Diablo Immortal is a surprisingly premium-feeling adventure in the series that hits all the right notes, even if its endgame starts to depend on microtransactions too heavily.
A 6 seems WAY too generous considering how egregious the money grabbing is. The base game needs to be payable start to finish - after the initial purchase. Not after the 100th.
this mobile cash grab disaster is a test bed for d4, I hope Im wrong, anyway 0 out of 10 for biast review. we live in the world where words lost theyr meaning 😭
I am not one to bash reviewers because opinions make the world go round, and as much as I hate to agree with a lot of crying dweebs on Twitter who take game reviews to heart, a 6 is a ridiculous score regardless of how faithful the gameplay is to the previous titles. Finishing a game should not cost 5 figures to complete. Games like Clash Royale you can sort of understand where the endless cash can come from due to its endless gameplay loop, but a story based game like Diablo Immortal should never require someone to fork out a years salary!
I get where you are coming from, I’m disgusted by the end game micro transactions and won’t be s-ending a dime on these predators. But I think the number is within reason because there are a lot of positive aspects of the game and the reviewer explains them. you can get many many hours of fun out of it without spending a dime. (I’ve paid for games that ended many hours before this one requires micro transactions to progress). That said, i do wish the reviewer would have made their position on the end game micro transactions more clear in the body of the review. I don’t think they do, though I might have missed it. They call them “problematic.’ But they have been widely called ridiculously overboard by other games journalists. So I would have preferred if the reviewer addressed this directly: either disagreeing and explaining why, or making it clear they are not just problematic, but egregious.
Media outlets mentioned this before in that they normally don’t even bother to play games if they seem/would get below a 5. It’s more important for them to focus on games that people are actually interested in/have potential to be good.
larger Gaming media outlets arnt a good source for game reviews, as they are often paid to promote titles, and almost certainly cant bash a game for its nasty features. Independent game media, CZcamsrs/streamers are more likely to give you a review thats useful, as their review is a true review, and not an elongated advertisement disguised as a review. IGN or gamespot will never tell you to not buy a game. people who have been ripped off by a game company will tell you not to buy a game.
@@Stue-e the reviewers who work for the media outlet do not base the scores and thoughts based on the months gaming adverts. There has been hilarious times where a review for a game is bad but the website has adverts for the game everywhere. And yes they do bash for nasty features. Many many many CZcamsrs who review games are extremely biased and would review something like COD as bad… because it’s COD. And yes I’ve heard ign and gamespot recommend people to “give this game a miss.”
Stand up and make a difference. Give this game the 0-2 it deserves for the egregious, predatory Microtransactions and stop pandering to multi-billion dollar publishers.
@@Psyn0sis Objectively, it does not. If you can control yourself and not spend money in the P2W schemes, it's a fun, free Diablo game. P2W is EZ mode. Don't pay for EZ mode.
No it isn’t. Six, funnily enough means six. i.e. A good game for people who love it (genre, series, iteration etc.), but is lacking in some regards, that holds it back from being a must have experience, or good enough or bring back people who are feeling series fatigue, and so on. Perhaps, you’re too young to remember when gaming ratings where complex and detailed. As opposed to a content creator glorifying a game / dismissing it as worthless. 👍
@@RiskyFriskyHandle exactly. Lol people honestly. “not get invited to play the next game.” The truth is it’s rare for non indie games to be a zero. So much investment is spent on the making of them. But yeah I’ve played many 6 out of 10 games and enjoyed them. I have never enjoyed a game under 5 personally. But i still wouldn’t rate a game 0 unless it was unplayable.
