Diablo® III

I don't get multi-platform negativity

The problem is that Blizzards fan base have become elitist jerks. Especially the old school fans are like jealous ex-boyfriends that can't move on.
02/22/2013 06:12 AMPosted by Zaxxon23
It is wrong to beta test a console game by charging customers $60 for what they thought was a pc game when it was really a scaled down console game
Stop. Just stop this.
02/22/2013 11:31 AMPosted by Jekyllnhyde
The problem is that Blizzards fan base have become elitist jerks. Especially the old school fans are like jealous ex-boyfriends that can't move on.


We have a winner!
02/22/2013 08:41 AMPosted by FloydGA
I don't understand why people don't get why some are upset about it.

Because some of us actually are moderately informed. It has been publicly known for a long time that they were working on porting it to console. A LONG time.

This announcement should not have surprised anyone.
Posts: 1,759
View profile
We all paid for a PC game, and got punked into paid-beta-testing a console port. Our community was used and tossed to the side.

Diablo 3 was originally intended to have complexity, to have tons of buttons and builds and TRUE multiplayer games. But since they decided to beta test a console game with a PC community, the game only had 6 action buttons to keep it simple on a controller, only have 4 players (for 4 joysticks) and a ridiculously close zoom in to create the illusion that it'd be too crowded with the 8 players that Diablo 2 was just fine with.

We paid for a car and were given a tricycle.

Anyone saying "Ohh the community is SO elitist" or any other Blizzard-Apologists is really just saying "Waaah I want MVP!! Look how BROWN my nose is, Blizzard!!" Just ignore them.
Posts: 148
02/22/2013 03:15 AMPosted by tbagala
So...funny guys. No actual answer yet. Just useless meanderings.


Multi-platforming is bad for 1 reason.
PC players will ALWAYS dominate the console players.
ALWAYS.
The precision of the mouse/keyboard cannot be touch by that of any controller on the market.
Even Microsoft stated this as to why some of their games weer being refrained from multi-platform support.
Also there is the issue of frame rate, while my personal computer can handle a rock solid 60fps on pretty much all games, consoles cannot, to be able to compensate for that, the frame rate for online activity would be synced at about 30fps.
Personally, idc, let em play with us, we'll just crush em in whatever genre they bring our way.


soo true i remember playing the csgo beta with console players and spanking them over and over again then they stopped trying to make it cross plat
02/22/2013 02:50 AMPosted by Japhasca
we are at a point now where consoles have actually caught up with, and in some situations, surpassed, the average gaming PC

first of all, I doubt it
2nd of all, the ppl who come here and post 2,000 rants about the many and varied flaws of D3 aren't owners of "average" gaming PCs, I'd guess.

The argument is that the console versions has already had an effect on the design of the game some time during development. The decision to make versions for consoles meant that several aspects of the game had to be redesigned so that it can accommodate console gamers and as such, it resulted in the game being "dumbed down".

No one is arguing that cross-platform gaming is a bad thing. If D3 turned out to be a really good game, no one would care if they ported D3 over to consoles.

dude sez it well enough. he can speak for me in this case.

also, OP, this isn't speculation. these are well-known facts.

to clarify a bit further:
there are two subjects being discussed here. one is simple old-school "multi-platform" development, and that's the old way u described, where ports to console were "shadows of their PC selves". that is no longer the way things are done, though. now, to cut costs in various ways, it's all about a "unified code base" for multi-platform development, which means all versions are basically the same design and requirements, and based, for the most part -- i.e. except where absolutely impossible -- on the exact same code. support for console has to hit some certain (lower) "horsepower" targets in order to be viable; this is the modern way, and it screws PC players, which is why we hate it.

among other things, this all explains a lot about why D3 team is so reluctant to make (obvious, logical) UI changes. because the UI has to serve for ppl who are "all thumbs", i.e. using controller users. mouse+kbd vs. controller = lego vs. duplo*. :P (http://duplo.lego.com/en-us/ --- that's right, they doubled it! :P)

________________
IDENTIFY ALL!


Either way no matter which way you look at it, D3 doesn't appear to have been made for Diablo fans.


So, you could say someone that killed Deckard Cain with butterflies wasn't really looking out for the Diablo series?
It's not elitism. It's simply disappointment in a company who earned our trust then abused it.[/quote]

^Jealous ex right there....
Edited by Deadlight#1690 on 2/22/2013 11:57 AM PST
So this "realization" whether true or not, that D3 was designed and dumbed down for consoles by design changes what exactly about the D3 game that we have today? Nothing.

