Blizzard: We're "Very Serious" About Diablo III On Consoles

 Pages PREV 1 2 3
 

NameIsRobertPaulson:
snip

The game's poorly optimised then, what do you want me to say? That because one game lagged for him, consoles are more powerful?

NameIsRobertPaulson:
All I can say from experience is that Oblivion nearly murdered my last computer, I was forced to remove all non-essential graphics. And without them, the game looked terrible. My PS3 ran it fine and it looked great.

The average person cannot afford the top end range PCs that allow them to surpass consoles. My friend Mike has such a rig. It cost him $850. That's a PS3 and 7 new games, btw. Just so he can play Battlefield 3 with all the fully rendered dust.

The average person who doesn't want to do any kind of looking and wants to go to someplace like Best Buy and buy one off the shelf can't afford a gaming rig, sure. However, someone who wants to put in a bit of work and do some shopping and searching can put a very competent gaming rig together for under 500 dollars.

Hell, if you want to factor in some mail in rebates and the like you can probably come in under 400 if you really want to exercise some patience. I'm pretty sure I could put together two gaming rigs for 850 dollars and still have money left over for a couple games.

The smart PC shopper knows you don't just wake up one day and decide "It's PC buyin' time" and go out and get whatever the hell you can find. No, you search and shop around and wait to find great deals and after a small period of time you have a big pile of parts you paid next to nothing for that you can combine into one hell of a gaming machine. To bottom line it if you can afford a PS3 there is no reason that you couldn't afford a PC. If you are lazy and impatient then ya consoles are the best way to go but you can get a much better bang for your buck exercising a bit of patience and work buying a PC.

NameIsRobertPaulson:

bakan:

NameIsRobertPaulson:

All I can say from experience is that Oblivion nearly murdered my last computer, I was forced to remove all non-essential graphics. And without them, the game looked terrible. My PS3 ran it fine and it looked great.

The average person cannot afford the top end range PCs that allow them to surpass consoles. My friend Mike has such a rig. It cost him $850. That's a PS3 and 7 new games, btw. Just so he can play Battlefield 3 with all the fully rendered dust.

I guess for 850$ he runs a rig with water cooling etc so he shouldn't have any problems with any game nowadays, or he just got ripped off with a pre-built one...
And you don't have to invest so much money, 400-500$ is enough to play all current games on high settings.

400-500 is BS. A low-end Quad-Core is at least $150 by itself. My graphics card is mid-end, and it was $125. That's $275 before we even get into the other stuff.

What other stuff is there? You'll get 4 gigabytes of RAM anywhere for less than $100, and same goes for the motherboard.

NameIsRobertPaulson:

bakan:

NameIsRobertPaulson:

All I can say from experience is that Oblivion nearly murdered my last computer, I was forced to remove all non-essential graphics. And without them, the game looked terrible. My PS3 ran it fine and it looked great.

The average person cannot afford the top end range PCs that allow them to surpass consoles. My friend Mike has such a rig. It cost him $850. That's a PS3 and 7 new games, btw. Just so he can play Battlefield 3 with all the fully rendered dust.

I guess for 850$ he runs a rig with water cooling etc so he shouldn't have any problems with any game nowadays, or he just got ripped off with a pre-built one...
And you don't have to invest so much money, 400-500$ is enough to play all current games on high settings.

400-500 is BS. A low-end Quad-Core is at least $150 by itself. My graphics card is mid-end, and it was $125. That's $275 before we even get into the other stuff.

I run an i5 quad core, Gainward GTX 460 GS 1GB, 6GB Ram, 3 TB storage (1TB faster hard drive and 2TB eco just for data) and this for ~600 1 year ago from scratch as my other PC went down in a storm due to overvoltage.
And honestly if you can upgrade your old rig you are even better off than this and you could get this stuff for ~500 nowadays.

NameIsRobertPaulson:
400-500 is BS. A low-end Quad-Core is at least $150 by itself. My graphics card is mid-end, and it was $125. That's $275 before we even get into the other stuff.

