Support NeoGAF

[Opiate]

I think it's doable too, huge RAM usage could be toned down pretty easily, I think. Lower quality textures, etc. Nothing strikes me as particularly troubling to port over from what I've seen of the game... Torchlight making it over kinda proves in some sense D3 could make it over, just need the overhead for the multiplayer, but TL2 will be on consoles, and that has multiplayer I think.

From the sounds of discussion here about next gen, it seems most people want the PS3/360 to be viable platforms for like the next 10 years, and looking at the rate which studios are dropping like flies, I imagine they want that as well.

They could always put out a next-gen patch, so existing PS3/360 owners could patch their game so the PS4/720 runs at higher settings or whatever.

I'm speaking economically here.

Whether publishers like it or not, people get bored of their toys and move on, eventually. Once games peak out graphically/technologically and very little innovation seems to be occuring -- and I'd argue we're rapidly reaching that point, if we already haven't -- active users begin to ebb, as they look for new ways to entertain themselves. Perhaps a new system (some may migrate to PC, or handhelds, or iOS), or a new hobby entirely for a while. In fact, this is precisely why new systems get launched in the first place: the old systems begin to sell less hardware and software, so a refresh is needed to get people interested again.

I feel quite confident of this. By 2013, third parties are going to have to choose between sticking in this generation -- and seeing revenues decline -- or moving to a new one -- and seeing costs go up.

 

[StuBurns]

They could always put out a next-gen patch, so existing PS3/360 owners could patch their game so the PS4/720 runs at higher settings or whatever. After all, this is Blizzard, and when it comes to support, Blizzard is pretty much best in class.

A few developers, id and Crytek notably, have talked a lot about making their tech cross-generational for such a situation. I think considering the cost (both fiscal and time) given to creating engine technology and having to teach new tools to developers is already way out of hand, I imagine Blizzard have to be hoping to use their current tech for a long time going forward.

Valve are having a big tools push right now, presumably for the same reason, to establish something even more iterative in design going forward.

 

[Mr. B Natural]

Starcraft didn't work well on N64 so it didn't compete with the PC for sales. Diablo 3 on consoles would compete with the PC version, and the PC version would be much higher margin for Blizzard.

This is utter nonsense.
And the game will sell for 10 dollars more on consoles making it identical in terms of sales margin. And for those 10 dollars, you got sony and microsoft spending millions on advertising for your game competing amongst themselves for your benefit. And a retail priced sale is a retail priced sale. Saturation of the market is saturation of the market as long as they self-publish, which of course they would...this is activision. If it was a question of self-publish on indy style pc or force nab a publisher for microsoft/sony's approval then ok, I see your point. But Diablo couldn't be farther from that comparison. They got the Eye of Saron (sp?) publisher on their side.

And they're not stupid. They know PC fellas are gonna stay PC plat when it comes to these legacy games. There's only a couple of brands in the entire world that have PC loyalty anymore and Blizzard is one of them if not THE brand for pc loyalty.

If they decide not to go multi-plat, it's not cause of the money-sink or the margins. And if they do go down the multi-plat road, it is strictly for the saturation (thus money.) Appears to me like it's a question of happiness/greed. Are they content selling x bajillion million sales or do they want x + y bajillion million sales? Are they content with the mad scientist grasp they have on the industry now or do they desire super over-the-top mad scientist power? Who knows how much the y is in that formula, but let's be honest, it's a lot and enough to justify the multi-plat shift.

 

[KJTB]

I'd be so happy if this happened.

My PC blows and won't be able to play diablo 3 on anything other than the lowest settings :/

 

[Boonoo]

I'd be so happy if this happened.

My PC blows and won't be able to play diablo 3 on anything other than the lowest settings :/

So no different than the console versions

 

[datruth29]

As long as it doesn't affect the core game design, I say go for it. Still get it for the PC. But yeah, Diablo 3 is more suited for consoles then the other 2. With WoW, a ton of consideration has to be taken for the interface, not only the patch and maintenance bits. That's not even getting into 3rd party modifications and such.

And as for Starcraft.....xDDDD Yeah, no way in hell that's ever coming to a console.

 

[aktham]

Why? If a console port does not effect the PC version at all, what is the logical reason for wanting it to be exclusive?

PC fanboy/elitism ?