@@RiskyFriskyHandle this honestly is how I see ratings. I feel like people are defiantly, a bit too emotional about Immortal and so when objective critiques are made, they dislike it because an objective critque won't outright slam the game which they want. My issues with Immortal though if I'm objective and don't focus on micro transactions. Is that it still would be a 6. Even if it wasn't as P2W as it is now and was a completely fair F2P game, it'd still be a 6. Theres just better dungeon crawlers on mobile these days that feel like Diablo, where as Immortal feels like a generic mobile "MMORPG" like Black Desert Mobile or something. similar HUD, similar systems, similar components like short bite sized runs for loot. These have been done to death since 2012 on mobile by other top down hack and slash games on mobile. Diablo Immortal is honestly quite generic as a game and even a mobile game, its polished, but it does nothing special. It feels more like any other mobile game, than a full Diablo dungeon crawling game, which is dissapointing. Because other smaller teams or indies have shown me, you can do it well on mobile. Blizzard took the easy way out here and copied the others in the market instead of making their own unquie, amazing game. Even if it wasn't P2W, this wouldnt have changed how I felt on this game personally.
@@jeveritt8398 Yep and D2R is on sale for $25 on Bnet, just bought that instead. Masterpiece game compared to the cartoony mindlessly easy disasters D3 and DI.
i wonder what this would have got scored if it was a new ip made by a nameless Indy dev. seems like you gave it a 6 just so you don't lose early access and favorable treatment.
A nameless indie dev couldn't have the production value of this game. I agree the game is atrocious in terms of monetization but the graphical nature and it runs well is impressive.
Its disgusting seeing mobile games inventing the best ways to take your money and slapping a game on the side as a bait, many times with good ideas. The best example was the era of farmville. They could be interesting idle managment city builder games, but in reality every single activity was disigned to make money, either directly or by using you to advertise the game to others...
@@andrewcairnsmrkiplin it really isnt. This kind of games is made specifically to be manipulative. They "get you to spend money" without you realizing it. It's not a case it's called whaling, it's because they are aimed at people who are vulnerable and not capable of controlling their spending.
@@worldiefeard8396 of course yes but u really don't have to spend money on it. watch review as soon as you know its a pay to win never EVER play them its that simple.
It's the least pay to win game on mobile right now, other than the codm, apex and all ...the PvP is a little p2w but the pve is f2p friendly ... people r greatly exaggerated it for some reason
This review should really have started with its micro transaction and pay to win mechanics rather than bringing them in at the end. Due to these mechanics it is a 3/10 at best. If it didn't have these mechanics then it might be a 6/10.
I gotta say that I just hate when companies release a broken game and then go silent. No news, no updates, no patches, NOTHING. What to do they expect players come back after you do one tiny update every 4 months? Forget that the game is 800% pay to win.. they dont even bother communicating or patching the game to make it better in meaningful time.
I think your thinking of more console and full priced games... not so much mobile games. Since it launched, theres been updates every few days for DI, and based on how ftp games work (they want you to come back daily) - doubt that will change. If by "better" you mean less free to play, then absolutely dont hold your breath lol I really just hope D4 is not already tainted..
@@brzzzy I mean the PC versions controls do not work... the controls.. do not work, still. Atleast for DH, unplayable and the PC version has a max res of 1080p.. in 2022.
@@TheTanelChannel Remember, it was never meant to come to pc - they added it last min bc of the backlash but its from beginning to end a mobile game. and i played on pc, its works, its just not intuitive bc ... again.. mobile game Youll just be sorely disappointed if you keep thinking of immortal as a pc game unfortunately : /
This game has earned them over 24 million so far, so they don't really care about the likes of us commenting here. It is horrible that this practice works. All we can do is avoid the game like a plague. Don't play it. Don't give them 1 cent, and review it badly whenever you get the chance.
Gamespot, you’re being too generous. The monetization schemes in this game are so egregious that you should actually be scoring this as a 4, I don’t care how technically good the game is. Please don’t be complicit in everything that is wrong with the the gaming industry nowadays .
You say 25 hours played? Why is your character always showing 20ish to 30ish? That's roughly less than 2 hours of play. Forgot to show shop page too and check other reviews that expose how bad this game is. Other than that its a paid review because Activision and Blizzard would pull adds from your website. Good job.