Assuming you just crawled out from under a rock and don't have a current PC you can use things like the case, hard drive, etc off of you can still put together a solid gaming rig for between 400-500 easily. Tigerdirect.com or newegg.com constantly has barebone kits that come with damn near everything but a video card for 300 dollars or less. You slap a good 150 dollar video card in one of those and you have yourself a gaming rig that's going to run anything you throw at it like a top.

CthulhuMessiah:
I'm looking forward to it because I don't have the money to buy a gaming PC. Hopefully, this doesn't degrade the quality of the PC version.

How could it? This is being done in the correct order PC first then remove features to make the console versions work. Sounds perfect, PC gamers get a proper version not gimped for consoles and console gamers get to play the game too. Blizzard makes trucks full of cash and makes more games.

The console might even be better, since it won't give you insane mouse hand arthritis from 180 clicks a minute. I still don't understand how WASD movement and hotkeys as an option would hurt the game. I'm actually considering not buying D3 because it literally hurts my hand to play it for any stretch of time.

Icehearted:
This would explain their strong anti-modding policy.

The strong anti-modding policy has nothing to do with this and everything to do with the cash AH. They dont want people screwing with anything because it could unbalance their precious cash cow that the AH will be. Pretty much every single strange policy blizzard has announced for diablo 3 is all directly related to the cash AH.

LOL they're "very serious" but not serious enough to actually commit to it by making an official announcement?

That's good. I'm not particularity interested in getting a gaming PC just for a handful of games and now I have even less of a reason.

OutrageousEmu:

Vibhor:

OutrageousEmu:
Who said anything about top down?

Before you use the post button anytime more know this that the first FPS was on a PC.

Movable first person perspective isn't really the same thing as movable camera. I'm talking the third person open 3d games of the fifth generation that hbad fully movable cameras.

There there.
The first polygonal 3rd person shooter was made for computers and then ported to sega CD. It was called slipheed and was made in 1986

SupahGamuh:
Uhhh... yay for consoles?.

Don't hold your breath just yet, this is Blizzard we're talking about, even if the console version is real, it'd be ready "when it's done" and we all know what it means.

Hey, wanna play SC: Ghost while we wait?
Oh wait...

OP: Diablo is something that HAS to be on PC imo.
Kinda like SC or CC. The console versions were just really crappy =/

SgtFoley:

Icehearted:
This would explain their strong anti-modding policy.

The strong anti-modding policy has nothing to do with this and everything to do with the cash AH. They dont want people screwing with anything because it could unbalance their precious cash cow that the AH will be. Pretty much every single strange policy blizzard has announced for diablo 3 is all directly related to the cash AH.

I wasn't referring exclusively to stat modding. Absolute control over all content means multi-platform content uniformity.

That's great news for consoles, and is absolutely no reason for PC gamers to start bitching. And if you think Diablo 3 wouldn't work on consoles then you ought to play the Torchlight console port. I have, and I had no issues with it aside from it getting boring after a while, and that's a content variety issue rather than a porting one.

Please don't try to pin all your Diablo 3 bugbears onto consoles, it's nothing more than childish. Everything from requiring a constant online activation, to the lack of modding can be blamed on one thing: money. Specifically the piles of Auction House Moolah that Blizzard are busy staining their shirt fronts with drool over.

Yes, we all know PCs are the superior platform, but it really isn't a significant advantage. Some of us (yes I'm a PC gamer too) need to stop acting so smug and stop getting their frilly knickers in a twist everytime we're forced to share some of that delicious gaming pie.

DrWilhelm:
That's great news for consoles, and is absolutely no reason for PC gamers to start bitching. And if you think Diablo 3 wouldn't work on consoles then you ought to play the Torchlight console port. I have, and I had no issues with it aside from it getting boring after a while, and that's a content variety issue rather than a porting one.

Please don't try to pin all your Diablo 3 bugbears onto consoles, it's nothing more than childish. Everything from requiring a constant online activation, to the lack of modding can be blamed on one thing: money. Specifically the piles of Auction House Moolah that Blizzard are busy staining their shirt fronts with drool over.

