Blizzard Double-Secret Confirms Diablo III on Consoles

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

666Satsuki:

Kitsuna10060:

good points, but until they release spyware in the guise of digital distribution, they still aren't AS bad, yet

You know I wasnt going to mention the software they make you download if you want to sign up for their betas but, well ya it does the exact same thing as origin.

tzimize:

Sigh...................................

For the billionth time. Its not great news. The game will not be as great since design choices will revolve around making the game work on all platforms and for all audiences instead of one. For fucks sake how hard can it be to understand that this is a bad thing no matter what stupid platform one is sitting on?

If you try to fit a game in too many places, the result will be a game that doesnt really have an interesting shape.

This has nothing to do with being an elitist anything, it just has to do with logic.

The only way it is not good news is if your a insane PC elitest who thinks some how that the game eventually being ported to a console is going to corrupt it. Diablo is a type of game that you dont actually have to change anything for it to work on a console. Its been done before with the origional diablo and more recently torchlight. Logic is exactly the thing your post is lacking since everything you said has been proven wrong time and time again. All you have to do is take a look around.

Try reading my arguments and answer with some of your own instead of referring to shadows.

I guess you havent played much Diablo. At least on a high level. Have you seen a Sorceress from Diablo 2 teleporting around and throwing frozen orbs all over the place? She can be around the map in seconds. That kind of twitch gameplay is not possible with a gamepad. If you suggest otherwise you are simply ignorant.

The console version of Diablo was released almost two years after Diablo for PC, and wasnt even developed by Blizzard. This is not whats happening now.

Blizzard is developing Diablo 3. And RIGHT NOW and probably way earlier, they have had plans of making it multi-platform. They dont design specifically for the PC and its audience (or specifically for the console and its audience for that matter), they design it so it can fit on all platforms.

As I said in my last post. This means having to COMPROMISE. You drop some features because it doesnt fit on PC while the Xbox handles them fine, or because it doesnt fit on Xbox but the PC handles them fine. This leads to a LESSER GAME.

Logic, and arguments. And a lesser game. You dont have to be insane to be annoyed by this.

DonTsetsi:

Moldova is not a part of the European Union. I'm from Bulgaria.

Okay, sorry about that, thanks for the correction. I double checked and for some reason when I entered "EU, poorest country" in Google, it brought up two articles about Moldova, but now on closer inspection, it didn't bring up just information about the EU, but Europe in general, and near the top of findings list mentioned Moldova.

And like a brick to the skull, I get to wheel out my D3 conspiracy barrel in utter surprise.

So when I assumed some months back that the note to make the game always-online seemed like it was gonna lose them customers (also around the time i inexplicably became more dismal), I had a feeling they were gonna make this move. Its nice to be further confirmed in the obvious then I was back then. Obviously the console bucks would outweigh any lost money over having to be always online. Heck, probably return you a bunch, in fact.

I entirely lost track as to whether or not I thought that before the first massive hints were out there, but just to make me feel a bit better, I.Called.It.

But since someone earlier on in the thread brought it up, i do wonder if anyone has a clue how they will handle the controls for this game. I freely admit during the old days I completely avoided PS Diablo as well as starcraft 64 because I already had them on PC and it was a familial thing to play as such. Could someone enlighten me as to how those operated?

AndyFromMonday:

666Satsuki:
snip

Well yeah but since the hardware consoles use is outdated the game would have to be developed specifically with consoles in mind meaning smaller areas and dungeons, less monsters on screen, relatively simple boss encounters, less gear variety etc.

Im going to have to disagree by saying borderlands and torchlight already did it. Less gear veriety would never happen because its been done so many times with other games before. As for relatively simply boss encounters I dont think they could actually make them any simplier then in diablo 2. You wont have to worry about smaller areas and dungeons you wont really have to worry about because of the isometric view that diablo uses. This also helps allow them to put as many montsters on the screen as they want. At most the only real changes would only effect the console version and that would be graphically.