The game is good guys...stop spreading hate. Amazing graphics and story for a mobile game. If it has a lot of micro transactions why does that bother u. Just dont pay. Ive been playing upto level 42 and has not been a problem for me. Part of the game is to enjoy the story and combat and upgrade ur stuff/collect loot. Why do u wanna level up faster. Let it have its time😒
@@shen-long9082 i had some Bnet balance from years ago that i used to buy the battlepass. no other purchases. also, i've quit the game and would recommend anyone else to do the same. it's an enjoyable game, but unfortunately its monetization model is extremely egregious and ruins that enjoyment on top of being predatory and immoral. i wouldn't encourage anyone to spend any money on the game as it's not worth it in the least. it has one of the worst battlepass + daily login systems of any game i've ever played. however, as a big Diablo fan, i wanted to level all of the classes to max and experience what some of their builds played like since it's a new game in the franchise.
I think so, the gaming "journalists" have really stabbed us in the back to, they are completly un trustworthy and are just trying to help blizzard rip us off
I still don't get why people would pay for this when you can literally use this game as a demo then buy Diablo 3 for PS4 for like 10€ if you really like the formula, and if what you're looking for is a mobile experience then look for the Switch version. As I say, paying hundreds of € in the long term for this watered down version of diablo seems really silly when you can have the full experience with a minimal entry fee these days 🤷♂
People upset about the pay-to-win EZ mode I have a simple solution for you: Don't spend any money! It's a fun, free game that allows you to spend money to make the game easier. Man up and play this free game without the hand-holding it makes available. I do and I'm having fun.
Immediately upon reading the title, I expected a huge dislike number. I wasn't disappointed. Won't watch the review, but I bet it's praising the game and says the monetization isn't bad.
If sites like gamespot don't think something is fundamentally wrong with a pay to win system, it just shows that gaming journalism is heading towards a dark path.
yeah and GT7 is a 70usd cashgrab. but wont be called out or exposed bcuz its a SONY Exclusive. you remember how they swept the whole microtransaction cars drama under the rug so fast and silently?
personally id give this a 7. Game is great. Free phone game that runs and looks great. Im not boycotting chipotle because they charge $5 for a spoon of guac im just not getting the guac when I go there......
"It drains the soul from you and your wallet. 6/10" -GameSpot
this is fair.
@@AlleineDragonfyre No it's not.
0/10 and the crew should never make a game again.
@@FewNewReasonss im agreeing with you
*sigh*
Corporate greed has decimated gaming. I'm worried for the future, creativity isn't the driving force anymore.
Spoilers 😞
A 6 seems a bit too kind.
They are trying to help blizzard rip off their audience, why are people OK with this?
That’s an understatement. Without the P2W stuff this game is probably a 7, so it’s crazy that it only got dropped to a 6 because of them.
@@aaronhumphrey3514 it's 3
A 6 seems WAY too generous considering how egregious the money grabbing is.
The base game needs to be payable start to finish - after the initial purchase.
Not after the 100th.
Well they probably paid gamespot a lot of money so couldn't give them a 1.
"... game needs to be payable start to finish..." Well it is payable lol.
this mobile cash grab disaster is a test bed for d4, I hope Im wrong, anyway 0 out of 10 for biast review.
we live in the world where words lost theyr meaning 😭
I am not one to bash reviewers because opinions make the world go round, and as much as I hate to agree with a lot of crying dweebs on Twitter who take game reviews to heart, a 6 is a ridiculous score regardless of how faithful the gameplay is to the previous titles.
Finishing a game should not cost 5 figures to complete. Games like Clash Royale you can sort of understand where the endless cash can come from due to its endless gameplay loop, but a story based game like Diablo Immortal should never require someone to fork out a years salary!
I get where you are coming from, I’m disgusted by the end game micro transactions and won’t be s-ending a dime on these predators. But I think the number is within reason because there are a lot of positive aspects of the game and the reviewer explains them. you can get many many hours of fun out of it without spending a dime. (I’ve paid for games that ended many hours before this one requires micro transactions to progress).