Yes, we all know PCs are the superior platform, but it really isn't a significant advantage. Some of us (yes I'm a PC gamer too) need to stop acting so smug and stop getting their frilly knickers in a twist everytime we're forced to share some of that delicious gaming pie.

Noone says Diablo wouldn't work on a console, the same way noone says you can't eat soup with a knife. You can, but it's worse than eating with a spoon and there's no fucking reason to do it.

And please, stop it with the failed guilt tripping. It's almost like suddenly consoles didn't make up the largest part of the gaming market and didn't have 90% development either exclusive to it or being done for consoles first and foremost. And yet, you don't see PC gamers in every thread whining about how they can't get to play Gran Turismo or God of War. There seems to be more common sense involved when a PC gamer speaks his mind, but maybe that's just me. It's always the console gamers wanting something that would be objectively worse on their platform of choice just to have it on their platform of choice.

Well, guess what, RTS games? Every single one of them ever released would work on a console. Hell, even Starcraft 2. It's not a matter of working or not, it's a matter of how well it would work, or at least of what could be gained (gameplay wise) to outweigh the detriments.

Hammeroj:

DrWilhelm:
That's great news for consoles, and is absolutely no reason for PC gamers to start bitching. And if you think Diablo 3 wouldn't work on consoles then you ought to play the Torchlight console port. I have, and I had no issues with it aside from it getting boring after a while, and that's a content variety issue rather than a porting one.

Please don't try to pin all your Diablo 3 bugbears onto consoles, it's nothing more than childish. Everything from requiring a constant online activation, to the lack of modding can be blamed on one thing: money. Specifically the piles of Auction House Moolah that Blizzard are busy staining their shirt fronts with drool over.

Yes, we all know PCs are the superior platform, but it really isn't a significant advantage. Some of us (yes I'm a PC gamer too) need to stop acting so smug and stop getting their frilly knickers in a twist everytime we're forced to share some of that delicious gaming pie.

Noone says Diablo wouldn't work on a console, the same way noone says you can't eat soup with a knife. You can, but it's worse than eating with a spoon and there's no fucking reason to do it.

And please, stop it with the failed guilt tripping. It's almost like suddenly consoles didn't make up the largest part of the gaming market and had 90% development either exclusive to it or being done for consoles first and foremost. And yet, you don't see PC gamers in every thread whining about how they can't get to play Gran Turismo or God of War. There seems to be more common sense involved when a PC gamer speaks his mind, but maybe that's just me. It's always the console gamers wanting something that would be objectively worse on their platform of choice just to have it on their platform of choice.

Well, guess what, RTS games? Every single one of them ever released would work on a console. Hell, even Starcraft 2. It's not a matter of working or not, it's a matter of how well it would work, or at least of what could be gained (gameplay wise) to outweigh the detriments.

Again. Torchlight. I played it on the 360 and it works very well. I'm not talking about how well the game runs but rather how well the game functions as a game. Was it fun to play and were the controls frustrating. In the case of Torchlight the answers are respectively, yes and no. I also remember playing Baldurs Gate: Dark Alliance 2 years back on the PS2 and having a barrel of fun. Point out to me how top down third person hack and slashers are objectively and significantly worse on consoles, because I keep coming up empty. Sure the game was probably better on PC but that's akin to saying a delicious blueberry muffin would probably be better if it had more blueberries. That may well be the case but it's still a delicious muffin.

On the subject of RTSs, the only reason you don't see more of them for consoles is because they are one of the very few game types that really require the precision of a mouse. That's about it.

And I really don't see any difference between the two sides of the PC versus console debate. I typically find that PC gamers have neither superior intelligence or logic. They're just the same as Console gamers; no better, no worse. Some of them may believe they're smarter, but that's just pretense and arrogance. I hesitate to even call it a debate. It's more like a pair of nerds getting into a slap fight over their favourite Star Trek Captain while everyone else looks on, baffled as to why it even matters so much. They have their favourite Captains as well, but they don't see what's served by starting a war over it.

