PetriP-TNT
Member
Isn't Diablo 3 THE WORST GAME EVER? I read it on the interweb so it must be true.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Diablo III fans angry at PS4 announcement
- Thread starter MRORANGE
- Start date
Not the worst game ever.
But Its certainly not worthy of its heritage as a Diablo game and it doesn't have a 5-7 year shelf life, like all of its predecessors.
Well this is the internets, where have you been the past 12 years?
Well this is the internets, where have you been the past 12 years?
Well you know, playing video games, getting unreasonably angry at game developers, losing my grip on reality.
Same old, same old.
Parallax Scroll
Banned
water_wendi
Water is not wet!
First off, lets clear something up. You are talking about not just PC gamers but Blizzard fans. Secondly, if by referring to conspiracy theorists you mean the idea of Diablo 3 being made with consoles in mind.. i dont think a notion like that is crazy at all. In fact it seems entirely plausible.
Yeah, but honestly, there's been such a ginormous wave of backlash and bitching, I was slightly surprised the game still had actual, vocal, passionate fans. I guess a couple of those out of what? 10ish millions, I guess that's not so unnatural. I just got to get used to the idea.
There are Diablo 3 fans.
It's not as good as Diablo 1, but it's so much better than Diablo 2 in terms of gameplay.
Schweinehund
Member
Most of these arguments do sound plausible.
However I think the blizzard of today is a different company then it was 10 years ago. Even if there were not a console port planned I think they would have stayed with the same design decisions.
However I think the blizzard of today is a different company then it was 10 years ago. Even if there were not a console port planned I think they would have stayed with the same design decisions.
PairOfFilthySocks
Member
I never cease to be at least a little irritated when I see people assume console players are inherently less intelligent/capable of understanding complex gameplay systems than their PC counterparts. Such a daft thought process.
ebullientprism
Member
You know I was gonna dismiss that all as nonsense but some of the complaints do seem legit.
Wonder how much more people are gonna be pissed off when D3 on the consoles doesnt use always online DRM.
Wonder how much more people are gonna be pissed off when D3 on the consoles doesnt use always online DRM.
Alligatorjandro
Banned
I guess Blizzard wants to make more money.
KojiKnight
Member
While there are certainly some who go to far, there is no doubt that you can make far more complex games with the keyboard and mouse combo than via a 10 button controller alone.
That's not to say all PC games or even PC exclusives are more complex than all console games, but there are certainly those that are.
There is nothing to indicate it doesn't. Consider Bungie's Destiny, which requires online connection, regardless of platform (PS3, PS4, 360 (720?)). Sony has stated that DRM systems are up to publishers.
Being on console doesn't mean it can't or won't happen.
It's not DRM.
Do you complain that an MMO has "always online DRM" because you can't offline it?
decoyplatypus
Member
For almost every single one of those points, it seems like SmashCrunch overlooks reasonable explanations that do not involve a secret scheme to dumb Diablo down for consoles.
1. The designers could have been telling the truth when they said the party limit was four because they felt that in Diablo 2 larger parties were rare anyway, the teamwork element was tighter with four people, and for Diablo 3, at least, the right level of chaos with allies, enemies, and spell effects occurred with four people.
The "four controllers" rationale only makes sense if you believe Blizzard was thinking local multiplayer. But why, in this day an age, would Blizzard build an online, multiplayer game around the comparatively small group of console players who would play on the same couch?
2. Again, keeping everyone on the same screen is only an issue if everyone is playing on the same tv.
3. No skill points or complicated number crunching was something the designers talked about openly many times before the game's release. They had genuine, game design reasons for their decision. There is no reason to believe that they were being disingenuous and really thinking about console players (and their alleged hatred of numbers) unless you've already signed on to the rest of the argument.
4. This one is tougher.
5. Why wouldn't runes or complicated item mechanics be fun for console players?
6. No idea about this.
7. Achievements are popular among console gamers, yeah. So you could read their inclusion as an attempt to appeal to console gamers (even though the game launched as a PC-exclusive, and it would have been fairly easy to introduce achievements later for the PS4 version), or you could draw the inference that because achievements are popular with a broad segment of gamers, they might appeal to some PC players too. There is a fair amount of overlap (both in personnel and in interests) between PC and console players, after all.
8. Can the author really think of no other reason a designer might be interested in passive skills than because CoD has perks? Tons of games on PC and consoles have passive skills. Why assume the designers were even thinking of CoD? And even if they were, that just brings us back to point 7: the fact that a feature is popular in a certain console game does not mean that its inclusion in a second game is meant to appeal specifically to players of that console game. Diablo 2's online co-op was extremely popular on PC. Phantasy Star Online featured online co-op. Does that mean that Phantasy Star Online was developed with an eventual PC version in mind?
I'm not sure how anyone can think that a console version is "how ActiBlizz intends to make the real money" with Diablo III. The game was a gigantic hit on PC. They've already made real money.
1. The designers could have been telling the truth when they said the party limit was four because they felt that in Diablo 2 larger parties were rare anyway, the teamwork element was tighter with four people, and for Diablo 3, at least, the right level of chaos with allies, enemies, and spell effects occurred with four people.