Pretty much the only thing that I can think of that could be an issue in the long run is the consoles lifespan. If we have learned anything at all from the past its that Diablo 3 will most likely be played for years and years. The next console generation however will probably be here within the next three years if the rumors are to be trusted. Backwards compatibility would help with this issue but it would still hurt Diablo 3s potential future sales.

tzimize:

As I said in my last post. This means having to COMPROMISE. You drop some features because it doesnt fit on PC while the Xbox handles them fine, or because it doesnt fit on Xbox but the PC handles them fine. This leads to a LESSER GAME.

Logic, and arguments. And a lesser game. You dont have to be insane to be annoyed by this.

I provided you with examlpes of how its been done in the past and has worked. You however have absolutely no way at all to prove your argument. It cant be proven true or false so really it is useless speculation.

Dexter111:

Greg Tito:
I get it. I know why stalwart PC developers from CD Projekt to Bethesda want to make their classic RPGs console-friendly. But Diablo? Really? Come on. Just stick with making me click that mouse about three thousand times per second.

Some of their first games (Lost Vikings, Rock & Roll Racing and Blackthorne) were mainly SNES titles, and Diablo was actually on the PlayStation, which people tend to forget although it didn't get entirely that popular...

image

Other than that Blizzard has only made RTS-games and one MMO (which aren't possible without Mouse + Keyboard, or at least need a better input than a basic controller is able to provide) and as you've seen StarCraft II didn't get a console port, although they tried back in the day by releasing StarCraft on the Nintendo 64.

image

That said, imo Blizzard as a whole has turned corporate/into shit lately, and as much of a fan as I was of any of their early games (and I've played and loved almost all of em :P) I can't really get excited over any of their new titles when they all come with a "but", in the case of Diablo III the RMAH/Pay2Win system, Always on DRM, no Mods and so on. Looking forward to Torchlight II instead.

yay some1 else who believes tl2 will be better than diablo :D (the game mechanics are my main reason for this thought, but the other stuff counts too)

The7Sins:
Well this explains why the vast majority of changes from D2 have been crap. They are changing it to suit consoles as well. Figures. Well if there was ever a chance I was gonna get Diablo 3 this puts those hopes to death.

R.I.P. Diablo franchise. Sad to see the death of ye. But Blizzard has gutted and killed what made you good and now has confirmed it was for the console crowd.

Hmmm my captcha was Seven Redenta. I guess I should be worried as the captchas seem to know my name and usual posting color now.

go check out torchlight 2, it is real competition for diablo 3, the creators were the co-founders of blizzard north (aka the team that made the old diablo's) the first game was a hit due to its gameplay and easy modablity, and they really have expanded out the concept. Well worth a look.

Sorry if you already knew all that.

My question is: are they holding up the PC release to coincide with the console?

bahumat42:

go check out torchlight 2, it is real competition for diablo 3, the creators were the co-founders of blizzard north (aka the team that made the old diablo's) the first game was a hit due to its gameplay and easy modablity, and they really have expanded out the concept. Well worth a look.

Torchlight was really not much better than Sacred, Titanquest, Fate(yeah, I know), or any of the other myriad Diablo clones. I'm not sure I understand this site's love affair with it. It seems kinda "I came here for the opening band" kind of pretentious.

666Satsuki:
snip

Well Torchlight used randomly generated dungeons and Borderlands was specifically developed with consoles in mind so you can't really use them as examples. Since they're already screwing us over with the paid auction house and always online DRM, I'd rather the game not turn into another Dragon Age 2.

Now it's clear why Diablo 3 will have a fixed camera, it would be too much effort to implement zooming just for the PC :p

Well, I already decided not to get it some time ago because of all the other infos we got about Diablo 3.

666Satsuki:

tzimize:

As I said in my last post. This means having to COMPROMISE. You drop some features because it doesnt fit on PC while the Xbox handles them fine, or because it doesnt fit on Xbox but the PC handles them fine. This leads to a LESSER GAME.

Logic, and arguments. And a lesser game. You dont have to be insane to be annoyed by this.

I provided you with examlpes of how its been done in the past and has worked. You however have absolutely no way at all to prove your argument. It cant be proven true or false so really it is useless speculation.

