Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Diablo 3 Coming To Consoles

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the when-it-releases-in-2016 dept.

PlayStation (Games) 344

RobinEggs writes "After long speculation and a few affirmative hints, Blizzard has confirmed that Diablo 3 will have a console version. Responding to a fan who asked him to 'confirm or deny' a console version of D3, Blizzard community manager Bashiok said, 'Yup. Josh Mosqueira is lead designer for the Diablo console project.' Here's hoping Blizzard remains one of the few companies to fully develop both the console and PC version of their titles, rather than simply porting the Xbox version to PC. I think we've all had enough of bizarre scrolling, menus that can't be used with a mouse, and 'Controls' menus that don't even bother replacing the 360 controller image with an actual keyboard layout."

cancel ×

344 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Release Date for PC (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38653888)

That would have been bigger news I think.

Re:Release Date for PC (5, Funny)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654132)

Once the subscriber base for WoW starts falling off, they'll manage to pull the employees away from the giant cocaine fountain in the lobby and the omnihedonic stimulus cocoon in the break room.

At that point, it should be the usual 3-5 years.

Re:Release Date for PC (4, Interesting)

HBI (604924) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654348)

Actually, I got an offer in my email for a free copy of D3 if I buy a yearly pass for WoW. I cancelled my account a couple years ago. I wonder how many others got the same thing?

Re:Release Date for PC (4, Insightful)

Dyinobal (1427207) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654394)

everyone got the same thing. It's a deal blizzard ran once they realized that D3 was going to really cut into their wow subscription numbers. In some ways blizzard are their own worst competition.

Re:Release Date for PC (0, Troll)

Zenin (266666) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654686)

Well, it's not helping them at all that each WoW expansion and patch is more dumbed down then the last. It's so bad at this point you can pretty much just drool on the keyboard and you'll still be just fine "raiding".

They've deliberately taken away any and all variables and variety, not just from the races and classes, but from the encounters as well. I look at other games and I'm sad when I see they only have 4 or 5 character choices...then I remember WoW only has 3...

Re:Release Date for PC (1)

chill (34294) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654784)

I don't play WoW, but when I saw the latest expansion pack in the store and realized it was Kung Fu Panda, I knew the end was near.

Re:Release Date for PC (1)

rujholla (823296) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654908)

It's actually worse -- it is a combination of Kung Fu Panda and Pokemon

Re:Release Date for PC (3, Insightful)

Supermike68 (2535978) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654972)

So after a complaint about removing 'variables and variety' you slam them for adding an entirely new feature to the game.

As for the Kung Fu Panda comment. The 'Pandaren' race was in place before Kung Fu Panda was released.

But who really needs their facts straight when bashing a game they'll never play.

Re:Release Date for PC (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38655104)

Well... yeah....

If you took your undead siege engines and cleared a path to the northwest corner of one of the 40 or so campaign maps, you'd find a little clearing with three Pandaren. You got a 30 second sound clip, then killed them for a medium grade item for Arthas.

Might as well say that the Easter Bunny was part of the lore; after all, the Panderian were an Easter Egg...

Re:Release Date for PC (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38655068)

Well, it's not helping them at all that each WoW expansion and patch is more dumbed down then the last. It's so bad at this point you can pretty much just drool on the keyboard and you'll still be just fine "raiding".

They've deliberately taken away any and all variables and variety, not just from the races and classes, but from the encounters as well. I look at other games and I'm sad when I see they only have 4 or 5 character choices...then I remember WoW only has 3...

There's 3 levels of difficulty. Blizzard doesn't force you to play it on the drooling zombie difficulty which was just recently offered. As of right now 635 out of 10 million players have beaten the hardest encounter in the latest content patch. Since you can't count classes (There's 10) I'll bet you haven't even beaten the content on medium difficulty.

Parent should be modded as a certified Troll.

Re:Release Date for PC (5, Funny)

Antony T Curtis (89990) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655016)

We have a cocaine fountain in the lobby? Why does no one tell me of these things?

Re:Release Date for PC (3, Insightful)

Kenja (541830) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654702)

I disagree. The announcement that the PC version will bite so they can release a console version is bigger news then when we can play the cash cow.

cool, but (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38653894)

when???