 

[Pai Pai Master]

This is utter nonsense.
And the game will sell for 10 dollars more on consoles making it identical in terms of sales margin. And for those 10 dollars, you got sony and microsoft spending millions on advertising for your game competing amongst themselves for your benefit.

Starcraft 2 launched at $59.99.

 

[Baraka in the White House]

Because blizzard has 10 programmers and 9 of them work on WoW. If you throw in a console port you are talking about 3-4 years more of additional work if they want to launch them simultaneous.

Spoiler

I made that all up but how else do you explain the duke-nukem style development of D3?

It's probably not too far from the truth. Otherwise there's really no excusing D3's 10+ year development cycle or why after 12 years we only got one third of Starcraft II.

Fuckin' WoW....

 

[Bisnic]

As long as it doesn't affect the core game design, I say go for it. Still get it for the PC. But yeah, Diablo 3 is more suited for consoles then the other 2. With WoW, a ton of consideration has to be taken for the interface, not only the patch and maintenance bits. That's not even getting into 3rd party modifications and such.

And as for Starcraft.....xDDDD Yeah, no way in hell that's ever coming to a console.

I can't imagine playing WoW on consoles, there is not enough buttons to use even half your spells. Not to mention moving your character and camera around in the middle of an intense boss fight as quickly as the keyboard + mouse would be impossible.

I don't how FFXI worked on PS2, but it couldnt be as good as the PC version.

 

[StuBurns]

I can't imagine playing WoW on consoles, there is not enough buttons to use even half your spells. Not to mention moving your character and camera around in the middle of an intense boss fight as quickly as the keyboard + mouse would be impossible.

You could use a keyboard and mouse.

 

[Bisnic]

You could use a keyboard and mouse.

If you're going to use a keyboard and mouse, why not stick to the PC version then? That's where most of the Blizzard fans are anyway. Is it really just a question of "But my PC is from the 90s, it sucks!!"?

 

[StuBurns]

If you're going to use a keyboard and mouse, why not stick to the PC version then? That's where most of the Blizzard fans are anyway. Is it really just a question of "But my PC is from the 90s, it sucks!!"?

I'm not saying it's a good idea, I think WoW on consoles would be utterly pointless. I'm just saying it wouldn't be any harder to control because you could use the exact same controls.

 

[Pancakes]

So no different than the console versions

Shots fired! :O

 

[HK-47]

Shots fired! :O

Truth fired from a gun.

 

[CrunchyFrog]

Maybe I'm misremembering, but isn't Steamworks still going through PSN first?

Nope. Which is why its such a big deal. Valve can push free background updates and steam networking features all without Sony involvement.

 

[Corto]

To people saying that Kotick couldn't enforce a console version of Diablo III because Blizzard does its own thing, I just want to remind them that it's not Kotick that gave these comments but Mike Morhaime Blizzard's CEO. You can't be enforced to do something that you are already willing to do in the first place.

 

[Dyno]

They have like a year or more to work out all the issues. That's probably why the PC version won't be out this year.

 

[StealthGoblin]

Well, this is one game that Microsoft probably would open up Live for.

 

[Corto]

Well, this is one game that Microsoft probably would open up Live for.

Or Blizzard can cave and release the game on the Xbox 360 without Battle.net integration like Valve is doing with Portal 2 without Steamworks. Highly improvable it may seem, but it's still an option.

 

[farnham]

i dont care if a third party from activision (neversoft for all i care)

ports this


blizzard themselves should focus on the pc version and on heart of the swarm

 

[Malio]

Blizzard Entertainment CEO Mike Morhaime brought up Diablo for consoles at DICE late yesterday

"I think money you could make money an argument that a game like Diablo money might play very well on a money console," the money executive noted while discussing Blizzard's money preference for PCs due to money flexibility. "It's money something that we're actually doing an investigation money into to see if that could make money sense."

He concluded that there are a "number of money issues" that money Blizzard would have to money solve in order to bring its games over to money consoles, with some of his money concerns involving the ability to patch money effectively and inevitably add money expansions. Asked directly if he thought Diablo money would be the money Blizzard game that could most easily be money ported for money consoles, he nodded in the affirmative. money.

It'll happen. Trust money me.