That said, i do wish the reviewer would have made their position on the end game micro transactions more clear in the body of the review. I don’t think they do, though I might have missed it. They call them “problematic.’ But they have been widely called ridiculously overboard by other games journalists. So I would have preferred if the reviewer addressed this directly: either disagreeing and explaining why, or making it clear they are not just problematic, but egregious.
Holy moly that was a downplay on the monetization.
A 6 really? Should be a 2 at best.
I feel like most gaming media outlets never go under a 6 . It's like no 1-5 games exist
Media outlets mentioned this before in that they normally don’t even bother to play games if they seem/would get below a 5. It’s more important for them to focus on games that people are actually interested in/have potential to be good.
@@Swillo That rule would be true if they hadn't done a review on Battlefield 2042.
I have seen under 6 rated games on both ign and gamespot. It doesn’t happen often but as Swillo mentioned, most of the games they play are not 1-5’s.
larger Gaming media outlets arnt a good source for game reviews, as they are often paid to promote titles, and almost certainly cant bash a game for its nasty features.
Independent game media, CZcamsrs/streamers are more likely to give you a review thats useful, as their review is a true review, and not an elongated advertisement disguised as a review. IGN or gamespot will never tell you to not buy a game.
people who have been ripped off by a game company will tell you not to buy a game.
@@Stue-e the reviewers who work for the media outlet do not base the scores and thoughts based on the months gaming adverts. There has been hilarious times where a review for a game is bad but the website has adverts for the game everywhere. And yes they do bash for nasty features. Many many many CZcamsrs who review games are extremely biased and would review something like COD as bad… because it’s COD. And yes I’ve heard ign and gamespot recommend people to “give this game a miss.”
This is a 10-year old game with a more "robust" cash shop.
Waiting for path of exile 2 :)
Monetisation totally downplayed in this review…these mechanics are a blight on gaming as a whole
Diablo Immoral
Stand up and make a difference. Give this game the 0-2 it deserves for the egregious, predatory Microtransactions and stop pandering to multi-billion dollar publishers.
Or you know, give it the rating it deserves based on the quality of the GAME and don't spend any money. You get it for free after all.
@@phrozac well how they monetize the game directly impacts its quality
JEveritt No it doesn’t.
@@phrozac It obviously, objectively does. I'd recommend you watch Josh Strife Hayes' video, The Immoral Design of Diablo Immortal.
@@Psyn0sis Objectively, it does not. If you can control yourself and not spend money in the P2W schemes, it's a fun, free Diablo game. P2W is EZ mode. Don't pay for EZ mode.
When it comes to gaming outlets, a 6 is their version of 0. They just don't want to admit it and not get invited to play the next title.
Hahahaha
No it isn’t. Six, funnily enough means six.
i.e. A good game for people who love it (genre, series, iteration etc.), but is lacking in some regards, that holds it back from being a must have experience, or good enough or bring back people who are feeling series fatigue, and so on.
Perhaps, you’re too young to remember when gaming ratings where complex and detailed. As opposed to a content creator glorifying a game / dismissing it as worthless.
👍
@@RiskyFriskyHandle exactly. Lol people honestly. “not get invited to play the next game.” The truth is it’s rare for non indie games to be a zero. So much investment is spent on the making of them. But yeah I’ve played many 6 out of 10 games and enjoyed them. I have never enjoyed a game under 5 personally. But i still wouldn’t rate a game 0 unless it was unplayable.
@@RiskyFriskyHandle this honestly is how I see ratings. I feel like people are defiantly, a bit too emotional about Immortal and so when objective critiques are made, they dislike it because an objective critque won't outright slam the game which they want.
