Release Diablo Immortal globally
Delivered after the deadline (153 days after the deadline)
AI-assessed · human review in progress Found and assessed by AI from the cited sources. Shown with its evidence; it is not counted in any Kept Score until confirmed.
- Announced
- 4 May 2021
- Due
- 31 Dec 2021
- Delivered
- 2 Jun 2022
- Deadline
- Met
- Late
- Not met
- Today
What the company said
“Diablo® ImmortalTM entered its second phase of testing and is on track for global release later this year.”
What we found
Evidence strength A What the grades mean
Activision Blizzard failed to release Diablo Immortal by the end of 2021 as originally announced, ultimately launching the title on June 2, 2022.
-
A Activision Blizzard 10-K filed 2022-02-25
“Blizzard’s mobile title based on the Diablo franchise, Diablo Immortal, is now anticipated to release in 2022” ✓ confirmed on the page
-
A Activision Blizzard 10-Q filed 2022-05-03
“We recently announced that Blizzard’s mobile title based on the Diablo franchise, Diablo Immortal, is expected to be released on June 2, 2022.” ✓ confirmed on the page
Checked 21 Oct 2026.
Commitment lineage
Every time the company restated this commitment. The original is never changed, and the outcome is always measured against version 1.
- Deadline drift +181 days
- 2 versions
-
Version 1 · original · stated 4 May 2021
Deadline 31 Dec 2021 (“later this year”)
-
Version 2 · stated 2 Nov 2021
Deadline 30 Jun 2022 (“the first half of next year”) · wording firm
“Diablo® ImmortalTM is in public testing, and remains on track for release in the first half of next year.”
Commitment DNA
The structured record of this commitment. Fields the company did not state are left blank rather than guessed.
- Event type
- Commercial launch
- Indicative materiality
- Medium rules
- Action
- Release
- Deliverable
- Diablo Immortal
- In the company’s control
- High
- Specificity
- Medium
How this entry was checked
- Commitment recordedThe company's words were matched word for word against the filing.
- First checkAn AI model, Gemini (Google), read the company's later filings and recorded the outcome with a quoted passage.
- Second check: disagreesClaude (Anthropic) re-read the evidence blind and read it as “Not met”.
- Tie-breakA stronger model read the evidence and both earlier answers, without knowing which was recorded, and agrees with the second check.
Not yet confirmed. Shown on the record, but it will not count in any score until it is confirmed. How verification works
Are you Activision Blizzard? You can publish an official statement next to this entry, free. Add a statement.
Is something here wrong or out of date? Companies and readers can ask us to check it. Please bring a link to a public source.
Report an error in this entry Reference: KI-C-2021-C718877-018803 · Corrections policy