 

[poisonelf]

I personally consider it a done deal. I did so as soon as they presented the glowing little orbs that you collect. This is a console mechanic, both controller-wise as well as presentation-wise. I remember discussions prior to the showing of the orbs, finding that the biggest problem to porting would be the tens of hot keys, for example those for potions. Well, what do you know, problem solved.
It may seem insignificant, but suddenly going to an extremely game-y (yes I said it) and dumbed down (for me) scheme of happy floating orbs, is not a natural decision.

Now couple this with the blasphemous merging with Activision and the fact that they have tasted console blood and acquired a taste for it, well I'd bet good money that Diablo 3 is coming out for consoles. Do you really think that amidst the endless sea of CoD dollars they are saying "nah, Diablo is a PC game, let's keep it that way" ?

I'm off to cry alone in a dark corner now.

 

[legend166]

Add expansions and patch effectively? Dont our console games already do that in the form of DLC?

IF by effectively, you mean 'Wait three months after completion for Microsoft to certify your patch, which might not even mean much because there have been completely dodgy patches before', then yes, consoles do patch effectively.

 

[krypt0nian]

Welcome back, Bizzard. Your comfy couch is right where you left it.

 

[CrunchyFrog]

This plus Portal 2 on PS3 and I won't need anything else, ever. Make it hapn capn Morhaime.

 

[charlequin]

I don't want to update my laptop just to play a game or two. I'd gladly take Starcraft or Diablo on the PS3 even if they weren't perfect ports.

That's my point, though. You'd take them on PS3... but would you skip the game altogether on PC? It's hard for me to see a scenario where multi-platform Diablo 3 sells significantly more than PC-only Diablo 3. The business case for multi-platform releases is the ability to bring in additional new sales that outdo the development and QA costs of a multiplatform release, the potential for design sacrifices due to targeting weaker platforms that lead to worse reviews/WOM, etc. and I'm not really convinced

(That's even putting aside the issue Zzoram brings up of used copies cutting the legs out from underneath the inevitable Battlechest.)

It'd make more sense as a "whatever we could squeeze into a console-sized box" port a year after the PC version is out than a day-and-date release, to me.

 

[J-Rzez]

Blizzard - "Well, controllers are inferior to kb/m, thus our games can't be done to our high quality of standards".
Person - "Um, blizz, you can use kb/m if you wanted to on the consoles".
Blizzard - "..."
Blizzard - "Well we like to patch stuff and add content down the road, thus a HDD is needed, and stuff, thus our games can't be done to our high quality of standards".
Person - "Um, a large HDD is standard on the PS3, and the vast majority of 360s have a large HDD as well".
Blizzard - "..."
Blizzard - "..."
Blizzard - "Well, we'd have to find a way to have total control over patching and content, future expansions and the such, thus our games can't be done to our high quality of standards".
Person - "Steam, on PS3, Valve bypasses Sony's standards here".
Blizzard - "..."
Kotick - "HDD, KB/M, Steam on PS3, $$$, get to work Morhaime, or else I'll find someone else that's will to work".

To be honest, I'm surprised MS nor Sony has been fighting to get Blizzard on their machine. For one of them to have them aboard would be a HUGE shot in the arm for them. I mean, there's absolutely a lack of good dungeon crawlers on both consoles. I'm not sure how someone hasn't tried to make a "good" one yet.

 

[Zzoram]

IF by effectively, you mean 'Wait three months after completion for Microsoft to certify your patch, which might not even mean much because there have been completely dodgy patches before', then yes, consoles do patch effectively.

Not to mention that Microsoft charges the developer/publisher money for every patch after they "use up" the 2 free patches they get. Blizzard games, as with Valve games and most good PC games, get a ton of patches for bug fixes, optimizations, features, and balance over time.

 

[ferr]

WTF, no one noticed all the job listings at blizzard for "Diablo 3 - Console" ?

http://us.blizzard.com/en-us/company/careers/posting.html?id=10000BB

 

[Zoe]

That's my point, though. You'd take them on PS3... but would you skip the game altogether on PC?

Well... yeah. I'm simply not an avid PC gamer. I didn't even play SC1 until this past year, and my last game before that was WC3 at launch. Before that was either KQ6 or PQ3.

I don't mind waiting for a game that's good, but if I get a chance to play it in a decent form on a platform I do own, I'll take it.

I'm also shocked that Torchlight hasn't been developed for the consoles yet. I mean, there's absolutely a lack of good dungeon crawlers on both consoles. I'm not sure how someone hasn't tried to make a "good" one yet.