I can't actually find any fault in PC gamers getting upset about certain games being exclusive to consoles. That would be a legitimate grievance. I should point out that God of War and Gran Turismo, being exclusive to only a single console, are terrible examples however, and it's hardly as if PCs don't get their own share of exclusives. Perhaps not a fair share, but a share nonetheless. But blaming Diablo 3's faults on consoles, and even worse, having a fit just because they get the game too? It's quite frankly pathetic. In the latter case, to hastily reanimate the pie metaphor from my last post, it's like being given a pie, but only wanting to eat half of it. Your brother comes along and asks if he can have the other half. Despite not wanting the other half, you decide he can't have it. How does it hurt PC gamers if Blizzard ports the game to consoles at some point? It's not like theres any evidence that Blizzard have deliberately dumbed down the PC version because of a port they may or may not make. Live and let live, for fucks sake.

NameIsRobertPaulson:

Mid-end my rear. His rig is:

Graphics Card: GeForce GTX 460 1 GB
Processor: Intel Qaud-Core Q6600

That's hardly a "mid-tier" computer, unless you feel like throwing down $1000 for the QX9600. And it lagged hard. That computer was $925. I have never had frame rate problems on my PS3.

What the fuck, he paid $925 for that?

The only reason you don't have any frame rate problems on your PS3 is because they cap all the games at 30 fps because it can't handle higher than that. Bayonetta is infamous on PS3 for having frame rate problems, but even a lower end card like the GTX 460 1 GB could probably run it at a consistent 60 fps at twice the resolution.

I have become "less serious" about Diablo III as time goes by. It has fallen waaaaaay down on my list of games I'm looking forward to. The more they talk about it and reveal things they have cut out of it or added to it (no LAN, constant DRM, etc etc) the less interested in the game I become.

... why do i keep reading these things!

well, I knew it. Blizzard had some form of special loop. why care about the PC gamers in the less sturdy internet zones if you can badger the console gamers for extra bucks. that'll easily leverage the stunt they're pulling with always-on DRM, and Drastically increase the amount of people on the RMAH. game sells like new creme crackers, ID whoops up a big game along with blizzard, hapless console gamer's buy a game they know little about, and the always- online crap will continue

*slow claps for 15 seconds* Bravo Blizzard, you've doomed us all in due time now.

Clive Howlitzer:
I think Diablo 3 is slowly leaning towards the 'suck' end of the spectrum the more I hear about it. Especially if it follows the trend of Starcraft 2. Of course, this would have nothing to do with it being on console. Diablo was on the PSX.

Whats wrong with Starcraft 2 again? sorry i was busy playing the game everyday and noticing its a super extremely popular game and a growing E-Sport where corporations are coming up holding tournaments with prize pools of 50-100k

Legion IV:

Clive Howlitzer:
I think Diablo 3 is slowly leaning towards the 'suck' end of the spectrum the more I hear about it. Especially if it follows the trend of Starcraft 2. Of course, this would have nothing to do with it being on console. Diablo was on the PSX.

Whats wrong with Starcraft 2 again? sorry i was busy playing the game everyday and noticing its a super extremely popular game and a growing E-Sport where corporations are coming up holding tournaments with prize pools of 50-100k

SC2 is a great game, but Blizzard hasn't been handling it the best way it could be (same with Diablo 3).

DrWilhelm:
Again. Torchlight. I played it on the 360 and it works very well. I'm not talking about how well the game runs but rather how well the game functions as a game. Was it fun to play and were the controls frustrating. In the case of Torchlight the answers are respectively, yes and no. I also remember playing Baldurs Gate: Dark Alliance 2 years back on the PS2 and having a barrel of fun. Point out to me how top down third person hack and slashers are objectively and significantly worse on consoles, because I keep coming up empty. Sure the game was probably better on PC but that's akin to saying a delicious blueberry muffin would probably be better if it had more blueberries. That may well be the case but it's still a delicious muffin.

'Kay, let's get a few things out of the way.

First, I wasn't talking about how well the game would run, but, in this case, only because it's Diablo 3 and it's behind a certain hack'n'slash from 2006 on a technical level. I was talking about how well it would work.

