Diablo® III

I don't get multi-platform negativity

lol, if they had made this game with the original, loyal Diablo fans in mind, I'm sure they would have had much higher revenue as well as more players. Terrible direction from the higher ups (The infamous Jay Wilson)IMO. The reason why Blizzard had such a positive reputation was because of the original fans that played D1, Warcraft, Starcraft, etc. After 10 years of waiting, what do we get in return? A dumbed down and poorly developed program. I would have more fun playing Infinity Blade on my phone than playing D3 on my Xbox. Who the hell would find the game fun on console? It will be the same boring, repetitive gameplay over and over again. If you guys had just gone with the original idea for an awesome d3 for loyal consumers, instead of a greedy approach, how much positive feedback, money, and even more regular customers would you have gained? smh
Sooo... this game is the worst game ever made in human history because it was a giant conspiracy from the beginning to screw over PC players (Blizzard's beta testers that have to pay 50 dollars for the privilege of being a game tester) in favor of gaining more money from console people?
90 Blood Elf Warlock
17705
Posts: 403
It really makes you wonder what Diablo 3 COULD have been, if they weren't planning on porting this game to consoles, doesn't it?


Not even the smallest bit. I don't play games and wonder what they "could" have been. I play them and have fun. That's the point of games.
It wouldn't be a big deal if D3 was worth porting. Or was finished. Or was fun. Or innovative. This game won't sell a lick on PS4 as its features, storyline, ect belong in 2006
02/23/2013 04:47 PMPosted by Taters
Sooo... this game is the worst game ever made in human history because it was a giant conspiracy from the beginning to screw over PC players (Blizzard's beta testers that have to pay 50 dollars for the privilege of being a game tester) in favor of gaining more money from console people?


Lol yah, that seems to be the conclusion many people are making, despite how absurd it is when laid out.
The biggest negative about it is the cross platform exclusivity. Why, if they wanted to go cross platform in the beginning, would they sign with Sony for an exclusive deal? Surely, the Xbox could run it as well. Unless they are worried that Live might get in the way. I guess Sony must have given them a nice big fat signing bonus. Disgusting.
Edited by CapnJack#1804 on 2/23/2013 6:05 PM PST
02/23/2013 05:13 PMPosted by Haygurl
It really makes you wonder what Diablo 3 COULD have been, if they weren't planning on porting this game to consoles, doesn't it?


Not even the smallest bit. I don't play games and wonder what they "could" have been. I play them and have fun. That's the point of games.


+1

back to diablo and maybe some COD free weekend
People will always find something to hate, even when they are too ignorant to realize why they are hating on it. You also can't forget the mental capacity of the said haters is quite limited, so once the trend starts, all the people trying to be the cool kids on the forums hop aboard.

The same people who are quitting the game now are most likely the people who quit when x happened, and again when y happened, and again when z happened.
02/23/2013 06:04 PMPosted by CapnJack
The biggest negative about it is the cross platform exclusivity. Why, if they wanted to go cross platform in the beginning, would they sign with Sony for an exclusive deal? Surely, the Xbox could run it as well. Unless they are worried that Live might get in the way. I guess Sony must have given them a nice big fat signing bonus. Disgusting.


Some people are criticizing the PC version, saying the diablo team made compromises for the sake of the console port team, and that they would also collectively lie about their reasoning to limit co-op to 4 players and remove skill points, and beyond that, that they would make up reasons to do those things, reasons that Jay Wilson talked extensively about. Some of the same people are also saying the reason he made certain changes is because he is a bad designer, not just in on the conspiracy to lie about their reasoning behind the mechanics for the sake of the console port later on, and those two things seem to be at odds.

Anyway, by contrast, you're criticizing the port team for not also making an Xbox version. That's legitimate, but that's just how consoles go; they are so similar in function that they have to sign exclusive deals to get attract gamers. Xbox players don't get to play uncharted, Playstation players don't get to play Halo.
Edited by Ricky2shoes#1357 on 2/23/2013 7:45 PM PST
02/22/2013 03:02 AMPosted by Japhasca
It really makes you wonder what Diablo 3 COULD have been, if they weren't planning on porting this game to consoles, doesn't it?


No, it doesn't. Not at all. the only difference would be control mechanisms, and D3 was clearly designed for PC controls (keyboard + mouse) so I don't see ANY choices designed for console.
02/22/2013 03:02 AMPosted by Japhasca
It really makes you wonder what Diablo 3 COULD have been, if they weren't planning on porting this game to consoles, doesn't it?


No, it doesn't. Not at all. the only difference would be control mechanisms, and D3 was clearly designed for PC controls (keyboard + mouse) so I don't see ANY choices designed for console.


Control aspects do seem a bit off to me. Why is it that the game wants a monster for a target SO badly. Why is that if my mouse is within 10-15 feet of a mob I target it? A number of skills in this game are VERY large AoE effects, I don't WANT to target a mob, I WANT to target ground, why is that not the default? For example, acid cloud, blizzard, meteor. These are much harder to target then they should be because of how **** hard it is to target ground.