At this point I'm not sure if you are trolling or what, but I'll give it one last go.

1: Can it be done?
Can Diablo 3 be made to work on consoles? 100% sure.
Does the fact that it works mean that its the best game that it can be? No.

2: Your "proof"
The fact that Torchlight has been made to work on consoles proves absolutely squat since the game doesnt even have multiplayer. And even if it revolves around gathering loot and has an isometric pov the gameplay itself is quite different. If you cant see how its different you havent really played Diablo and I can see why you think what you do. However its also the exact reason why I'm angry that D3 will be a console title.

3: My proof
The fact is that while one can argue about the "casualness" of the console crowd all one wants, and disagree on what a gamer is and isnt...the experience of gaming on a PC and gaming on a Console is different.

One of the main reasons it is different is the control scheme. PC flags a mouse+keyboard, console uses gamepads. These have different strengths and weaknesses and are one of the MAIN reasons why D3 can be "compromised". I am not a PC elitist, I do not say a PC is always better, but I am saying that sometimes IT IS. At the same time sometimes a console IS BETTER.

I dont know if you've played for example the recent prince of persia games, or god of war for that matter, but I have. Both on PC (only PoP obviously) and console. Can PoP/GoW be played on a PC with mouse+keyboard? Certainly. Is that a worse alternative than playing with a gamepad? Oh yes.

The same goes for Diablo. The amount of customizable hotkeys for spells are NOT THE SAME on a gamepad. The speed and accuracy with wich you can teleport or place aoe spells in Diablo with a mouse versus a gamepad is NOT THE SAME.

This leads to the conclusion that making a game work for one of the platforms excludes certain gameplay options. This is not speculation, this is a fact.

If you exclude certain gameplay mechanics because the PC cant handle them, or the console cant handle them you are compromising your game so it will work for a wider amount of hardware. This is a fucking fact. We're not debating wether Blizzard can make D3 run on a console, of course they can. The issue is that the fact that they are going to, most likely means that the game will be less than it COULD have been if they designed it for ONE crowd specifically. This is a fact.

If you cant understand this, I suggest you play some more games to educate yourself, then get back to me. I am done with this thread.

AndyFromMonday:

666Satsuki:
snip

Well Torchlight used randomly generated dungeons and Borderlands was specifically developed with consoles in mind so you can't really use them as examples. Since they're already screwing us over with the paid auction house and always online DRM, I'd rather the game not turn into another Dragon Age 2.

Yes both games are different from diablo 3 in that one was designed for consoles and the other uses randomly generated dungeons but that doesnt really matter. They have already proven that it can be done. This is extremely important because it means that if blizzard decides to gimp anything it will not be because the consoles cant handle it.

tzimize:

666Satsuki:

tzimize:

As I said in my last post. This means having to COMPROMISE. You drop some features because it doesnt fit on PC while the Xbox handles them fine, or because it doesnt fit on Xbox but the PC handles them fine. This leads to a LESSER GAME.

Logic, and arguments. And a lesser game. You dont have to be insane to be annoyed by this.

I provided you with examlpes of how its been done in the past and has worked. You however have absolutely no way at all to prove your argument. It cant be proven true or false so really it is useless speculation.

snip

This quote pretty much sums up the entire argument. We COULD release D3 on consoles (They are) but the end result would be a horrible franken-game, that has been "dumbed down" to work on gamepads. You cannot, in any way, expect that a game involving real money, is going to allow gamepad using players compete against K&M players. It would be a slaughter. So, in order to make things fair, Blizz would have to nerf the effectiveness of skills and talents, or remove them all together, to prevent "exploits" by K&M players.

People have sited teleporting and AOE skills. Those are good examples. There is also the matter of PVP to be considered. If this goes live, in the way people are expecting, we can be sure that Consoles will get a form of autoaim assist for PVP, and probobly for PVE. Which in turn is not only broken, but horribly inefficient. Say 4 players are taking on a boss that summons mobs. Autotargeting engages the summons, when your trying to engage the boss. Major problems.