Second, it wouldn't work as well because of a couple of things that go wrong when you make the switch to a console controller (some of these may be general things and may or may not specifically apply to Diablo 3):
A) You lose the ability to quickly manage menus;
B) What menus you get, including and especially the inventory, are most likely going to be converted into one of the things I hate most about console game design brought on by the inability to point at things - list-based. It's an eyesore. And they're all still going to take multitudes of times longer to get through, despite the regress for convenience in design.
C) You lose hotkeys;
D) You lose speed with what keys you have left to use. Assuming Diablo 3 will use both of the analog sticks, you have 8 buttons - out of the already ridiculously small number - that are not going to be accessible until you abandon your movement or your aiming capability. Meaning that yes, between the 4 different skills you'll be able to take along for the ride, you'll have to stop aiming every time you want to switch;
E) And on the skill side of things, your ability to use them is literally one dimensional - "that way". I'll leave it up to you to figure what's the problem in that yourself. Even if none of the other problems existed, this alone should be a deal-breaker to anyone who can say they have standards when it comes to this genre.

Now, on to this part of your post that I quoted. Torchlight I have not played because I have no interest in playing a super cartoony, hardly balanced at all, tight budget Diablo knockoff. Out of curiosity, though, have you played the PC version of it in the first place to have something to compare it to?

Now Dark Alliance 2 I have played, and boy, did my respect for you just take a kick in the nuts when I read your words about it. There is not one thing the game gets right in the hack'n'slash genre. Not one. It doesn't have an itemisation system worth a fuck, it doesn't have a crafting system worth a fuck, the sound design sucks balls, has no oomph whatsoever, doesn't have any sort of art direction (or shiny graphics, for that matter. Even for PS2), and so on. It's the most generic, oversimplified piece of garbage in every single aspect of it you can name. The fact that you regard it as good only speaks of how low your standards for 'good' are.

Have you played an actually good hack'n'slash on a PC?

And worse is still worse. The only reason for them to even consider porting the game to consoles is a sign of greed and nothing more and should not be embraced. There is nothing that can be gained gameplay wise, and there are lots of things that are going to be lost.

On the subject of RTSs, the only reason you don't see more of them for consoles is because they are one of the very few game types that really require the precision of a mouse. That's about it.

My point is that they can be made, and they do work on a technical level, but without the control scheme fitting the genre, they are not worth shit.

And I really don't see any difference between the two sides of the PC versus console debate. I typically find that PC gamers have neither superior intelligence or logic. They're just the same as Console gamers; no better, no worse. Some of them may believe they're smarter, but that's just pretense and arrogance. I hesitate to even call it a debate. It's more like a pair of nerds getting into a slap fight over their favourite Star Trek Captain while everyone else looks on, baffled as to why it even matters so much. They have their favourite Captains as well, but they don't see what's served by starting a war over it.

When's the last time PC gamers whined about the latest fighting, racing or action adventure game being exclusive to consoles? There are genres that fit one of the control schemes more than the other, and I have not yet seen PC gamers cross the line - on this forum, anyway. Console gamers, though? There isn't a fucking thread about a PC title without some ignoramus coming in and saying "If only I could play this on my Xbox 360". That is what I meant and by the way, I wrote 'common sense', not 'intelligence'. Even though the two do tend to come hand in hand. A matter of ignorance, too, because the vast majority of console gamers are convinced that an analog stick is the best way to aim in an FPS game.

I can't actually find any fault in PC gamers getting upset about certain games being exclusive to consoles. That would be a legitimate grievance. I should point out that God of War and Gran Turismo, being exclusive to only a single console, are terrible examples however, and it's hardly as if PCs don't get their own share of exclusives. Perhaps not a fair share, but a share nonetheless.

Yeah, sure, the PC gets its share of exclusives, but when it comes to any of the big publishers, which is what we're talking about, that number is really close to zero, and it's getting closer by the year. Let's not beat around the bush and let's not try to spin things the way they aren't.

Fine, replace those with Mortal Kombat or something. Point is, no fuss is being raised when consoles are played to their strengths.

