Official Blizzard Quote:
Jay Wilson: I heard you met my wife and daughter!
Wired: I did. I was looking for a ?human interest? story when I saw a woman and her young daughter playing Diablo III. I asked the mother for an interview and it turned out to be your wife. How do you feel about letting your daughter play an M-rated game like Diablo?
Wilson: Well, I feel like for every parent you have to make a choice about what kind of content is appropriate for your child and at what age. At a certain age, I wouldn?t have let her play a game like Diablo because of the violence. And honestly, I paused before letting her play. It?s hard when I work on it though, and she wants to see what I do; I don?t really want to deprive her of that. I know my daughter well enough to know that I didn?t think she?d have any problem handling it. That being said, I don?t let her see games that have any guns in them or first-person shooters that have violence. That, to me, is a little too personal. And so, that?s where I draw the line. I think it?s got to be a really personal choice that everyone makes. To do my official company line, too, one of the things we intend to do is add parental controls so that every parent can make their own choice about what?s appropriate for their kids.
Wired: Does your daughter have an inclination towards Diablo-like stuff?
Wilson: (laughs) No, no, no. She is a rainbows-and-unicorns kind of girl, all across the board. She likes World of Warcraft, but she doesn?t play it that much. She loves Spore, plays Spore like crazy. Nothing mature. Diablo is the only mature game I?ve ever let her play. And, again, it was because it?s my game. If it was somebody else?s game, I probably wouldn?t let her see it. I would?ve decided it was too mature for her. But she really likes games where she can control characters from an isometric view. So I think that?s probably the biggest appeal for her, she likes being able to look down upon the world and see her character moving around.
Wired: If your daughter is a rainbows-and-unicorns kind of girl, maybe people will blame her for the new art style...
Wilson: Maybe, but they shouldn?t. (laughs)
Wired: At the convention, we saw the Fallen Lunatic, who explodes after stabbing itself in the chest multiple times. Can anything ever too be too gory for Diablo?
Wilson: Yes. We do get a couple of things that are questionable, but usually, it?s not so much gore-related ? it?s that you can have gore that implies things that we as a Western society aren?t really comfortable with. Any kind of nudity, you can?t really have, especially when you couple it with violence. Those types of things don?t work well. You have to be really careful with things like torture. Those things are difficult. But to honest, in the development of the game, we tend not to think about it. We tend to build what we need to build and then wait for somebody to say, ?That?s a step too far.? There are a few ways we edit ourselves, but usually not with gore, like sheer amounts of gore. It?s like, ?You want to behead the guy? Go ahead, yes. You want to slice the guy apart? Go ahead.?
One example of one of the biggest ways we edited ourselves is ? we have this cool system where we can hit a dude so hard that his skeleton flies out. It was awesome, really cool-looking. And we added several skills that did that; every time you hit somebody, their skeletons fly out. But I have to say, it got a little boring after a while! It became a little excessive. It took away the coolness of it. And so there, we felt like our overuse of it actually de-emphasized it, and we didn?t like that. We were like, ?No, if we want to push the skeleton out of somebody, we want it to be a big deal.? I want to really like see it, and I want it to be a special event. And that?s probably the main way we?ve toned ourselves down, is to go back and say, let?s not go so overboard, that there?s nothing cool about the violence.
Wired: I think some people would disagree with that though considering the gore in Fallout 3. Some would say that the dismemberment there never gets old...
Wilson: I think in our case, it really got old. I wouldn?t speak to what other developers have done ? and I love Fallout 3, I thought it was a great game ? but it?s a choice every developer makes. And yeah, I?m sure some people say, ?Nope, it never gets old. Always love it every time.? But our feeling was (for Diablo III), it got old. And it doesn?t mean we remove it. It just meant that we really wanted to emphasize it, and so we did that by controlling the frequency of it.
Wired: Do you think Diablo III, with all its blood and gore, can appeal to a wider audience this time around?
Wilson: If we appeal to a wider audience, I don?t think it should be because we shied away from mature subject matter. Diablo is our Mature-rated series, and it?s important for us that it be that. It?s our goal, and that?s where we want it to be. So we wouldn?t go for an audience by moving away from that. Now do I think we can appeal to more people? Diablo II appealed to a lot of people, and I can only hope that we can appeal to more. But I think the way to do that is actually through introducing players to the game in a more friendly way. Better tutorial systems, a more streamlined control interface, better game design ? those are the ways I think to broaden your audience. Content-wise ... I think games like Grand Theft Auto have already proven the tone of your content is not restrictive to your audience size.
Wired: Earlier, you mentioned parental controls. What are you guys planning for that?
Wilson: We intend to have people to be able to tone down the actual gore levels. In terms of whether we go beyond that, we?ll probably do something. But we haven?t really gotten into a specific design for it yet, so it?s hard to say.
Wired: Are you thinking it?s possible to turn off the blood completely? Or simply change the blood color?
Wilson: Yeah, we?re going to have to be able to turn off blood, change the color and things like that, because you can?t have red blood in some regions, regions that we would very much like to sell the game in. So we definitely build everything, that every bit of gore, in a deposited manner so that at a future date, we can go through and change it all or turn it off. In terms of what kind options we give, we actually give within a particular version. We?ve haven?t nailed it down, but if you turn down the gore, you can actually change it to not have red blood. That seems to be really the sticking point for a lot of people because a lot of times we use blood as feedback. And so if we take that out, that actually hurts the gameplay. But we can change the note of that feedback so that it?s something that people are more okay with.