Diablo 3 (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38653906)

Confirmed for shit.

FACT: consoles retardify any gaming experiance.

Re:Diablo 3 (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38653958)

It was confirmed for shit when Blizzard went on record stating that weapon switching was an undesired exploit that gave non-retards an advantage over others.

Re:Diablo 3 (4, Insightful)

hedwards (940851) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654182)

Don't forget the in game auction house, the lack of a real singleplayer game and that like SC2 there will be no LAN play option. I remember them rationalizing taking away the offline play as not requiring people to start over if they began a character offline.

Personally, I'm glad that they didn't have anything better to do like making sure that the game is actually better than its predecessor so that they could tell players how to play. Personally, I'm glad I didn't waste my money on SC2, I'm guessing that I'll feel the same way about Diablo 3.

Blizzard, what happened to you? You used to make such good games, but ever since WoW you can't seem to create a game that's worth paying for. Last good game you made was WC3 and that was nearly a decade ago.

Re:Diablo 3 (0, Troll)

dskzero (960168) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654288)

The games are still good. Nothing you've mentioned is actually a gameplay flaw. Lack of LAN is annoying, but hardly difficult. Diablo was always a retarded game. This is just a mainstream retarded game.

Re:Diablo 3 (3, Insightful)

spire3661 (1038968) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654548)

Lack of LAN IS a gameplay flaw. LANs create an immersion environment that cant be replicated any other way.

Re:Diablo 3 (1)

dskzero (960168) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654578)

It might be missed, but you can always just get online in the same room.

Re:Diablo 3 (5, Insightful)

UnknownSoldier (67820) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655092)

> but you can always just get online in the same room.

Tell that to Ubisoft and RB6:LV2 (Rainbow Six: Las Vegas 2) You are ASSUMING the login servers NEVER go down.

Why the fuck do I need to go online when I already have friends+family in the same room ??

Re:Diablo 3 (0)

dskzero (960168) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655172)

Yup, I'm also assuming that Blizzard will eventually release server software or something similar once the game has run its lucrative course. This is Blizzard we're talking about, not Ubisoft. Please let's be serious here.

Re:Diablo 3 (0)

The End Of Days (1243248) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655174)

Your spittle-flecked comment missed one important point - you don't need to do any of this. This is entertainment, not food or oxygen.

Re:Diablo 3 (1)

Tyr07 (2300912) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654662)

>

Lack of LAN IS a gameplay flaw. LANs create an immersion environment that cant be replicated any other way.

You can all sit in the same room, on the same network, and play Starcraft 2.

You can just play with each other, you can play lan games.

The only real complaint I'm seeing here is "It's not easy to download copies for all our friends and play together without buying the game"

If you like it enough to have a lan party for it, you like it enough to buy it.
If your arguement was 'I should be able to have spawn copies in the past like the original starcraft did to play LAN with a few friends' I'd completely agree with you.

I think they should allow people to play games with spawn copies or something similiar so a few friends can get together to play.
Other than that, you can 100% recreate the experience, as long as you have internet access.

Re:Diablo 3 (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654814)

Yes, and you get basically no benefit from doing it. Part of the point of LAN parties is that you get to game with little to no latency and put people on a level playing field. Which you can still somewhat do with the current system, but you add extra lag so that Blizzard can be sure that you're not pirating the game.

As for buying it, what was so brilliant about spawning was that you could actually spend time playing competitively with friends before having to commit to the purchase. The spawned copies were really just demos and you would be left with that when your friends went home.

Re:Diablo 3 (1)

Tyr07 (2300912) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654974)

I guess it depends where you live.

I don't have latency issues playing diablo 2 or starcraft, or world of warcraft. Actually, any game.

So fair point if your internet connection generally has poor latency or the servers you can stuck on by location aren't very reliable.
This mattered much more though back in the days of dial up internet. Most people's broadband connection will have no issues in many parts of North America.

Re:Diablo 3 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38654832)

Is no one aware of the Starter Edition? It replaced the demo and allows some single player and multiplayer on a few maps. I agree that LAN play is not a problem. You have friends over and play in the same room, that is LAN play to me.