666Satsuki:

Yes both games are different from diablo 3 in that one was designed for consoles and the other uses randomly generated dungeons but that doesnt really matter. They have already proven that it can be done. This is extremely important because it means that if blizzard decides to gimp anything it will not be because the consoles cant handle it.

Yes, it can be done on a very small scale. Which means if Diablo 3 ends up being dumbed down, the reason will be quite obvious.

AndyFromMonday:

Yes, it can be done on a very small scale. Which means if Diablo 3 ends up being dumbed down, the reason will be quite obvious.

Im going to have to disagree with the small scale part. The majority of the places you visited in diablo 2 were no bigger then any of the levels in torchlight. The only difference is the few large open zones which were all fairly empty enemy wise. Then again some of the levels in torchlight were just as big as the zones in diablo 2.

tzimize:
If you cant understand this, I suggest you play some more games to educate yourself, then get back to me. I am done with this thread.

I think the Prince of Persia games are a perfect example and I should thank you for pointing them out. It was a game that was designed to be played with a gamepad and they didnt sacrifice anything for that. Sure they ported it to the PC but as you said the PC version was inferior because they didnt compromise the game so it would work on both.

You design the game with one system in mind and then do your best to port it to the other. If the other game is inferior because of the different controls then oh well. This happens with games in every single genre so I am confused as to why you think there is no possibility that it could happen here. Especially since from all we know the console and PC versions will not be coming out at the same time.

Bradeck:
snip

You make a good argument for why the game should not have cross platform multiplayer but not for why it should never be ported to consoles. Although why you talk about pvp in a game where the company specifically says they dont give a shit about it and will not try to balance it in any way is beyond me.

666Satsuki:
Im going to have to disagree with the small scale part. The majority of the places you visited in diablo 2 were no bigger then any of the levels in torchlight.

Diablo 2 was developed 10 years ago. Current hardware allows for much more complex encounters and dungeons. Console hardware on the other hand is very outdated. If Diablo 3 ended up being developed for consoles they'd have to make multiple compromises to make it work.

666Satsuki:
[ You make a good argument for why the game should not have cross platform multiplayer but not for why it should never be ported to consoles. Although why you talk about pvp in a game where the company specifically says they dont give a shit about it and will not try to balance it in any way is beyond me.

Because it won't be ported to consoles. It's much more cost effective to develop the game with consoles in mind than to create two different versions of the same game.

AndyFromMonday:

Because it won't be ported to consoles. It's much more cost effective to develop the game with consoles in mind than to create two different versions of the same game.

All evidence suggests otherwise though.

666Satsuki:

Because it won't be ported to consoles. It's much more cost effective to develop the game with consoles in mind than to create two different versions of the same game.

All evidence suggests otherwise though.[/quote]

Well, no. Blizzard didn't just decide during the middle of development to develop Diablo for consoles as well. This decision was made right when development started. As it stands, the whole game is developed with consoles in mind.

AndyFromMonday:
Well, no. Blizzard didn't just decide during the middle of development to develop Diablo for consoles as well. This decision was made right when development started. As it stands, the whole game is developed with consoles in mind.

My problem with that statement is that you have no evidence to back it up but there is plenty to support the contrary. Hell all you have to do is look at all of the links in the news article here.

Eric the Orange:
OMG, the game is getting a console release, that means it will be dumbed down and terrible. rage. RAGE!

Diablo? Dumbed down?

It's a pretty simple game. Kinda what makes it so awesome.

I have no issue with a console port, it doesn't stop me from playing it on my computer.

666Satsuki:

My problem with that statement is that you have no evidence to back it up but there is plenty to support the contrary. Hell all you have to do is look at all of the links in the news article here.

I do have evidence. Look at every other multiplatform game released in the past 5 years.

AndyFromMonday:

I do have evidence. Look at every other multiplatform game released in the past 5 years.

Now your not even trying to make sense. You could at least have tried to come up with something logical to say. Or you know something that was in any way at all related to the topic at hand.

bahumat42:

The7Sins:
Well this explains why the vast majority of changes from D2 have been crap. They are changing it to suit consoles as well. Figures. Well if there was ever a chance I was gonna get Diablo 3 this puts those hopes to death.