Demon's Souls doesn't count? Honest question, I'm not too clear on what a proper dungeon crawler is.

 

[ToyMachine228]

I'd buy Diablo III on 360 in a second. if there's no console version I'll get the PC version. Not to start any wars, but I really personally prefer a controller.

 

[J-Rzez]

Demon's Souls doesn't count? Honest question, I'm not too clear on what a proper dungeon crawler is.

Well I suppose Demon Souls can count. It's not quite the same, but close enough in theory. And Demon Souls, a new unheard of IP did pretty good iirc. I'd imagine Diablo which is well established would be rather successful.

As far as the used game market goes, I would not be surprised to see IF this happens, that this game becomes the death of used games. I can see Blizzard making you pay for a key to access the whole game and/or all it's features. Others will follow full suit, and the used game market will be destroyed forever.

 

[Ricker]

Well, this is one game that Microsoft probably would open up Live for.

Exactly...they did it for FFXI so i`m sure they could figure something out for Diablo III...just imagine the megaton if this was announced and would be a platform exclusive as well? damn... (I mean after the PC version of course)

 

[Zzoram]

I'd buy Diablo III on 360 in a second. if there's no console version I'll get the PC version. Not to start any wars, but I really personally prefer a controller.

See everyone who buys a console version that would've bought a PC version is lost money, since console copies will make at least $10 less for Blizzard due to the platform fee, and likely have a lower rate of expansion pack uptake since $40 DLC is unheard of. The number of PC sales cannibalized by consoles could be very significant, into the millions.

 

[Zzoram]

WTF, no one noticed all the job listings at blizzard for "Diablo 3 - Console" ?

http://us.blizzard.com/en-us/company/careers/posting.html?id=10000BB

porting and multi-platform has always been a request for Blizzard developers, since they've always done PC+Mac on the same disc at launch, something almost no other PC developer does

maybe console means something else?

 

[Thermite]

As someone who has a less than stellar PC, and whose friends are primarily console gamers, I would welcome a Diablo III port to the 360/PS3. I'm still planning to get Diablo III no matter what, even if I have to run it at mid-low settings on my PC, but having the option to play it with people I know and not have to worry about performance would be nice.

To be honest, I'm surprised MS nor Sony has been fighting to get Blizzard on their machine. For one of them to have them aboard would be a HUGE shot in the arm for them. I'm also shocked that Torchlight hasn't been developed for the consoles yet. I mean, there's absolutely a lack of good dungeon crawlers on both consoles. I'm not sure how someone hasn't tried to make a "good" one yet.

Torchlight is coming to consoles: http://www.torchlightgame.com/gamenews/2011/01/06/torchlight-coming-to-xbla/.

 

[water_wendi]

WTF, no one noticed all the job listings at blizzard for "Diablo 3 - Console" ?

http://us.blizzard.com/en-us/company/careers/posting.html?id=10000BB

lol

 

[Ricker]

As someone who has a less than stellar PC, and whose friends are primarily console gamers, I would welcome a Diablo III port to the 360/PS3. I'm still planning to get Diablo III no matter what, even if I have to run it at mid-low settings on my PC, but having the option to play it with people I know and not have to worry about performance would be nice.



Torchlight is coming to consoles: http://www.torchlightgame.com/gamenews/2011/01/06/torchlight-coming-to-xbla/.

Torchlight is awesome but it doesn`t have the Diablo effect

 

[Zzoram]

Torchlight is awesome but it doesn`t have the Diablo effect

Torchlight just isn't as good in a lot of minor and difficult to summarize briefly ways that add up to a huge deficiency in the experience. That's been true of every Diablo-clone since Diablo II, none of them have ever quite hit the sweet spot.

 

[KJTB]

So no different than the console versions

Well played

 

[J-Rzez]

Torchlight is coming to consoles: http://www.torchlightgame.com/gamenews/2011/01/06/torchlight-coming-to-xbla/.

Yes, I just remembered that. What needs to happen here though is a day-and-date release of console version(s) with the PC version to see the real impact adding this to consoles can make.

 

[Zzoram]

Well played

Seriously though, Sacred 2 on consoles was like low-medium settings and still ran at ~20fps with further dips. It was a horrible lag fest and it had nowhere near the monster and spell effect density that even Diablo 2 had. I know Diablo 2 was 2D sprites, but Diablo 3 having similar monster and spell effect density in 3D would crush consoles badly.