Or is it a "realization" that D3 is never going to be retrofitted to be D2.v2012? That's not going to happen and that's been pretty clear for a LONG time, console theory or not.

Whether the design was done to accommodate a console port or the to make a game that wasn't targeted to appeal solely to D2 sycophants, knowing this "new" information doesn't change a single thing about the D3 experience as it is today.
02/22/2013 02:50 AMPosted by Japhasca
What I want is a LEGITIMATE and WELL-THOUGH-OUT reason for why ANYONE thinks the PS announcement has ANY EFFECT WHATSOEVER on the PC D3.


This has already been addressed several times now. I'll repeat since you apparently don't know proper forum manners and have blasted us with a bunch of capitalized text (which is equivalent to yelling, very rude), this indicates to me that you don't know how to properly use the forums and thus may not know where to locate the already existent answers to your questions/challenge.

The level of gaming hardware has almost caught up to PC hardware on average, and in some cases exceeds lower-end PC's. Also, more and more gaming consoles, PC's, phones etc are using more and more similar software as operating systems, just look at Windows 8 if you wish to see a great example of a mobile phone app if I ever saw one, UI-wise at least. The point is, the only difference between these devices any more are the tools for user interface. So, the typical tools with a gaming console are controllers, with a phone it is the phone itself, and with a PC it is a keyboard and mouse. All three of these categories of devices allow for auxiliary attachments but usually these do not come standard and cost more money.

So now, when businesses combine, like a married couple or a pet and its master they generally become more and more like one another. Thus we can assume that Activision got classier and more creative whilst Blizzard got larger and greedier as a result. This means the newly combined business cares more about profit than either did ever before. But they still have a shred of game-making ability. For these two reasons, the current Blizzard is unlikely to waste resources having several independent teams for making different versions of the same game.

So now that we've gotten obvious facts and opinions based upon facts out of the way, what is the obvious conclusion that most people are jumping to (that many of us have known for a while now). The conclusion is that to maximize profits and make it easier both for development and manufacturing cross platforms, Blizzard has simplified Diablo 3 dramatically.

The upside is that this makes the game slightly more accessible. I say this because you don't have to have a great PC to run this game. I said slightly because, honestly, in today's economy, I feel that $60 ($100+ for CE) is a ton of money for the quality level of this game (yes even taking into account we don't (yet) pay a monthly fee), this price limits accessibility.

The downside is that even with the slight increase in overall accessibility, not as many people are playing the game as we would all (players and Blizzard) hope. This is because the game is not of the level of quality than we expected Diablo 3 to be. With its complexity stripped down for greater sales and accessibility along with cheaper development than it would otherwise have had, combine this with business decisions that seemed good but were long-term poor decisions (such as the AH), and combine this also with uncreative design, limited content, and a general feel of the game that does not match its much more successful predecessors, you get a lot of complaints from fans and critically-minded folk alike. We wonder what the game would have been if just for PC, if not dumbed down, if designed under better more creative management and design team with enough expertise in designing award-winning ARPG's while still having the resources of a larger company at their finger tips. We wonder this because this is what marketers and advertising for the game implied we would get, and we obviously did not get a polished, ready, quality product. This isn't like putting a quarter in a machine and hoping that you get the good prize, we invested $60 into this, heck they didn't release the hardware/software requirements until later on so I even bought a new PC (Diablo 3 wasn't my sole reason for doing this but it was part of my decision). Then it turns out I probably didn't need to buy the PC I did.

The graphics, the complexity level of the game, the lack of choices, the lack of content, so many things about this game in comparison to Diablo 2 or other more current similar games cries big company trying to make more money and damned be the quality. Making this game available on gaming consoles (which they've talked about doing for a while now (although originally they claimed they wouldn't do it)) is just one of many bad moves made by Blizzard in an attempt to make more money. And yes, due to sharing capital and resources in a larger business to improve efficiency (yes, this is what they call employees, people and their ideas, nowadays in large businesses), this meant that design for a gaming console was going to restrict design choices for PC. Unless a developer, not a blue, came on a proved to us that the development of Diablo 3 for PC and Diablo 3 for other platforms were independent, I would not believe it, because it would be an absurd thing to believe.

