to throw him back in, IMO at the very least they should have given him a bigger role in DIII then just a demon-shield for Diablo)

In part because the Three knew how to corrupt their soulstones because of Izual's information. The Black Soulstone does not have the same properties.


As far as i can tell the soulstones corruption in DII only meant that the Prime Evils could affect the worldstone, not with them being slain forever or not when they were destroyed.

But still even if your explanation of the soulstones being corrupted and this causing the prime evils not to be destroyed when the stones were is correct, it isn't mentioned anywhere in Diablo III as far as I can tell.

Reading a lot of posts on the storyline forum this is something i keep seeing: people trying to explain what the game fails to explain.
Edited by Dirach#1299 on 6/3/2012 8:23 AM PDT
90 Night Elf Rogue
11905
Posts: 13,320
06/03/2012 08:21 AMPosted by Dirach
As far as i can tell the soulstones corruption in DII only meant that the Prime Evils could affect the worldstone, not with them being slain forever or not when they were destroyed.


The Soulstones had to be destroyed because, with them corrupted, the Primes could use them to influence the world around them. This is how Mephisto corrupted the Zakarum and Diablo was able to spread his terror around Tristram in D1.

06/03/2012 08:21 AMPosted by Dirach
But still even if your explanation of the soulstones being corrupted and this causing the prime evils not to be destroyed when the stones were is correct, it isn't mentioned anywhere in Diablo III as far as I can tell.


Destroying a soulstone with an Evil in it sends the Evil to 'The Void' a place beyond creation. Presumably, Adria's mark allowed for Diablo and Mephisto's souls to be drawn out of the Void and into the Black Soulstone.

But we're all reading this assuming that Adria was telling the truth. It could be full and well that destroying the Black Soulstone could've released the other Evils.
The information is all there and the dude who posted this is jaded. Im a devout diablo fan from 95 and this game has the potential to be the best of the 3 because it is the most ambitious. Most people like to be spoon fed. Its a modern day phenomenon.

haters gonna hate
Edited by sOLO#6733 on 6/3/2012 8:40 AM PDT
Posts: 2,072
Potential and ambition are great, but don't amount for much when they result in a story as weak as D3's.
Tyreal didn't "leak angel juice", he awoke all the souls that were unjustly killed during Diablos first rampage in Diablo I, because he was the Archangel of Justice.

If you have ever played Diablo II at all and payed attention to the story you would know that the Angels only have a limited amount of time to spend in Sanctuary, and after that time has run out they cannot go back for a long time, as said by Tyreal himself at the end of Act II Diablo II when you rescue him from Tal'Rasha's tomb.

Also Tyreal was unaware, as well as most of the other angels, of the consequences of his actions, as well as being unaware that Heaven would just spit him out after ripping his wings off. Tyreal removed himself from angelic status because he couldn't stomach being a part of a society that would stand by and watch innocents burn.

And Tyreals fall didn't awaken everything, it awoke King Leoric, who in turn reinstated his curse, summoning up skeletal fiends.

The sword pieces were handed over to Cain because if you noticed, each piece you collected unlocked more of Tyreals memory.

One thing you got to understand with Blizzard games, whether it be Starcraft, Warcraft, or Diablo is that Blizzard likes the type of story where no matter what you do you either make things worse, or ultimately don't save the day. Don't be fooled the cookie cutter hollywood ending in Diablo III isn't the end, and there will be something bigger and nastier coming in an expansion, and Blizzard will some how make it the players fault, because Blizzard likes stories where the heroes don't win.


You know damn well he wasn't literally implying there was angle juice...
You fail to realize the point (1st time) which is that there's no need for Tyreal to go to Sanctuary here. All Tyreal did was pull a spoiled brat "run away from home". It's dumb. You telling us why he did the dumb thing shows you're missing the point (2nd time) b/c you're ignoring that it is dumb.
Again being overly literal this time with the word everything PLUS you ignoring all the dead just to try and act like the skeleton king alone was res'd when clearly it was SK plus all the undead that came with him...welp yup you missed the point (3rd time & 4th)
Explaining why dumb move was done with Cain (5TH TIME this time similar kind of point being missed in same exact way.)
Things being our fault is fine as long as it's not our fault in a very poorly written joke of a manner. (What exactly was our fault in D2 or D1? Wrong statement is wrong...btw thats missing the point in multiple acts and games so it seems you just. Don't. Get. It.)
Edited by Shingram#1112 on 6/3/2012 10:47 AM PDT
/popcorn
The information is all there and the dude who posted this is jaded. Im a devout diablo fan from 95 and this game has the potential to be the best of the 3 because it is the most ambitious. Most people like to be spoon fed. Its a modern day phenomenon.

haters gonna hate


First post I've mashed the like button on.

My only gripe with the entire story was how Cain was killed off, felt cheap and lazy and I feel it deserved a solid 10min CGI scene(and hearing one more "stay awhile and listen").

I admit some subtle things slipped past me at first, like Azmodan being the greatest tactician but he tells the people who just stomped a mud hole in his brother where he will attack from. Except that it was a wise choice assuming he thought his army(ARMY and not just random wandering fiends) was enough to stop them and take the soul stone. He also does an excellent job of infiltrating the strongest stronghold in sanctuary, even goes so far as to poison the food and water so that if he has to he can just wait it out.