Re:Diablo 3 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38654768)

After watching some beta play, it looks like pure garbage anyways.

Interface for items is crap, less variety in bonuses than dungeon siege 1.

Don't forget the stupid and boring spells.

Re:Diablo 3 (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654830)

I'll probably try the demo at some point and I'll probably play the free to play option if Blizzard provides one, but I doubt it will stay installed for more than a few hours. At least SC2 didn't, and I took the unusual step of deleting the files. I don't normally do that with large install files as I often times reinstall later, but SC2 went straight in the trash upon uninstall.

Re:Diablo 3 (1)

ndrtkr (708778) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654886)

If you think that SC2 was a bad game or a disappointing one because it didn't have LAN, you should google GSL or MLG ;-)

Re:Diablo 3 (4, Insightful)

black3d (1648913) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655084)

the lack of a real singleplayer game

There is a single-player game in exactly the same format as Diablo 2. That is, the single player and multiplayer are the same game, but with multiplayer the difficulty is increased with each additional player. I guess it's a matter of perspective, the fact that there isn't a separate game for single-player and multiplayer, as in SC2. But with an RTS, the multiplayer component always focuses on player v player battles whereas the single player focuses on story missions - eg, the entirety of the Command and Conquer series, Dune 2000, the Red Alert series, Total Annihilation, Supreme Commander 1 & 2, Warcraft 1, 2 & 3, etc - in all of these games, there's no multiplayer "story", it's just battles.

Conversely, I can't think of a SP/MP RPG where the multiplayer isn't simply the single-player game with increased difficulty. Occasionally they add some multiplayer specific components, such as arenas, but what you're describing - "lack of a real single player game" is at best misleading. If anything, there's a lack of a separate multiplayer game, but as pointed out, this is the norm for the genre. Torchlight 2 multiplayer is going to be Torchlight 2 singleplayer + more difficulty. It's rare (I can't think of a single example, really) where an RPG developer has produced an entirely separate storyline for SP and MP.

Re:Diablo 3 (1)

UnknownSoldier (67820) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655146)

> Conversely, I can't think of a SP/MP RPG where the multiplayer isn't simply the single-player game with increased difficulty.

Uh, Diablo 2

a) Uber Trist for Hellfire Torch
http://extreme-gamerz.org/diablo2/viewdiablo2/hellfirecharmquest [extreme-gamerz.org]

b) Diablo Clone for Annihilus Charm
http://extreme-gamerz.org/diablo2/viewdiablo2/annihiluscloneguide [extreme-gamerz.org]

c) Ladder only Runewords
http://classic.battle.net/diablo2exp/items/runewords-110.shtml [battle.net]

Re:Diablo 3 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38654234)

Gotta agree. Saints Row 2 on PC was ass on wheels with a rocket launcher strapped on top, full of menus that you navigated by pressing shift and other absolute complete bullshit.

Re:Diablo 3 (1)

Remus Shepherd (32833) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655168)

But the company (THQ) learned from the blowback from SR2. They took extra care with Saints Row the Third, and it's a terrific PC game. All the menus, combat, and movement are optimized for the PC and function intuitively and smooth as glass.

Games built for consoles don't have to suck on PCs. THQ has proven this. Blizzard is known for the polish they apply to their games, so I trust they'll take extra care in making the PC version great. It's the management decisions for D3 that I fear. (No LAN, no offline play, etc.)

Re:Diablo 3 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38654420)

Then you, obviously, must be a console gaming experience.

Cover your ears (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38653922)

And here come the amazing whining manbabies, all butt-hurt that their precious video game is going to be for children, and dumbed down, and all the other stupid things that overweight self-entitled shut ins complain about all the damn time.

Re:Cover your ears (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38654096)

Now, now, they already did all that back when they learned the game would have actual COLORS in it. Besides "dirt brown" and "blood red".

Re:Cover your ears (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38654210)

So what do you call your sort of flame, then? Preemptive douchebaggery?

Re:Cover your ears (5, Insightful)

hedwards (940851) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654218)

I would except that Blizzard has pretty much admitted to fucking things up, i haven't been interested in Diablo 3 in quite a while because of all the "features" they've put in to prevent people from playing in unapproved ways. Any hope of me buying it evaporated the moment that I found out that there would be no singleplayer game and that there would be no LAN play either.