I wasn't surprised by the announcement and I hope some little kids have fun playing a game that it totally inappropriate for them since it is a mature game, but heck parents nowadays don't parent and even if they wanted to they're too busy working to earn money for large corporations like Acti-Blizzard.

Anyone who claims that this didn't negatively affect the development of Diablo 3 is absurd unless they argue that making it cross-platform demands that Blizzard put more money into development. But does this balance out all the negative affects? I doubt it. And did they really put any more money into development than they absolutely had to? They didn't know the game would sell this well. They knew it would sell well but not this well, so no, they did not put enough money into making this game. They didn't know that they could easily have afforded it. The irony is that now that they can afford it, you'd think that there would be dramatic improvements, but we were reminded of the fact that, no, they're too busy getting D3 out to gaming consoles or phones or whatever they'll try to put D3 onto now.. probably Apple tablets or HD online TVs next.. sigh..

PS: There may have been some typographical errors or such. I'm busy today and don't have time to edit this. As much as I wish I had a well-paying job doing this, no, I am not paid to write these walls of text. I am aware that while I am stating some obvious facts, these posts I make are largely my opinion or at least heavily influenced by my biases. I don't post these to hate on Blizzard or to make money, I make these posts because I genuinely care about the game and I also believe its fans deserve to know the truth. The truth is that Blizzard compromised on the quality of Diablo 3 for accessibility to the game and for more profit for Blizzard and its stockholders. I thought everyone already knew this and since it seems like some people didn't I wanted to make it very clear. People are welcome to disagree with me but it is my opinion that these people are just denying what they know is true because they're trying to avoid being cynical. But I'm not cynical, I'm just very disappointed.
The problem is that they took every thing ahead of fun into account when making this game.
The second problem is that they made this game by designing the game in a way that would make the most profit (in a short run) instead of the most entertaining (in a long run).
The third problem is that they always think of milking than fun.
I think in general people in this age are very concerned that there is a conspiricy threatening their experiences in life, with anything, not just diablo 3. We are in a paranoid delusional time full of internet educated people who feel they deserve what they desire, and if it cant be the way they want it, the only way they know how to deal with that is to whine and moan in hopes that they will get their way.

The problem is they HAVE been getting their way with D3 since launch, but once you give the begger a coin, what does he do? He asks for more.

They will always find something new to blame their dislike of D3 on. As if it were suppose to be the best game of all time that can somehow please every little whinebag in this forum.

Diablo has always been quite a simple game. Kill lots of demons. Get new loot. Very random loot. kill your freinds. Thats pretty much the basis of this game and it most defenately exists in its latest iteration of Diablo 3.
02/22/2013 04:09 AMPosted by Espionage724
Both did not have their PC versions dumbed down and were actually respectable finished products when they hit release. I'm not entirely sure and I could be wrong, but I imagine the console versions of these games was made at a far later date than the PC release.


Starcraft on N64 had abysmal graphics, being ported to a regular TV-based setup lowered what you could see on screen, and the controls were awful (using a gamepad & stick to play an RTS is rarely workable, especially in hotkey setup and unit selection.) While it did include brood war, some maps were cut. There was no StarEdit, multiplayer was limited to two players and split-screen by necessity, so the viewable area was even smaller and you could cheat by looking at the other guy's screen.

Diablo on PS1 wasn't hit as hard, but in a game where anything ranged is targeted independent of movement is simply poorly implemented without a mouse. Line attacks wouldn't be that bad (take the classic Robotron control setup in mind) but targeting SPECIFIC spaces sucks. Multiplayer was limited to 2, and it WASN'T splitscreen so you had to stay near eachother. No LAN or internet play.

I didn't say they were "dumbed down." I said they were "shadows of their PC selves" and I think I've made that abundantly clear.
Starcraft was available on N64.
Diablo was available on PS1.

Both were shadows of their PC selves.
That would be due to the fact the console port was an afterthought and the games were designed for PC. D3 was designed either as a console game to be released on PC first or with both platforms in mind. Both of which hinder what D3 should have been.

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.

There tons of console->PC ports that utilize the mouse+keyboard in such a way that makes it similar to D3. So saying D3 was "designed for PC controls" is just an attempt to justify crappy design.

But I'll agree with you on one thing... YOU don't see any choices designed for console. That doesn't mean they aren't there, just that you don't see them.

D3 is still optimized for keyboard + mouse ..


this kind of keyboards
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/594/nooboardsmall.jpg/
Posts: 1,409
You guys are high...

+1 OP =)
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]