My issues with Immortal though if I'm objective and don't focus on micro transactions. Is that it still would be a 6. Even if it wasn't as P2W as it is now and was a completely fair F2P game, it'd still be a 6. Theres just better dungeon crawlers on mobile these days that feel like Diablo, where as Immortal feels like a generic mobile "MMORPG" like Black Desert Mobile or something. similar HUD, similar systems, similar components like short bite sized runs for loot. These have been done to death since 2012 on mobile by other top down hack and slash games on mobile. Diablo Immortal is honestly quite generic as a game and even a mobile game, its polished, but it does nothing special. It feels more like any other mobile game, than a full Diablo dungeon crawling game, which is dissapointing. Because other smaller teams or indies have shown me, you can do it well on mobile. Blizzard took the easy way out here and copied the others in the market instead of making their own unquie, amazing game. Even if it wasn't P2W, this wouldnt have changed how I felt on this game personally.
From Warcraft 3 Reforged to this. *Shaking my head* Ohhhh my childhood memories.
At least diablo 2 resurrected turned out okay but that's because it was made by vicarious visions 😅
@@jeveritt8398 Yep and D2R is on sale for $25 on Bnet, just bought that instead. Masterpiece game compared to the cartoony mindlessly easy disasters D3 and DI.
I feel so sad to be a gamer these days.
Indie games rule
Corporate greed has decimated gaming. I'm worried for the future, creativity isn't the driving force anymore.
@@vincetaliaferro2777 we need to start our own game studios.
i wonder what this would have got scored if it was a new ip made by a nameless Indy dev.
seems like you gave it a 6 just so you don't lose early access and favorable treatment.
A nameless indie dev couldn't have the production value of this game. I agree the game is atrocious in terms of monetization but the graphical nature and it runs well is impressive.
Its disgusting seeing mobile games inventing the best ways to take your money and slapping a game on the side as a bait, many times with good ideas.
The best example was the era of farmville. They could be interesting idle managment city builder games, but in reality every single activity was disigned to make money, either directly or by using you to advertise the game to others...
its the players fault too actually spend money on games like this.
@@andrewcairnsmrkiplin it really isnt. This kind of games is made specifically to be manipulative. They "get you to spend money" without you realizing it.
It's not a case it's called whaling, it's because they are aimed at people who are vulnerable and not capable of controlling their spending.
@@worldiefeard8396 of course yes but u really don't have to spend money on it. watch review as soon as you know its a pay to win never EVER play them its that simple.
It's the least pay to win game on mobile right now, other than the codm, apex and all ...the PvP is a little p2w but the pve is f2p friendly ... people r greatly exaggerated it for some reason
Wait, a 6? Deserves more like a 0.2
This review should really have started with its micro transaction and pay to win mechanics rather than bringing them in at the end. Due to these mechanics it is a 3/10 at best. If it didn't have these mechanics then it might be a 6/10.
I completed the main story with zero spending, I'm not interested to be the strongest in PVP
I gotta say that I just hate when companies release a broken game and then go silent. No news, no updates, no patches, NOTHING. What to do they expect players come back after you do one tiny update every 4 months? Forget that the game is 800% pay to win.. they dont even bother communicating or patching the game to make it better in meaningful time.
I think your thinking of more console and full priced games... not so much mobile games. Since it launched, theres been updates every few days for DI, and based on how ftp games work (they want you to come back daily) - doubt that will change. If by "better" you mean less free to play, then absolutely dont hold your breath lol I really just hope D4 is not already tainted..
@@brzzzy I mean the PC versions controls do not work... the controls.. do not work, still. Atleast for DH, unplayable and the PC version has a max res of 1080p.. in 2022.
@@TheTanelChannel Remember, it was never meant to come to pc - they added it last min bc of the backlash but its from beginning to end a mobile game.
and i played on pc, its works, its just not intuitive bc ... again.. mobile game
Youll just be sorely disappointed if you keep thinking of immortal as a pc game unfortunately : /
This game has earned them over 24 million so far, so they don't really care about the likes of us commenting here. It is horrible that this practice works. All we can do is avoid the game like a plague. Don't play it. Don't give them 1 cent, and review it badly whenever you get the chance.
"Diablo Immortal is like Diablo 3, without the heart"
7. Oh wait wrong channel
Gamespot, you’re being too generous. The monetization schemes in this game are so egregious that you should actually be scoring this as a 4, I don’t care how technically good the game is. Please don’t be complicit in everything that is wrong with the the gaming industry nowadays .