 

[Thermite]

Torchlight is awesome but it doesn`t have the Diablo effect

True, but I still think it is an awesome game, and in a lot ways very similar to Diablo (press mouse to attack/move, loot, levels, skill tree, etc.), albeit very simplified. What hurt the experience for the first Torchlight the most, IMO, is that it didn't have online co-op. I'm really interested in seeing how Torchlight 2 is online with 3-8 people playing at once.

Torchlight just isn't as good in a lot of minor and difficult to summarize briefly ways that add up to a huge deficiency in the experience. That's been true of every Diablo-clone since Diablo II, none of them have ever quite hit the sweet spot.

Yeah, there's just a certain level of polish that Blizzard games have that a lot of games - loot games, in particular - seem to be missing.

Yes, I just remembered that. What needs to happen here though is a day-and-date release of console version(s) with the PC version to see the real impact adding this to consoles can make.

Agreed.

 

[Won]

WTF, no one noticed all the job listings at blizzard for "Diablo 3 - Console" ?

http://us.blizzard.com/en-us/company/careers/posting.html?id=10000BB

The job listings are several months old. They started all the speculations in the first place.

 

[Commanche Raisin Toast]

That's my point, though. You'd take them on PS3... but would you skip the game altogether on PC? It's hard for me to see a scenario where multi-platform Diablo 3 sells significantly more than PC-only Diablo 3. The business case for multi-platform releases is the ability to bring in additional new sales that outdo the development and QA costs of a multiplatform release, the potential for design sacrifices due to targeting weaker platforms that lead to worse reviews/WOM, etc. and I'm not really convinced

(That's even putting aside the issue Zzoram brings up of used copies cutting the legs out from underneath the inevitable Battlechest.)

It'd make more sense as a "whatever we could squeeze into a console-sized box" port a year after the PC version is out than a day-and-date release, to me.

not to mention the spin-off route would most likely be a no-go considering how well ghost worked out...

i'm craving more traditional hack-n-slash on my PS3, and with Gothic 4 canceled (as bad as it was, at least it was something) it would be insta-buy if D3 could be ported somehow. if it was a later on thing like you say, would they put the time and effort in to make sure the controls on a console were top notch? would they pass the work on to a different developer?

i think the fact that they are openly commenting on looking into consoles speaks volumes. blizzard isn't a dumb company (for the most part anyway), so certainly they are aware of all of these questions and road blocks in their path, but are still looking into the idea.

 

[bigboss370]

the people saying on consoles D3 would look like the lowest pc settings are kidding right?

 

[flyinpiranha]

See everyone who buys a console version that would've bought a PC version is lost money, since console copies will make at least $10 less for Blizzard due to the platform fee, and likely have a lower rate of expansion pack uptake since $40 DLC is unheard of. The number of PC sales cannibalized by consoles could be very significant, into the millions.

So PC gaming is dying?

I would still buy it on the PC, and I know about 4 people that would buy it for the console to play together (I would too with that crowd - double dip) that wouldn't have for the PC because they do ZERO PC gaming .. so you could easily add those sales up and it could be very significant, into the millions.

I personally don't see the loss here. If the core game isn't changed for the consoles (which is my hope) you are opening up to tens of millions of new customers. Will the expansions be cannibalized because $40 expansions are unheard of? Who knows? Do any expansions sell 1:1? I'm guessing no.

I really don't think that any significant amount of people anticipating this game on the PC would all of a sudden switch to the console and not buy expansions ...

I also am sure there is some way they could do the $15 surcharge for used games if you want to play it online like EA does.

I think this game would be great on the consoles personally, it wouldn't be the PC version which I'd enjoy more, but I'd be able to fuck around with a couple friends IRL on Live because I know 0 people who still play PC games IRL.

 

[starsky]

I want this game in whatever platform.

<3 Diablo

 

[Zzoram]

Diablo 3 on consoles would be a substandard gameplay experience. Having played Sacred 2, which did adapt controls to console quite well, probably like what Torchlight is doing, it's just not the same. You don't have the precision and speed when using spells that you do on PC and the gameplay is slower paced. You also can't flip between spells as effectively without a ton of hotkeys.

However, if people are willing to buy it, I'm sure Blizzard would be willing to sell it.