Their were some plot hole and some lazy parts, over all however I think it was a good story and parts intentionally left open to make room for an expansion or two.
he, as the Archangel of Justice, would not stand to be one of the High Heavens if they would let such injustice go unpunished.

Why is that the way to make his point? dumb move by writers and dumb defense by you

Him falling and raising the dead is not a bad explaination. The fallen star, the stranger, was a good way to start the story off by giving us a reason for the dead rising. So what if his fall had unexpected result. Are you faulting the story for that? That actions have unforseen consequences?

Yes it is bad. No it wasn't good. It seemed cool initially yes but when you find out the reason it just sounds retarded and neatly cancels anything good about it..

As for the sword pieces, we give them to the Stranger in an attempt to jog his memory. Which works, as this allows us to find the last sword piece in Wortham. It seems like you weren't really paying attention to the story as it was happening.

Way to miss his point completely. You need to learn how to read. The people who defend this story seem to have that issue a lot.

As for your idea about Leah killing Cain. I'm sorry, but you're a literature student? And you're complaining about this story? Cain being killed by Leah would've first made Cain look stupid for ignoring all the signs he KNEW about Leah (the reason why they killed him so early) and would've been a cliche as hell device.

Why are you trying to insult him personally with the lit student comment?. BTW wrong statement is wrong. Was he going to murder an innocent Leah just to stop potential Diablo? Oh btw his point was that Cain's original death was pathetic and he offerred this alternative for fun. So clearly you make excuses for a piss poor story that took a decade to make but you criticize fanfic that took mere minutes? WOW. The point (you missed again no surprise) is that almost anything including what he came up with is better than what we got Way to miss the point again as you often seem to do.

As for Act 2, you have valid points. The lack of 'epic' drive though, as a literary student should not be a problem for you. There are luls in a story. There are events that take a slower, more relaxed state. Act 2 was Diablo 3's, the small breath before the evenst of Act 3 and 4.

over a decade to write the story and when it was written it was awful that's his point which you gasp seem to have missed again.

I find it odd that you left out Zoltun Kulle's arc during your review. Because, frankly, the Kulle arc was good. You were given moral ambiguity with the character. You were given some intrigue. You were given some foreshadowing (too much IMO). Are you just going to ignore anything decent just to pan the game?

So in a post about what was bad he should post about what was good? The bigger problem is that you who seem to refuse to criticize this awful story in any way shape or form keep coming into threads about how legitamately awful the story is and asking people to write what was good about it. If you have a good clarification for something fine but your act is getting old and annoying. If you find our act of critique is old and annoying then STOP COMING INTO THREADS CLEARLY LABELED D3 STORY IS BAD.

Your entire breakdown of Act 3, which goes beyond sparse, (again, trying to ignore any good points in the story?) and instead tries to argue that all the events are happening because of us. They aren't. Belial's been in Caldeum for ages, corrupting the entire city. Azmodan had a fully fledged army that was waiting to be unleashed on Sanctuary.

Wow another HUGE missed point by you holy hell. If you need him to clarify all that was wrong by act 3 and IN act 3 then you're clueless.

You argue that because we have the Soulstone, we are responsible. You're wrong. Us having the soulstone hastens the events. Tyrael even says that Azmodan and Belial are on the move. It wouldn't have been much longer before that army pushed through Arreat.

Azmodan was on the move before we got the black soulstone? Didn't see him at Arreat until then.


As for Leah holding back the demons, why is it dumb? If you talk to her, it gives her a story arc. It gives her some depth. It has her lose faith, give up on her dreams, fail to see an end in sight. Events occuring specifically to flesh out a character happen all the time in literature... and you're questioning this?

I don't have a problem with Leah being used in this way there either.

The cinematic was cool as well.


The Cinematic was pointless and would've been better showing off the actual betrayal, not a fight between Imperius and Diablo.

(cont below)
It should've done both but of course that'd require hard work.
@ Shingram, go away. People have given you the EXACT same reason addressing every issue. Tell me how its dumb for the personification of justice itself to get fed up when he's being punished for upholding justice?

Dumb poster is dumb.
Bear with me, I'm writing this at 3:43 a.m.

The storyline of Diablo 3 is, to put it bluntly, BAD.

I say this from the perspective of a Grad student in Literature.

Rather than hit you all with a wall of text, or a traditional essay format, I'll break things down, act by act, to show just how bad this story really is.


I agree, I liked and voted sticky.

I would also connect with this thread:

https://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/5150111877

It sums up and complements with your ideas.

I give D3 History a 2.5/10 rating.
I want to address only one thing here. No one knew what would happen if an angel transubstaite into a human form in the world of Diablo. Its never mentioned in lore that I've read or within the games. So If he doesn't know what effects of ripping his wings off will have, how is that bad writing?

Being the Arcangel of Justice, if he sat back and did nothing, he would be betraying his essence and the core of who he is. There was nothing mentioned that he was the smartest of the angels or the strongest, only what he enbodied. His rash decsion had true aftereffects. It may have been reviving the dead as the Holy energies fled his body with a strong cause and effect.
This topic has reached its post limit. You may no longer post or reply to posts for this topic.

Please report any Code of Conduct violations, including:

Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.

Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.

Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.

Forums Code of Conduct

Report Post # written by

Reason
Explain (256 characters max)

Reported!

[Close]