To be fair at this point I think most game reviews operate on a scale from 6-10, so a 6 is pretty accurate.
Yeah I just auto deduct 5 these days
@@alistairmckellar so a 10 is a 5? Flawed logic.
@@liamgray2589 I more mean 6/10 is a 1/5 so 10 is a good game either way.
Absolute sellouts
Score: 110,000/10
it deserved a 1/10
I give the developers credit for putting this much effort into this out of season April fools joke.
Too generous. It should be
800% value/10
I see GameSpot editors don’t concern about the reputation of the website which has fallen to 6/10
How much did they pay you to give this game a 6 when the metascore is ZERO
Gamers are cry babies. Who can trust that score?
After seeing how poorly Blizzard handles free to play with Diablo Immortal, I'm very concerned for Overwatch 2.
I'm not concerned, because I don't plan on playing anything from Activision /Blizzard any time soon.
OW2 is free to play?
@@vashish39 Yes
Don't see the point of watching this after watching Josh Strife Hayes analysis
Now way this is a 6
Its a solid game. You cant lie in your score because you’re mad and trying to fight some ideological battle.
You say 25 hours played? Why is your character always showing 20ish to 30ish? That's roughly less than 2 hours of play. Forgot to show shop page too and check other reviews that expose how bad this game is. Other than that its a paid review because Activision and Blizzard would pull adds from your website. Good job.
Im sure she doesnt know Diablo games...
yep. she played 5 hours at most, at moooost. i had 32 lvl after 2-3h
Maybe they only showed early game footage? God relax with the insane conspiracies.
This game should come with a label warning that it can be addictive, like slot machines
Downplay the monetization harder Gamespot. Shameful
GameStop, did Blizzard pay you for the score?
a predatory disgusting "game" like this should be review boycotted by every outlet with a warning - do not purchase, predatory monetization
The fact that this got a 6 is exactly why you can't trust mainstream game journalists.
The game is good guys...stop spreading hate. Amazing graphics and story for a mobile game. If it has a lot of micro transactions why does that bother u. Just dont pay. Ive been playing upto level 42 and has not been a problem for me. Part of the game is to enjoy the story and combat and upgrade ur stuff/collect loot. Why do u wanna level up faster. Let it have its time😒
No way it deserves a 6... the PVP is a cash grab Whaleland ....this is a paid review?
Diablo immortal Predatory!
6? should have been a 2 or 3
the user score was 0.2 last i heard, i played the game myself and think it should be banned
Is this some kind of joke? When's the real review coming out?
decent game ruined by monetization. 6/10 is a pretty accurate score and what i'd rate it myself after 100+ hours.
How much real money have you spend so far??? 2...3...or maybe 4...or...5 hundred bucks??
You played a 6/10 game for over 100 hours?
@@misho129 yes because not every game has to be a 10/10 to be fun.
@@shen-long9082 i had some Bnet balance from years ago that i used to buy the battlepass. no other purchases. also, i've quit the game and would recommend anyone else to do the same. it's an enjoyable game, but unfortunately its monetization model is extremely egregious and ruins that enjoyment on top of being predatory and immoral.
i wouldn't encourage anyone to spend any money on the game as it's not worth it in the least. it has one of the worst battlepass + daily login systems of any game i've ever played.
however, as a big Diablo fan, i wanted to level all of the classes to max and experience what some of their builds played like since it's a new game in the franchise.
And keep children FARE AWAY FROM THIS
"Bosses drop significant loot." What game have you been playing?
Pretty neat cash-vampire with a game attached.
I don't envy whoever drew the short straw at Gamespot and had to review this dumpsterfire.
you already know blizzard paid gamespot for a slight positive review score.
Don’t you guys have mobile phones
6 is a bit too high, i go with 1. but enjoy this Diablo 4's Demo.
Don’t even look at it
Why displaying mobile should it be PC. I guess they being paid for this review unless the state it?