The "four controllers" rationale only makes sense if you believe Blizzard was thinking local multiplayer. But why, in this day an age, would Blizzard build an online, multiplayer game around the comparatively small group of console players who would play on the same couch?
2. Again, keeping everyone on the same screen is only an issue if everyone is playing on the same tv.
3. No skill points or complicated number crunching was something the designers talked about openly many times before the game's release. They had genuine, game design reasons for their decision. There is no reason to believe that they were being disingenuous and really thinking about console players (and their alleged hatred of numbers) unless you've already signed on to the rest of the argument.
4. This one is tougher.
5. Why wouldn't runes or complicated item mechanics be fun for console players?
6. No idea about this.
7. Achievements are popular among console gamers, yeah. So you could read their inclusion as an attempt to appeal to console gamers (even though the game launched as a PC-exclusive, and it would have been fairly easy to introduce achievements later for the PS4 version), or you could draw the inference that because achievements are popular with a broad segment of gamers, they might appeal to some PC players too. There is a fair amount of overlap (both in personnel and in interests) between PC and console players, after all.
8. Can the author really think of no other reason a designer might be interested in passive skills than because CoD has perks? Tons of games on PC and consoles have passive skills. Why assume the designers were even thinking of CoD? And even if they were, that just brings us back to point 7: the fact that a feature is popular in a certain console game does not mean that its inclusion in a second game is meant to appeal specifically to players of that console game. Diablo 2's online co-op was extremely popular on PC. Phantasy Star Online featured online co-op. Does that mean that Phantasy Star Online was developed with an eventual PC version in mind?
I'm not sure how anyone can think that a console version is "how ActiBlizz intends to make the real money" with Diablo III. The game was a gigantic hit on PC. They've already made real money.
Crimson_Gold
Member
I remember playing Diablo on the PlayStation. Definitely going to pick this up for the PS4. To me, this was the second biggest surprise at the unveiling other than the RAM
pelicansurf
Needs a Holiday on Gallifrey
PS3 supports 7 controllers?
Messofanego
Banned
Most of the people that complained about Diablos mechanics and lauded Path of Exile as the savior of PC gaming didnt even play Path of Exile once the open beta hit and now i see some of them back whining about this port.
It seems some people are only really happy when they can be unhappy, i for one shall look forward to having more people to talk about D3 with.
It seems some people are only really happy when they can be unhappy, i for one shall look forward to having more people to talk about D3 with.
electroshockwave
Member
You're kidding, right?
Can you play an MMO from start to finish without ever even seeing another person? Y/N
And D3 on consoles will have an offline mode, thus, it's PC DRM. It worked protecting against piracy and duping (afaik, but bots still run free), but let's not pretend is anything but.
Like who? Here on GAF? Name some names please...
Well, yes.
KojiKnight
Member
People saying that Blizz would only simplify the game to appeal to console users, might I suggest a counter example: WoW.
Blizz has gone out of their way to simplify ALL of their games as of late. WoW has gone from a complex 40-50point skill point system to a 6 point skill selection. SC2? Way simpler to learn and control than SC1 and even WC3. Diablo 3 was just a continuation of this trend, not a sudden change.
Same with achievements... SC2 and WoW both had achievements before Diablo 3... it's something Blizz has standarized for it's own games.
Blizz has gone out of their way to simplify ALL of their games as of late. WoW has gone from a complex 40-50point skill point system to a 6 point skill selection. SC2? Way simpler to learn and control than SC1 and even WC3. Diablo 3 was just a continuation of this trend, not a sudden change.
Same with achievements... SC2 and WoW both had achievements before Diablo 3... it's something Blizz has standarized for it's own games.
It's nice to see that people still have the ability to overlook common sense in order to try to convince themselves of something.
I particularly dislike the one about the game having "no complicated number crunching because it's designed for console players". I don't know what this odd stereotype is or where it came from, but not all console-only players of video games are mouth-breathing neanderthals who cannot do the oftentimes simple math to figure out how much their DPS is or how much their armor mitigates damage because for some reason the developer hasn't just added an extra box to the UI to make the processor do it for you.
I don't see how any can feel that playing on PC somehow makes you more intelligent because you can take a short while to slot together Lego-like PC parts.
If we're going to throw broad generalizations around, why don't I say something like "PC games are full of number crunching because all PC gamers are massive nerds playing on a platform with controls primarily designed for office work". Sounds stupid, right?
Diablo III was a bad game, and it may have been worse to some fans of the second due to being designed for a wider audience, but to blame the people who were clearly an afterthought at best in the dev process? To blame the people who probably weren't even considered until after the development of the PC version was almost done?