PC first (5, Insightful)

Freddybear (1805256) | more than 2 years ago | (#38653960)

Given that the Diablo 3 beta has been around for a while on PC, I would expect that the console version will be ported from the PC rather than the other way round.

Re:PC first (4, Informative)

Slime-dogg (120473) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655042)

This isn't the case. PC Insider has an article interview with the lead on the D3 project, and he discusses the belief Blizzard has about ensuring that platform games are created from the ground up. They may share textures, sounds, etc, but the games will be developed separately.

Re:PC first (1)

black3d (1648913) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655116)

Indeed, and the PC version has no awkward menu scrolling or any other signs of console "taint". The only thing in the beta that appears remniciscent of console games is considerably lower difficulty than par. However this is likely solely due to beta tuning.

Lets get it on Wii U (2)

DeanCubed (814869) | more than 2 years ago | (#38653970)

With the tablet touch screen controller, Diablo 3 would be amazing, plus it could have graphics somewhat on par with the PC version. They gave the N64 Starcraft so anything is possible. Come on Nintendo drop a wad of cash off at Blizzard HQ.

Re:Lets get it on Wii U (4, Informative)

Moheeheeko (1682914) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654064)

They gave the N64 An unplayable version of Starcraft .

FTFY

Re:Lets get it on Wii U (1)

WillAdams (45638) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655070)

Actually, I want to see an RPG using full Motion Plus controls --- it was great that Nintendo added upgradeable items / crafting to Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword, but I've beaten the game (twice! just finished Hero mode and only need to beat two more mini-games, then do boss rush for the Hyrule Shield) and would really like something a bit more involved than Red Steel 2 challenges, or mini-games in Skyward Sword.

Android/Tegra 3? (0)

symbolset (646467) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654016)

Want to see this on the mobile console of the future.

Duh..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38654024)

Any new IP or sequel or reboot of a old game having a console version is given.Nobody expects them to stay PC only.Ofcourse they're going to come where the money is

On the fence (1)

SJHillman (1966756) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654046)

I loved the first two Diablo games and spent endless hours playing them. However, there's a lot of questions that they never answer or keep changing their answer to. Will it be pay-to-play like their WoW model or will B.Net be free like previous games in the series? Will there be a single-player mode? Will you be able to play on private servers or will you be stuck with B.net?

If at least two of those three are not favorable then I probably won't be getting it.

Re:On the fence (1)

Dog-Cow (21281) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654208)

What answers have been changed?

You will be able to play by yourself, but you will need to be connected to b.net. There will be no local storage of characters.
It will be free-to-play.
You will be "stuck" on b.net.

Re:On the fence (2)

hedwards (940851) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654248)

It will almost certainly be free to play, but not as free to play as their previous games were. There will be no spawing copies for LAN play. I'm guessing that the money they need to maintain the servers will in large part come from the auction house and people buying new copies in the future.

Re:On the fence (1)

Rotag_FU (2039670) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654446)

Will you be able to play on private servers or will you be stuck with B.net?

The B.net aspect of your post is interesting to me. With the exception of Sony's recent acceptance of Steam on the PS3, the consoles have been loathe to support a community system other than their own. For example, the XBox 360 never gives any indication that you are playing on anything other than XBox Live (aka XBL). Although, when playing many EA games you do have to at least link an EA account to your XBL gamer tag, so there does seem to be some connection, but everything about the interaction appears to be simply XBL.

Since Blizzard was adamant about the tight incorporation of the new Battlenet when releasing the latest StarCraft, I'd be surprised that they would court consoles unless the console companies were willing to loosen their grip on the online experience. Perhaps that is an indication that Blizzard is actually targeting the PS3 rather than the XBox 360, even though the port work would likely be easier for PC->360 than PC->PS3.

Re:On the fence (1)

Dahamma (304068) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654828)

Microsoft is definitely MUCH stricter about XBox Live integration for all games/apps on the 360 than, say, Sony with the PS3. They made a "partial" exception for EA because without it they'd be missing online play for the majority of console sports games, etc. I'd imagine after looking at the insane profits WoW has been making in recent years Microsoft would be willing to work with Blizzard on some sort of B.net support as well...