Also, console games tend to be simplified in many ways. Why? Because it's a larger audience, and PC players tend to be more complex thinkers. Why? Because people who play on the PC are generally older, have to handle their computer in the first place to get the game to play (often more complicated than playing the RPG anyway), and often get the computer version for the ability to mod. Now that's not to say that there aren't smart console players, or even that there are LESS smart console players, but they're lumped in with a larger group of more ignorant (often simply due to age) players.
02/23/2013 09:55 AMPosted by Amiscar
Compared to what? If you're actually saying that the Souls games are easily accessible, then you have openly declared that you don't know what you're talking about. The Souls games are examples of ARPGs. They don't bang you over the head like other RPGs, but that doesn't change that the fact that it's still an RPG.


Arpg? Maybe its you who dont know what are you talking about. A game that relies on memorizing enemy patterns to avoid them,how complex. Ffs, the game even has the option to leave notes to other players -.-''. Do you really want me to start compare it to real rpgs? Just because you have items and skills,that doesnt make it an rpg. Hell,i dont even see d3 as an any kind of rpg.
Demon's souls is a Action Role Playing Game... duuuuuurrrrrr. Memorizing enemy patterns isn't complex? LMFAO at you buddy. You level up, assign stats and loot mobs... also the combat is in real time... sounds like a freakin action role playing game to me!!!!
Nobody cares that consoles get D3. The entire source of anger is that blizzard knew it was a port from the start and that impacted design choices.

Why/how? You ask. It's basically this, consoles have a much much higher amount of younger gamers. There's a ton of 8 to 12 year olds that own Ps3 or Xbox not so many that have a gaming computer. For a business exec this is a prime untouched market. So diablo 3 will be designed in such a way so it can be inclusive to the 8-12 year olds, because if you make it too complex to exclude them that's leaving money on the table.

Morrowind is a fantastic example. That was a PC game ported to console. Everything about the UI showed that this was a PC game designed for the PC.

Now skip ahead to skyrim. The UI is so blatantly designed around using a controller that it feels really clunky on a PC. Skyrim was designed for consoles.

Now look at the complexity in character building, stat allocation, gear (remember gloves and pauldrons?) in Morrowind compared to Skyrim. One was designed with the PC in mind one was designed with consoles in mind. And there is still a large group of people that say Morrowind is still the best TES game.

So now using that example look at diablo. D2 was designed completely for the pc,it was complex and had real rpg character developing in stat points skill trees and gear customization.
Now look at this super watered down version of it that is D3. For a long time people were holding out hoping that they will make it better, but this announcement happens and then people put it together in their head.
Oh d3 is such a lackluster successor to d2 because it was designed for consoles from the start.

It parallels why skyrim is a lackluster rpg when compared to Morrowind. One was designed for the PC crowd the other for consoles.


It takes some heavy modding for me to enjoy Oblivion and Skyrim anywhere near as much as vanilla Morrowind. Modded Morrowind, where the mods are about adding new features in and not fixing those broken by aiming for consoles or just poor design choices (which you'd think wouldn't happen at all considering how great Daggerfall and Morrowind were as far as RPGs. But other than their memes and a few choice quests, a lot of the base game blew and were not memorable, although Skyrim was a little bit better than Oblivion)? They aren't even in the same universe, much less league.

I like D3, but it doesn't compare to the previous two at all. It's not Oblivion bad, but it's certainly Skyrim bad.
I just don't like playing a console port.

A PC version of Diablo 3 should let me walk free through the acts instead of locking me into checkpoints, this is a system that suits better consoles, not PC.

The game was built all around for consoles, they released it first on PC just to use us as beta testers.

Their loss, last time they get a coin from me.
I actually understand why Diablo is what it is since that statement by blizzavision.
Every decision on dumbing this game game can be attributed to the eventual port to console.

Also, it can attribute to how these boards have become a desolate wasteland since the announcement.
83 Gnome Mage
7610
Posts: 3,740
Last week: Every decision made by the game designers was to maximize RMAH profits.

This week: Every decision made by the game designers was to make a console game.
02/22/2013 03:02 AMPosted by Japhasca
It really makes you wonder what Diablo 3 COULD have been, if they weren't planning on porting this game to consoles, doesn't it?


No, it doesn't. Not at all. the only difference would be control mechanisms, and D3 was clearly designed for PC controls (keyboard + mouse) so I don't see ANY choices designed for console.


I was wondering why teleport was crap compared to the previous D2 version. It's not a game breaking skill since barbs can run insane speeds anyway. Makes sense that it wouldn't be the same if the game was getting ported to console. You couldn't use D2 teleport correctly with a controller after all. And you wouldn't want to make console gamers feel disadvantage just because they use inferior technology by choice now would you?
This topic has reached its post limit. You may no longer post or reply to posts for this topic.

Please report any Code of Conduct violations, including:

Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.

Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.

Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.

Forums Code of Conduct

Report Post # written by

Reason
Explain (256 characters max)

Reported!

[Close]