But blaming Diablo 3's faults on consoles, and even worse, having a fit just because they get the game too? It's quite frankly pathetic. In the latter case, to hastily reanimate the pie metaphor from my last post, it's like being given a pie, but only wanting to eat half of it. Your brother comes along and asks if he can have the other half. Despite not wanting the other half, you decide he can't have it. How does it hurt PC gamers if Blizzard ports the game to consoles at some point? It's not like theres any evidence that Blizzard have deliberately dumbed down the PC version because of a port they may or may not make. Live and let live, for fucks sake.

No. If you knew anything about how game development businesses and especially Blizzard, as of late, work, you'd realise that the moment the game's console sales exceed PC sales is the moment PC gets the shaft in the game's development.

'Sides, I have a problem with them being this cheap about actually making Diablo 3 while at the same time getting another dev team together to make a shittier version of it.

Legion IV:
Whats wrong with Starcraft 2 again? sorry i was busy playing the game everyday and noticing its a super extremely popular game and a growing E-Sport where corporations are coming up holding tournaments with prize pools of 50-100k

Everything is wrong with it but the competitive part. Being popular does not equal being good, by the way. That's not a way to argue the quality of anything ever.

Legion IV:

Clive Howlitzer:
I think Diablo 3 is slowly leaning towards the 'suck' end of the spectrum the more I hear about it. Especially if it follows the trend of Starcraft 2. Of course, this would have nothing to do with it being on console. Diablo was on the PSX.

Whats wrong with Starcraft 2 again? sorry i was busy playing the game everyday and noticing its a super extremely popular game and a growing E-Sport where corporations are coming up holding tournaments with prize pools of 50-100k

What does any of that have to do with my personal enjoyment of the game, again? Oh right, nothing.

Hammeroj:

NameIsRobertPaulson:
For every PC game you can name, I can name a console game that would never work on anything but the highest tier gaming rigs. Bayonetta, any of the Dynasty games.

And that is why this forum needs a wall of shame. This statement would not have been true 4 years ago, let alone now.

*chuckles* Oh wow...such a patently untrue statement...
(*whispers* Psst! Don't tell him Devil May Cry 4 was ported to PC. It kind of undermines the hyperbole in his argument.)

Icehearted:

I wasn't referring exclusively to stat modding. Absolute control over all content means multi-platform content uniformity.

I actually wasn't referring to stat modding either its just that the majority of the mods in diablo 2 were there to make it easier to "farm items". Allowing things like this would lower the value of everything on the AH since the faster you can farm said boss the more items you get.

I'm "Very Serious" about my disappointment in Diablo III.

WoW style cartoony graphics, and no offline singleplayer...and I'm having a hard time trying to think of PC-superior games that made a transition to consoles and -didn't- suffer for it in some way or another...a very hard time indeed.

Anywho, gonna go reply to that other topic I've got in a tab. Whoop whoop.

As a PS3 owner this news is pretty exciting, although I think the timing is a little odd. Wish it came out at the same time as the PC version, or at most a month apart so people would have options. My laptop can prolly run D3 fine and I'm probably going to pre-order...Sooo by the time the (most probably inferior) console version is out everybody and their moms would probably be bored with D3.

I feel like Blizzard made console versions as a charity for the "bottom feeder console gamers" who can't afford (or don't know how to build) a good enough PC rig. No offense to anyone, I don't actually think that consoles players are inferior. I most definitely have been stuck in console land for a while, and was there for a good amount of time till I got my VAIO.

Come on people, this is obviously Blizzard trolling. I figured it out with the line "Trust me, it is a dream job." it sounds like "Keep dreaming" to me.

Considering I shifted from hardcore PC gamer to console gamer in the early 2000s, this is good knews.
My PC wasn't upgraded since...

And it will take Blizzard another ten years to adapt it to a console...

I play FFXI on my PS3, so I don't see how DRMblo III would be much different (in regards to the DRM, obviously).
Still not buying it though.

Well, THERES some good news. Not two weeks ago i was lamenting that i would never be able to play it. It looks good, and its been a long time since i played a good honest dungeon crawler. So yeah, good news for EVERYBODY!

SecretNegative:
And it will take Blizzard another ten years to adapt it to a console...

More like a year and a half. If they do it. They most likely will, but here's hoping.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here