Re:On the fence (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38654576)

More importantly, will its graphics be WoW-like ?

Re:On the fence (0)

Dahamma (304068) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654848)

There are about a billion screenshots, video clips, and even an beta that has been going on for a while now. Troll.

Will it require a constant connection to Blizzard? (2)

metalgamer84 (1916754) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654080)

Will the console version need a Internet connection to play single player though? Or can offline play finally be achieved? If it can be played offline, I would be tempted to buy it for a console.

Re:Will it require a constant connection to Blizza (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38654148)

Yes. Diablo III is using the new B.Net 2.0 which requires a constant login to play, even for single player. It's the same with Starcraft II, and I'm not going to fall for that trick twice...

Re:Will it require a constant connection to Blizza (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38654252)

SC2 has offline mode.

Re:Will it require a constant connection to Blizza (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38654680)

There's no way for you to know the console version won't be able to play offline, they've only stated that the PC version requires a constant connection. It would break precedent if a console game need an always on connection.

Battle.net (1)

xQuarkDS9x (646166) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654120)

You have to wonder if the console versions will require a constant connection to blizzard's battle.net system along with a REALID registration? God forbid though if they allow voice chat in the console version. Who wants to hear little kids screaming all the time?

Re:Battle.net (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654264)

I think they dropped the REALID registration, or at least when I signed up for b.net they didn't make me give it up. At least I don't think they did, they didn't require me to use my REALID in any publicly viewable place.

Re:Battle.net (2)

xMrFishx (1956084) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654458)

I believe they're adding a nickname system for replacement of the whole RealID thing for gamer friends that you don't know IRL. I think they called it BattleTag, read the preview a little while ago but here's what I remember:

Essentially: battle.net account - account all your games are tied to, login for WoW, SCII, D3 etc.
RealID - aimed at people you know, handles cross comms between games - you add them once and then you see/can chat with them in other games, lets you see friends of friends too.
BattleTag - hand out to guildies and random gamers who you don't hate, to communicate without them knowing your real name, email etc. Should have been added with RealID communication stuff, still in testing I think.

Some things might be a bit sketchy in explanation but that's what the bits are I think.

Re:Battle.net (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654674)

Not that it really affects me as I'll just crack the games I've bought from them if they force it retroactively on me, but I definitely won't be giving them more information than they currently have and I definitely won't be buying any more games from them if they're going to insist upon this sort of silliness.

I thought that they had given up on REALID, sounds unfortunate that I was wrong. This is just like that article from yesterday where Moglen took a reporter to task for using social networking sites. Everybody that buys into Blizzards rather extreme system is just fucking things up for the rest of us.

Called it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38654122)

When they replaced potions with "health bulbs," it was pretty evident that they were going to target the console market.

I'm not going to complain, but Blizzard definitely has changed their target market and I don't believe I'm in it any longer.

Re:Called it (1)

ifrag (984323) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654604)

There are still the usual health potions (in current Beta form) in addition to the "bulbs" or "globes". However, stocked potions do have an actual cooldown rather than instant in prior Diablo titles. In D1 & D2 it was pretty much possible to just spam potions to live. D2 made this a little harder with the way potions actually gradually filled the globe, but the purple potions were always instant.

A Diablo with no mouse clicking? (4, Funny)

aapold (753705) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654126)

HOw will they do that?

Re:A Diablo with no mouse clicking? (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38654374)

HOw will they do that?

with a mouse. duh!

Re:A Diablo with no mouse clicking? (2)

Scared Rabbit (1526125) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654516)

Prior art: http://www.gamefaqs.com/ps/197112-diablo/data [gamefaqs.com] I first played diablo on a ps1 before I ever played it on pc. The pc version was vastly superior, but the ps1 version was playable.

Re:A Diablo with no mouse clicking? (1)

Petron (1771156) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655228)

One thing I could of sworn I saw in a D3 demo is a "Loot all by keypress" that was meant to stop the hungry-hungry-hippo effect. With that they could allow character to move using the analog stick and have "B" be "Loot all".