R.I.P. Diablo franchise. Sad to see the death of ye. But Blizzard has gutted and killed what made you good and now has confirmed it was for the console crowd.

Hmmm my captcha was Seven Redenta. I guess I should be worried as the captchas seem to know my name and usual posting color now.

go check out torchlight 2, it is real competition for diablo 3, the creators were the co-founders of blizzard north (aka the team that made the old diablo's) the first game was a hit due to its gameplay and easy modablity, and they really have expanded out the concept. Well worth a look.

Sorry if you already knew all that.

Thanks for the info on that game. It looks great. I'll probably get it when it come out.

666Satsuki:

AndyFromMonday:

I do have evidence. Look at every other multiplatform game released in the past 5 years.

Now your not even trying to make sense. You could at least have tried to come up with something logical to say. Or you know something that was in any way at all related to the topic at hand.

Every single multiplatform game to date has been developed with consoles in mind then ported to the PC. What's different about Diablo 3? The developers saying they won't be doing that? Blizzard also said they wouldn't implement a lot of the current microtransaction features we have in WoW but it did eventually happen. What a developer says and what it does are two completely different things.

AndyFromMonday:

666Satsuki:
Im going to have to disagree with the small scale part. The majority of the places you visited in diablo 2 were no bigger then any of the levels in torchlight.

Diablo 2 was developed 10 years ago. Current hardware allows for much more complex encounters and dungeons. Console hardware on the other hand is very outdated. If Diablo 3 ended up being developed for consoles they'd have to make multiple compromises to make it work.

666Satsuki:
[ You make a good argument for why the game should not have cross platform multiplayer but not for why it should never be ported to consoles. Although why you talk about pvp in a game where the company specifically says they dont give a shit about it and will not try to balance it in any way is beyond me.

Because it won't be ported to consoles. It's much more cost effective to develop the game with consoles in mind than to create two different versions of the same game.

Exactly. Stop stealing all the good arguments. It's totally against Kotich's way of doing things to develope for PC first, then port to console. He knows where money will be made (Consoles) and will start from there first.

Secondly, the whole argument that D3 will not be based around multiplayer, please site the source on that. I would be interested if Activision took that route. That would seriously diminish replay value, thus destroying a major income source. I am willing to bet Blizzard caves to the PVP crowd in the first year, and we start to see major game "balances" in favor of PVP, ala WoW.

Bradeck:
I am willing to bet Blizzard caves to the PVP crowd in the first year, and we start to see major game "balances" in favor of PVP, ala WoW.

They already caved in by introducing the paid auction house. It's quite obvious Diablo 3 is entirely based on the online component. That's why Blizzard introduced the always online DRM scheme. It's sad to see how low Blizzard has fallen. They went from being "gamer gods" to sellout whores in the matter of a few years. The same thing happened to Bioware.

AndyFromMonday:

Bradeck:
I am willing to bet Blizzard caves to the PVP crowd in the first year, and we start to see major game "balances" in favor of PVP, ala WoW.

They already caved in by introducing the paid auction house. It's quite obvious Diablo 3 is entirely based on the online component. That's why Blizzard introduced the always online DRM scheme. It's sad to see how low Blizzard has fallen. They went from being "gamer gods" to sellout whores in the matter of a few years. The same thing happened to Bioware.

I wouldn't say whores, or sell outs. That would mean they sacrificed quality over dollars. Point remains, Blizzard, despite their business practices, still put out well polished and enjoyable games. As much as I hate to admit it, I, along with many others in this thread I am guessing, will purchase and enjoy D3. We may hate the way they made it, but we don't control the green stuff. I won't begrudge anyone who sets out to make money, from doing so. They are a business. At the end of the day, they are trying to make money.

Now EA on the other hand, BEGAN with the mission statement that "We take indie games and make them great, because above all else, we believe in the game" or something to that effect. The abomination that they have become, is frightening. They have truly sold their ideals for the almighty dollar, or yen for that matter. They are whores.

