Diablo 3 demo accidentally made available, Blizzard shuts down servers

[Rick]

In a Wednesday morning stroke of serendipity, some individuals discovered that a Starter Edition of Diablo 3 was made accidentally available for download via their battle.net accounts. Upon discovery of the slip up, Blizzard promptly took battle.net down for maintenance at 8:45am EST. However, those who managed to snag the game before battle.net went dark have reported being able to play through part of the single player campaign without the need of a product key.

Gamers who have been enjoying the Starter Edition report that it is indeed D3, but in a more limited form. Accounts by these players suggest it is similar to the content found in the D3 beta. All of the classes are available to play, but the user interface prompts users to upgrade to the full version in order to access certain features. 

The now-confirmed existence of a D3 Starter Edition coincides with other such watered-down demo versions of popular Blizzard titles, such as StarCraft II and World of Warcraft. For those games, the Starter Edition allows players to enjoy a limited part of the game for free. When upgrading to the full version, the experience is seamless, retaining characters and progress in the demo. Players can probably expect the same treatment for D3 as well.

Diablo 3 has been in development for over a decade, so many fans of the franchise were excited to hear Blizzard officially announce a May 15 launch date. Diablo 3 will feature real-money auctions, five distinct hero classes and sport a controversial DRM scheme that will require players to be online in order to play.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/48257-diablo-3-demo-accidentally-made-available-blizzard-shuts-down-servers.html

 

[lawfer]

Really, it has been in development for over a decade? I had no idea. It better be good. I mean, like, really good.

 

[Mister_K]

Really, it has been in development for over a decade? I had no idea. It better be good. I mean, like, really good.

Its not decade of development good in my opinion, lack of content if you ask me even though all the acts aren't available. If you look at TOR only around 5 years of Development yet it has tones of content (whether the game is good / bad is another discussion).

Anyhow, don't get me wrong, D3 is great but not decade of development good, would of expected far more from 10 years of development. Once again, good but not that good.

 

[Guest]

It was not even officially announced until 2008, so development started in 2008.

 

[Rick]

It was not even officially announced until 2008, so development started in 2008.

How simple life would be if that were true.

 

[lawfer]

It was not even officially announced until 2008, so development started in 2008.

How simple life would be if that were true.

Well, to be fair, according to Wikipedia, development of the first Diablo 3 iteration began in 2001. But Vivendi, Blizzard's major owner, didn't like it so it scraped the game and then closed down Blizzard North.

According to Wikipedia:

The original artistic design differed from that shown at Blizzard Worldwide Invitational 2008 demonstration, and had undergone three revisions before reaching the standards felt necessary by the team behind Diablo III.

To me the Diablo 3 we know probably started development somewhere between 2006 - 2007, and then announced on 2008. His assertion is not really that far-fetched if you think about it, considering there's still a 4 year gap between the announcement and today.

Then again, we really don't know the facts.

But judging from reviews of people who've played the beta, however, the game itself is good, but not "developed for 10+ years" good if you know what I mean.

 

[Guest]

There could have been another Diablo game between then and now if Blizzard North was allowed to go ahead with the series they created. Instead the Blizzard North team was dissolved and all the work that had been done on Diablo III up to that point was scrapped. From the videos that I've seen of the original D III it looked like it would have also been a great game and that Blizzard probably would have made a ton of cash with it and also have been on this game with maybe an even better story (because of keeping the people that originally created it).

Now, because Blizzard has Diablo without any of the original creators we can't have a better Diablo game from the original creators because of copyright. That is evil to me, the people that created Diablo and work for themselves now can't create a Diablo game and are relegated to creating a lamer cartoonish game with the same aspects but not with the history/lore behind it.

Sorry for the rant, I really wanted to play the original D III.

 

[Rasta211]

I'm pretty sure with the success of World of Warcraft, they began dragging their feet on Diablo III. I agree with Blizzard, milk them for as much as you can.