Hack and Slash (1)

harpake (1787320) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654140)

The fan outrage continues: first rainbow colors, now console retardation. Hack and Slash already is dumbed down, porting it to consoles is really not a big deal.

PC gamers don't need to be worried (4, Insightful)

Pluvius (734915) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654180)

Blizzard is pretty PC-centric, so if anything it will be the console versions that will be shitty ports of the PC version, not the other way around.

That said, there's no reason why both versions can't be good. Torchlight was a Diablo clone made by an indie developer that was praised for the amount of work put into making the console port just as playable as the PC version. There's no reason why a big company like Blizzard couldn't do the same... other than greed and laziness, I guess.

Rob

Re:PC gamers don't need to be worried (5, Informative)

El_Muerte_TDS (592157) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654456)

But Torchlight was made by the people that made Diablo 1 and 2. Diablo 3 is created by a completely different team.

Ahh! Save me! (2, Insightful)

RobinEggs (1453925) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654630)

But Torchlight was made by the people that made Diablo 1 and 2. Diablo 3 is created by a completely different team.

I found both Torchlight and the D3 beta totally awful.

Maybe I'm just outgrowing hack-n-slash, along with every other mainstream category. God knows I hate 95% of shooters these days.

I swear to god, I hate indie game hipsters just as much as indie music hipsters and Linux prophets, but I haven't played a good AAA game since New Vegas, whereas indies are putting out dozens of kickass titles per year.

God help me I'm becoming an elitist. Get me some non-ironic domestic beer and a copy of MW3, stat!

Re:Ahh! Save me! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38655206)

But Torchlight was made by the people that made Diablo 1 and 2. Diablo 3 is created by a completely different team.

I found both Torchlight and the D3 beta totally awful.

Maybe I'm just outgrowing hack-n-slash, along with every other mainstream category. God knows I hate 95% of shooters these days.

I swear to god, I hate indie game hipsters just as much as indie music hipsters and Linux prophets, but I haven't played a good AAA game since New Vegas, whereas indies are putting out dozens of kickass titles per year.

God help me I'm becoming an elitist. Get me some non-ironic domestic beer and a copy of MW3, stat!

You're just growing up is all.

Re:PC gamers don't need to be worried (1)

Baloroth (2370816) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654588)

There's no reason why a big company like Blizzard couldn't do the same... other than greed and laziness, I guess.

Blizzard is owned by Activision, so greed and laziness should probably be considered the norm at this point.

Re:PC gamers don't need to be worried (1)

Kenja (541830) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654986)

Blizzard is long gone, the people who made it great no longer work there. It is now Blizz-ivision. Which isn't to say they cant produce good games, but you can no longer predict the game quality based on past efforts.

Actiblizzard (3, Interesting)

Dyinobal (1427207) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654198)

How long until Acitvision/Blizzard get enough money that their bank account collapses into a black hole, under it's own mass? Seriously, I'm sure Diablo 3, will be fun to play but the whole real money market place and lack of LAN/always on connection requirement really bothers me as a consumer. I think I'm going to pass on Diablo 3 myself, and just buy Torchlight 2 when it comes out.

Re:Actiblizzard (0)

amicusNYCL (1538833) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654496)

What's the negative aspect of the auction house? From what I see there's one auction house that uses in-game gold and another that uses real currency, and as far as I can tell neither of them are required for a player to use.

Re:Actiblizzard (2)

Baloroth (2370816) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654616)

Right, neither one are "required."

Unless you want the good weapons, of course. Or the gear good enough to get the good weapons.

Note: I don't actually know this, it's just an educated guess based on the fact that it's Blizzard/Activision and not just Blizzard.

Re:Actiblizzard (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38654982)

The point Blizzard made: The people who want to buy weapons with real money will. Usually through shady sites which use game hacks, hacked accounts, and credit card fraud.
So Blizzard(/Activision) cuts out the crooks and takes a small fee to cover the cost of resolving the inevitable disputes while saving the cost of recovering compromised accounts.