Bruh…
'It has a little something for everyone'
Are you effing kidding me? 6? .05 is too kind.
Perhaps this marks the absolute end of true gaming
I think so, the gaming "journalists" have really stabbed us in the back to, they are completly un trustworthy and are just trying to help blizzard rip us off
The Guy At 00:59 Sounds Like Tom Hardy’s Bane 😭
6/10???? Wayyyyy too generous.
I still can't play it. It says it's not supported on my phone, but it let me download it.
Count yourself lucky
Not even available in my country for its bottomless greed.
"Do you guys not HAVE phones?!"
Its not a 6.
Nice light slap on the wrist there for those pay to win mechanics.
I still don't get why people would pay for this when you can literally use this game as a demo then buy Diablo 3 for PS4 for like 10€ if you really like the formula, and if what you're looking for is a mobile experience then look for the Switch version. As I say, paying hundreds of € in the long term for this watered down version of diablo seems really silly when you can have the full experience with a minimal entry fee these days 🤷♂
Diablo... the mother of all evil, and greed
Don't you guys have $110,000 to spend on a mediocre game?
Hey GameSpot, average games get 5/10. You're supposed to work up or down from there.
Carbot annimations called this Diablo Immoral.
So I can see the likes and dislike it has 110 like and 350 dislikes atm 30 minutes in
Is this the Diablo that spawned the infamous meme???
Yep and it lived up to everyone's worst fears
Sounds like 'just wait for Diablo IV"
they really try to sugar coat it that you need to pay to win
Diablo Immortal is the Cash Cow level
DIABLO IMMORAL!
Typical game spot review.
The moment it crashed after less than 5 minutes of gameplay....UNINSTALLED.
Seems fair, This game actually really good, you play free and you need to pay 100k to max out one character nice
2020s, Blizzard are worse than EA
What a world we live in
This game has already made hundreds of millions of dollars. It's a free game... how
Overlooking the abusive p2w mechanics, you're left with a lesser Diablo 3 experience... Nothing new here.
How much did Blizzard bribe you for a higher-than-1 rating?
"open beeeta"
People upset about the pay-to-win EZ mode I have a simple solution for you: Don't spend any money! It's a fun, free game that allows you to spend money to make the game easier. Man up and play this free game without the hand-holding it makes available. I do and I'm having fun.
Immediately upon reading the title, I expected a huge dislike number. I wasn't disappointed. Won't watch the review, but I bet it's praising the game and says the monetization isn't bad.
Can the main campaign be finished without paying and within a reasonable amount of time and/or grind?
Worse examples of pay to win and deceptive tactics seen in a modern video games with an endgame designed around whales, but its fun. 6/10.
Is this review some kind of late April fools joke? Nice paid review.
Not sure whether they are making games or money
If sites like gamespot don't think something is fundamentally wrong with a pay to win system, it just shows that gaming journalism is heading towards a dark path.
Diablo IV is our last hope...
6 is decent u can play the story start to finish with a fun gameplay loop. But the endgame to leaderboard is just nonsensical
Sounds like the Gran Turismo 7 version of Diablo... wait, but this seems mostly finished and free to play? 🤔
yeah and GT7 is a 70usd cashgrab. but wont be called out or exposed bcuz its a SONY Exclusive. you remember how they swept the whole microtransaction cars drama under the rug so fast and silently?
You guys have phones, don't you?
24 million made so far says yes. Lots of phones.
I can see the like/dislike ration with the mozilla firefox add on. On this video it is 743 likes and 3,9k dislikes.
personally id give this a 7. Game is great. Free phone game that runs and looks great. Im not boycotting chipotle because they charge $5 for a spoon of guac im just not getting the guac when I go there......
4 is an appropriate score
Zero, it's designed rip off the player
Waaaaaay too kind with the 6!
Wow. Skim over the pay-to-win focus some more why don't you? Poor review
Seems like you dont rly mention the pay to win aspect... sounded to me like someone got paid to eviod talking about the ptw and scammy loot system