For all their pandering to dollars, Blizzard was always up front with the message, we will do anything to this game in order to make money. Oh, you want this armor? Guess what! Or you don't like Paladins? WHAMALAMA-DINGDONG NERFED! As long as you subscribe, thats all they care about.

I love me some Blizzard games, but I can't fault them for making money the best way they know how. Kinda like the MLB. I HATE Scott Boras for what that midget prick has done to baseball, but I can't fault what he does, which is make as much money as possible for his clients, ala his job.

I don't care if it comes to consoles as long as they make a decent PC version and I know Diablo has had its share of problems but a shitty UI and a console feel to it won't be nice. Personally, Champions of Norath was a bit shit and diluted along with the Baldur's Gate so hopefully they will do better jobs than that.

danyy2009:
I'm really happy because i really want to play Diablo 3, and my comp is too old to run it.

Same here, I was pondering upgrading my system, but these news just give me more incentives not to.

hurrah, a choice of control systems on my PC!

boag:

danyy2009:
I'm really happy because i really want to play Diablo 3, and my comp is too old to run it.

Same here, I was pondering upgrading my system, but these news just give me more incentives not to.

Unless you are running a pre 2000 system, you can run most games these days, on low settings. Blizzard builds for the common denominator. Online, that may be a problem. Now the other side of this argument, is that you can buy a brand new tabletop PC from New Egg for about the same cost as a New PS3 or Xbox. 300$. So this whole argument that PC gaming is cost prohibitive is bull shit.

Bradeck:

boag:

danyy2009:
I'm really happy because i really want to play Diablo 3, and my comp is too old to run it.

Same here, I was pondering upgrading my system, but these news just give me more incentives not to.

Unless you are running a pre 2000 system, you can run most games these days, on low settings. Blizzard builds for the common denominator. Online, that may be a problem. Now the other side of this argument, is that you can buy a brand new tabletop PC from New Egg for about the same cost as a New PS3 or Xbox. 300$. So this whole argument that PC gaming is cost prohibitive is bull shit.

Here is the thing, I already own a console, im not going to spend $300 bucks on a pc just to play a game, specially when that PC will be outdated in less time than the console.

Im way past the times when I would look forward to sinking money into a computer just for a game, im looking forward to other things now.

boag:

Bradeck:

boag:

Same here, I was pondering upgrading my system, but these news just give me more incentives not to.

Unless you are running a pre 2000 system, you can run most games these days, on low settings. Blizzard builds for the common denominator. Online, that may be a problem. Now the other side of this argument, is that you can buy a brand new tabletop PC from New Egg for about the same cost as a New PS3 or Xbox. 300$. So this whole argument that PC gaming is cost prohibitive is bull shit.

Here is the thing, I already own a console, im not going to spend $300 bucks on a pc just to play a game, specially when that PC will be outdated in less time than the console.

Im way past the times when I would look forward to sinking money into a computer just for a game, im looking forward to other things now.

Then please (Not you in particular, just people in general) don't clamor that games you can't play be made for your system. I really would like to try out Gears of War, but I don't have an XBox. I would REALLY like to try tabletop Warhammer. But GamesWorkshop decided that 4 ounces of resin thrown in a mold should cost upwards of 50$. I do not demand that these games be made on the platform or style that I choose. Because honestly, a video game version of Tabletop games would SUCK. In the same way that taking an intrinsically PC game, and making it for consoles, then porting it over to PC (ala Skyrim) gives a big fuck you to the PC gamers, who spent a great deal of time and money to make a system capable of running the game in the first place. Only to be defeated by shitty UI (Skyrim) TONS of bugs (New Vegas) horrible graphical glitches (RAGE) or the worst thing, just an all around shitty game (DA2), because the best parts were coded for Consoles, and since coding is expensive and difficult, it's easier to just remove the code (Features, maps, items, skins) then just re-write the code.

Tl;dr - PC Gamers spend alot of time and money creating their machines, and get fucked over by developers because people want to see Diablo 3, or Borderlands, on Consoles.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT

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