Re:Actiblizzard (5, Insightful)

demonbug (309515) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654810)

What's the negative aspect of the auction house? From what I see there's one auction house that uses in-game gold and another that uses real currency, and as far as I can tell neither of them are required for a player to use.

Well, for one, it gives them an incentive to design the game and item drops to maximize trading at the (real money) auction house rather than making it the most fun. Not that they will likely do that from the outset, but the promise of getting a portion of all trade at the auction house can't help but be a driver as they tweak item drop rates - once they have that ability, at some point a manager is going to point out that they could extract $x from the community by just doing this or that minor tweak. Activision won't be able to help themselves, even if Blizzard resisted initially.

There are other arguments, but to me that is the main one. It gives them an incentive to tweak the game to drive profits rather than just make the best game they can.

Hmm. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38654228)

There's only thing that really annoys me about this. There is no way they would make this game "online-only-even-for-single-player" on a console.
I understand the need for 24/7 connectivity on pc under their game mechanics, but it still doesn't make it any less frustrating.

Also curious to see how that auction house turns out on console. If it will even make an appearance.

Original Poster Here (3, Insightful)

RobinEggs (1453925) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654232)

As the OP I'd like to acknowledge, before any lifelong Blizzard fanboy bawls me out, that sometimes the game masters, forum moderators, and community managers at Blizzard can be full of shit. If it was just that statement I quoted in support of a console release, I might be at least skeptical myself.

This story, however, has much more to it than just that final acknowledgment; from the directness of the reply, including naming the project lead, to the stuff in the extra links soulskill was kind enough to add for me, there are many credible indicators of a console Diablo 3.

Not Enough Manna... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38654260)

in 7.1 surround sound..Epic!

Saves me $60! (1)

Zenin (266666) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654326)

Thanks Blizzard, this news saves me wasting $60 on yet another crippled game.

Re:Saves me $60! (1)

Mike Mentalist (544984) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654786)

Diablo is just a slightly fancier take on Gauntlet. Where does the notion that it is deep and complicated come from?

Who Cares? (-1, Offtopic)

Favonius Cornelius (1691688) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654484)

Consoles are for children and people who like to wave their wand around.

Re:Who Cares? (2)

bxmnky (995895) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654996)

So on the reverse it is fair to say that PCs are for grown-ups who couldn't find the stairs up out of their parents basement.

Not surprising at all to those with memories. (3, Informative)

Beelzebud (1361137) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654530)

Let's not forget that Diablo had a Playstation version. The sky is not falling.

I'm just waiting for the console version... (1)

forkfail (228161) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654566)

... of "Pokemon Pandas: Farmin' the Grind".

Command line (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38654574)

Who will want to play Diablo on the command line?

Re:Command line (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38654688)

You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike and filled with demons all rainbow colored.

Re:Command line (1)

BlackSnake112 (912158) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654740)

Actually there was a diablo mud for a while. The Cane there was not little kid safe. It got shut down. Seems someone didn't like it too much even though it had a few hundred people on it all the time. Remember this was a mud. Long before WOW came out.

Facepalm (1)

FranktehReaver (2441748) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654692)

This makes me extremely nervous for this game. I was already feeling a little meh about them taking out certain other aspects like potions and trading them in for health orbs. I would rather not loose some in game depth or functionality because PC can do it but consoles can't so lets take it out of the game altogether. This is one game that they are changing so much stuff on I won't preorder it but rather wait and see how it turns out and wait for it to go on sale after I read reviews and what not. Don't hate what they are doing yet but I feel unsure... and scared... someone hold me...

First Pandas (1)

Carnivore24 (467239) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654792)

Now this shit? WTF is Blizzard doing?!?!?!?!

Re:First Pandas (1)

black3d (1648913) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655182)

Because no Blizzard games ever got released on console?

Oh, except for:
RPM Racing
The Lost Vikings
Rock n' Roll Racing
Blackthorne
The Death and Return of Superman
Justice Leage Taskforce
Warcraft 2
Warcraft 2: Beyond the Dark Portal
Diablo
Lost Vikings 2
Starcraft
And the never-finished Starcraft Ghost..

d3 controls from beta (1)

forkfail (228161) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654880)

up - jump
down - duck
left - move left
right - move right
A - shoot current object (e.g., throw a turtle at a demon)
B - strike (punch a demon, or break a brick in front of you. if hit at same time jumping, breaks a brick above you)

unlock super secret key combos for special super moves!