Beyond ridiculous. Blizzard changed over the course of World of Warcraft becoming a worldwide phenomenon and have merged with a publisher known for only publishing low-risk, high profit titles. What on earth did people expect? They're about one step above Facebook and iOS game developers on the casual scale now and to continue championing them as one of the two remaining kings of PC gaming along with Valve (although CDPR have since come along and upset this monarchy a bit) is equivalent to hugging a past-its-prime race horse screaming and crying that "it will get better"
I particularly dislike the one about the game having "no complicated number crunching because it's designed for console players". I don't know what this odd stereotype is or where it came from, but not all console-only players of video games are mouth-breathing neanderthals who cannot do the oftentimes simple math to figure out how much their DPS is or how much their armor mitigates damage because for some reason the developer hasn't just added an extra box to the UI to make the processor do it for you.
I don't see how any can feel that playing on PC somehow makes you more intelligent because you can take a short while to slot together Lego-like PC parts.
If we're going to throw broad generalizations around, why don't I say something like "PC games are full of number crunching because all PC gamers are massive nerds playing on a platform with controls primarily designed for office work". Sounds stupid, right?
Diablo III was a bad game, and it may have been worse to some fans of the second due to being designed for a wider audience, but to blame the people who were clearly an afterthought at best in the dev process? To blame the people who probably weren't even considered until after the development of the PC version was almost done?
Beyond ridiculous. Blizzard changed over the course of World of Warcraft becoming a worldwide phenomenon and have merged with a publisher known for only publishing low-risk, high profit titles. What on earth did people expect? They're about one step above Facebook and iOS game developers on the casual scale now and to continue championing them as one of the two remaining kings of PC gaming along with Valve (although CDPR have since come along and upset this monarchy a bit) is equivalent to hugging a past-its-prime race horse screaming and crying that "it will get better"
ElRenoRaven
Member
Beats me. I've never understood it. Same thing has happened to Bungie twice now too. Apple & PC fans were livid and like we're never going to support you again when they went Xbox only. Then now Xbox fanboys are beyond livid that not only are they not exclusive to Xbox now but giving Sony some exclusive playable content with their new game hence they're never going to support Bungie again.
Basically it's just that some people are stupid and get so caught up in a fucking piece of hardware that they develop some sort of attachment to it. It's beyond crazy and stupid but they do. I myself will always be like well cool for them. The only time I remotely get pissed is if a game is announced for all platforms and then goes exclusive to a platform. Other then that it's all good.
While there probably are some PC fanatics who genuinely believe that console players are dumber than PC gamers, the main problem seems to be that for some reasons publishers (developers?) have traditionally simplified their games when bringing them to consoles, even when it makes little sense to do so. For example, the commo rose is exclusive to the PC version of BF3 despite the fact that its implementation as a radial menu almost makes it seem as if it was designed specifically for gamepads in the first place.
JJDinomite
Banned
It probably was designed with consoles in mind... but is that a bad thing? I must be the only one here who actually liked the game.
Impeccable
Member
+1 copy on PS4 from me.
I love playing Diablo 3 every once in awhile on PC when I get time and it'll be even better on a console where I can multiplayer with friends or my wife without having to buy another account or computer.
I love playing Diablo 3 every once in awhile on PC when I get time and it'll be even better on a console where I can multiplayer with friends or my wife without having to buy another account or computer.
Well, he said most of the people, which implies more than 1, and at least 3. Were you of the opinion that PoE would save PC gaming?
Cause I don't think it needs saving at all. But, it can't be you because he is talking about people who he knows never even played PoE after OB hit and I know you have.Or maybe he is just making a blanket hyperbolic statement about nonexistent people just to further a point and try to paint a certain crowd who likes a particular game negatively. Yep, I guess I'm going with this one.
I thought it was the most disappointing, since people hyped it to heaven and hell.
I found it fun, played it for a good 100 hours, made my money back in the auction house.
Hardly. Rumors about Diablo 3 going to consoles have been swirling for a couple years now.
Not like the person is wrong. The game was completely dumbed down for the console market. It's pretty apparent.
The art style, and feel of the combat are still absolutely stunning. However virtually every other decision Blizzard has made is completely awful. It would have been hard for me to imagine Blizzard making more of a disappointment than Diablo 3 is.
I am hoping the expansion fixes it. Diablo 2 was a piece of dog shit until the first expansion as well. Sadly the expansion won't even be announced until November. Meaning a mid or late 2014 launch. I don't think Diablo 3 will last long enough.
The art style, and feel of the combat are still absolutely stunning. However virtually every other decision Blizzard has made is completely awful. It would have been hard for me to imagine Blizzard making more of a disappointment than Diablo 3 is.
I am hoping the expansion fixes it. Diablo 2 was a piece of dog shit until the first expansion as well. Sadly the expansion won't even be announced until November. Meaning a mid or late 2014 launch. I don't think Diablo 3 will last long enough.
Wickerbasket
Member
I was expecting a new IP when they came out onto the stage.
I was sorely disappointed that they announced a port of an old game, it's not exactly PS4 reveal news imo.
Why would you expect this. Blizzard only announces new stuff at Blizzcon. Which is a hell of a lot larger than any press conference.
Everyone knew the game was coming out for Playstation. They said they were working on console development two years ago, and have had job posting for a long time.
That said, nobody knew how watered down the game was going to be for that market.
dream431ca
Banned
Did people already forget that Diablo 1 was on the Original Playstation? Nothing new to see here.