Wired: Do you think they?ll be controversy over the parental controls, like we saw with the new art style?
Wilson: I?m sure someone will be controversial about it. I don?t think they should though, the idea that people put parental controls and allow for option of turning down the blood. It?s not like we?re doing it across the board. It?s not like we?re forcing it on everyone. We?re making it an option, and not the default option. Will some people complain about it? I?m sure they will. But ultimately, that?s the world we live in.
Wired: You?ll obviously have to edit content for regions like Germany and Australia, but what about China? Is that a more difficult case?
Wilson: Definitely for regions like Germany and Australia, we will have to change blood if we?re going to sell there. And that?s fine. Those are the standards for those regions, and we don?t really have a problem with catering to what they need and what they want. But China?s going to be hard for us. Because a lot of the restrictions there are really... we may not be able to do them. It may not be possible. With our relationship with NetEase, we recently got new information about what China really wants, and it?s a lengthy list. It?s really hard for us to cater to. We?ll try. There?s no reason we wouldn?t want to go there, but there is a certain point where we?d have to redo so much of the game that it?s not viable anymore.
Wired: So it?s possible you won?t be released in China due to their gaming violence restrictions?
Wilson: We could have a lot of trouble with China, yes, but it would be our goal to go there. We haven?t decided what regions we?re going into, obviously. It certainly would be our goal to go there, but we will struggle to go to China.
Also, letting your daughter play Diablo 3 = Dad of the year.
Kinda goes without saying though, they manage to keep their projects under wraps SO well.
I feel really bad for China because more than likely they will not be able to experience the greatness that is Diablo 3
IF they even want to get a legit version in the first place
I know, you can pretty much get anything you want these days...I was just saying...
This person annoys me, i couldn't watch the whole thing.
I live in Australia and it sucks they have to tone the blood down for us, I'll be pre-ordering a Collectors Edition if Blizzard release one which I'm sure they will because its Blizzard and what fan wouldn't want one? On that thought I would probably pre-order 2 copies, one to sleep with.
But it saddens me deeply that they wont be as blood soaked as the rest of the world...
Even with less blood it will still be a kick-ass game that i will play for years like i have with D2, sorry China...
I believe he is referring to the fact that most FPS games have more direct connections to reality. Even though Diablo might be more violent/gory than a typical FPS, killing monsters in a completely fictional universe using completely fictional means has less likelihood to affect someone than a game featuring a gangster shooting people on the streets of New York (a real weapon killing "familiar" people in a real city). Granted, different people are affected in different ways, but I find his point valid.
Yeah i guess that's true. You make a good point. I guess i just don't understand people that get affected by video games and go and do stupid things. But i guess those people just have something wrong to begin with and shouldn't be playing these games period haha.
Canada is amazing enough too you know, none of that crap over there either. Any country that develops such regulation for gaming disgusts me. As in I'm disgusted by those agreeing for such laws.
And yes, Diablo would suck without blood, in my honest opinion. Its a too big part of the "feeling" of the game. Its like Titan Quest.. no blood.. no feeling.. well, there is more reasons to that, but its one of them.
If you have a look at the history of banned games over this decade the main reasons relate to drug use and sexuality, two things that Diablo 3 isn't really going to revolve around.
I'm almost certain that we will get the same as the Americans do, I think Jay was just going along with the interviewer for the sake of converstation-flow.
Edit: Also the fact that you are chopping up demons/monsters other than human beings for the most part in Diablo 3 makes me doubt the game will have to be toned down here.
They let Left 4 Dead fly through with no problems and it features non stop killing of human-shaped zombies at close range with Shotguns/Assault Rifles with realistic blood effects, decapitations and limb loss all in first person. The fact that they were zombies not "humans" probably made a difference. I think Aus authorities are less strict now that the GTA shitstorm has died down.
Now I personally am not a huge fan of excessive blood and gore, but at the same time I love the Diablo Series (is this a contradiction? yes). I certainly wasn't about to complain about the blood and gore in the diablo games, as that is a part of the series. I would have been willing to play this game as is, but my wife was against it. We talked about it, and she didn't want the game in our house. I can see her reasoning, and seeing how my relationship her is more important than any game, including this one, I agreed with her. After reading this article and mentioning it to my wife, she said that she might be more open to me playing the game if this option is implemented, thank you Jay Wilson for restoring my hope that one day i might play Diablo III.
...Seriously?
You let your wife decide for you if a game can even get in the house?
I have nothing against prioritizing the wife over games, I would do the same, but thats just ridiculous. I guess you know what you are doing with a girl like that... but I would seriously hold no respect for anyone forcing me to not have a game because its too bloody. Its simply ridiculous.
She never forced me. I just value what she wants a lot. That's what marriage is about. We make decisions together about what sort of media we have in the house. It's not so much that she ordered me to never play the game, it's more that I wanted her to be happy.
She asked me if I wanted our 9 month old daughter to watch me play (and she would, she very much likes spending time with us parents), and I said no. I don't put much stock in the whole "do as I say, not as I do," philosophy. My daughter is very smart, and wants to do everything her parents do (it's uncanny really). If I can turn the blood down, both me and my wife will be more comfortable with me playing the game with my daughter climbing up my legs while I sit. I'd rather not hide things from either of them.