Console's are for satan (2, Interesting)

Coolhand2120 (1001761) | more than 2 years ago | (#38654944)

Look no further than the sad evolution of TES. Back when TES4 came out the Bethesda said they had to dial back the graphics so it would run properly on an XBOX. So no distinct shadows, no huge preloaded areas (E.g.: open cities) even though the PC hardware could handle it without choking, they really didn't give a rat's ass about how much PC hardware could handle. Then enters TES5 and it's like the consolization of this game has grown by orders of magnitude. Now you can't change the default WASD keys for some aspects (e.g.: map), no more modding!

From: Bethesda To: Huge rich TES4 modding community: "Fuck you".

They've removed all the complex "stats" that made the game too difficult for console users who can barely figure out their power button and lame ass controller. THATS RIGHT they removed the damn stats from an RPG to make it easier for console users. That's like removing the bullets from a gun to make it safer! God damn idiots! That's he whole reason people play RPGs!

It's always a epic laugh to watch a "expert" with a console controller to try and control a player character in a FPS style game, like watching Helen Keller race the Indy 500. Or try and play a RTS game. To help elucidate the level of intellect we're dealing with here, last time I went on this rant, some little wet-behind-the-ears over eager console-tard tried to argue that his xbox controller was superior to keyboard/mouse for FPS. Some serious lowest common denominator shit.

Another good example of the destruction of an empire is Total Annihilation. Released back in the '90s for the first time, it was the first RTS with polygonal units (as opposed to sprites) where you could both create hundreds of units and select and control massive armies. One of the most significant perks of the game was the ability to create new construction prior to being able to afford it, like if you had half the bricks you needed to create your house so you got started before you had the rest of the bricks. If you run out before you're done, that's your problem. For the last 10 years that was fine, then Supreme Commander 2 came out (the 4th iteration of TA) and they removed this keystone element from the game to help simplify the game for console users.

(mini-rant: They made the game more like starcraft, which cannot hold a candle to the TA franchise IMHO, I mean you can't even select more than a dozen or so units at the same time, what the fuck good is that? Can you imagine the U.S. armed forces telling the JSTARS commander "sorry sir, you cannot command more than 12 soldiers at the same time, select fewer units".)

No longer can you have engineers assist other engineers to speed the construction process, no longer can you build before you have all the resources. All in the name of the console. The game's ability to be modded was removed, the game's ability to have user generated maps was removed. The game basically sucks, and anyone who loved TA either kept playing Supreme Commander 1 or switched to TA Spring (which you should check out if you like RTS games! Open source and pretty amazing.).

Perhaps the greatest demonstration in a single player game of how much superior PC gamers are to console gamers is the shooting range in GTA Vice City. If you're a mouse keyboard user you ace the contest every single time with flying colors. Then you begin to wonder, "why was that so damn easy" then you realize that they made the same test for console users and they wanted to allow them to pass the test so they had to lower the bar so low that it made PC user's breeze though the test. And don't even get me started on "Shadowrun" the only (as far as I know) FPS that allowed XBOX gamers to play with PC gamers. So sad that story, the poor console gamers never had a chance. I could be half asleep with two broken fingers, being actively stabbed by a knife, and partially on fire and I could still beat the crap out of a whole room full of console gamers. And I don't think that's an exaggeration.

So more than anything, the consoization of games (cross-platform porting) makes me extremely critical of console gamers by revealing their worst traits. Console's should stick to Street Fighter style games and platform Mario style games, they are good at that and I actually like playing games like that on my MAME emulator with my after market game pad controller ON MY PC.

Consoles.... pff

Re:Console's are for satan (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38655102)

Well you certainly are full of yourself. Keep fueling that nerd rage buddy, maybe one day it will matter.

What? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38655018)

Corporate sellouts!

Oh, wait...

you Faiwl It? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38655144)

it's going, decentralized People's faces at some intelligeSnt Is not prone to FreeBSD used to notorious OpenBSD the project to We'll bek able to
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>