 

[RzmmDX]

At this point, they should just leave it as it is.

I need my demo before I decide to actually play it.

 

[Guest]

They need to build up the Hype because $60 for a game that can be played online only does not even make sense. I was a huge fan of Diablo and purchased all of the expansion packs and as much as I would like to try Diablo 3 I will not pay that much for a online game.

 

[Guest]

lol, accidental availability my.

blizzard is creating a hype for its d3 game.

it will be available soon in your favorite torrent sites and its patrons will become unwittingly blizzard's third-part seeders.

nice move blizzard!, but dang! i missed it!
(well, torrentfriend, here i come!)

 

[insect]

Blizzard has yet to fail me with a game. I got 4.5 years out of WoW and going on two-years for Starcraft 2 now. Finally, of the people I know in D3 beta, they all have loved it, even if most of the content is locked away until release.

Furthermore, Blizzard supports a single game longer than any other company around. They still patch Starcraft 1, which came out almost 15 years ago. WoW is going on 11 years still, and Diablo 2 is going on 12 years and is still patched/updated. They also confirmed that they have no plans to stop supporting those "old" games yet.

I'm super-excited for D3 and I believe it will live up to peoples' expectations or Blizzard will fix it in short order.

 

[9Nails]

I'm pretty sure with the success of World of Warcraft, they began dragging their feet on Diablo III. I agree with Blizzard, milk them for as much as you can.

On that note: It is refreshing to see a game developer take this much time to put quality and content into their games. Only Valve, in my mind, can compare to the diligence that Blizzard puts into a title.

 

[Guest]

I only have experience with the initial closed beta launch and I've heard many things have changed since then; however, as someone who played Diablo and Diablo II, I did not feel like Diablo III was the same game. It felt a lot more like a modified WoW-clone in its delivery and changed mechanics. I mean, there isn't even stats distribution for your character anymore; that was one of the awesome components of the first two games - the ability to make your character and grow it in any way you wanted to.

Also, since I only played right at the beginning when the furthest you could get was Leoric the following may have changed: It felt lonely. It felt the same as Starcraft 2 on Battle.net 2.0 - I was online, but I wasn't really involved with any community. You would start a game on your own and it would kick you right to where you were when you last left. There weren't really people joining other people's games. I hope that has changed.

 

[MilwaukeeMike]

To me the Diablo 3 we know probably started development somewhere between 2006 - 2007, and then announced on 2008. His assertion is not really that far-fetched if you think about it, considering there's still a 4 year gap between the announcement and today.

Then again, we really don't know the facts.

But judging from reviews of people who've played the beta, however, the game itself is good, but not "developed for 10+ years" good if you know what I mean.

This makes a lot more sense. Developing a game for 10 years wouldnt' make it better anyway. Think of the technology changes and increase in PC capabilities over the last ten years. In order to keep up they'd have to change technologies and strategies a few times. Look at Duke Nukem Forever if you want to see how well that turns out....

 

[psycros]

Its not decade of development good in my opinion, lack of content if you ask me even though all the acts aren't available. If you look at TOR only around 5 years of Development yet it has tones of content (whether the game is good / bad is another discussion).

Anyhow, don't get me wrong, D3 is great but not decade of development good, would of expected far more from 10 years of development. Once again, good but not that good.

A "ton of content" in TOR? Seriously? A single leveling path and some of the most bland, unfinished zones ever put in an MMO is hardly what I'd call a rich experience. As for D3, I couldn't have less interest in an always-connected series of advertisements that look like a game from six years ago.

 

[DanUK]

Really, it has been in development for over a decade? I had no idea. It better be good. I mean, like, really good.

..Duke Nukem..
Seriously surprised that companies this big make these kind of slip ups. There have been quite a few like this recently if I recall correctly (for example the crysis 3 one the other day). Makes you wonder whether they are done on purpose for PR.
Either that or the tekkies are really loosing the grip on "prod" and "pre-prod" environments.