• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Blizzard CEO comments on Diablo III for consoles

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

There's no such thing as a used copy of Starcraft 2, I have no reason to believe there'd be such a thing as a used copy of Diablo 3 either. I'm inclined to believe Blizzard would tie each retail copy of their product to a Blizzard gamer ID required to run the game, thus completely eliminating the used market.
 
If there is cross-platform play i might have to pick this up. i was never very good at Diablo so racking up ears from console players would boost my ego.
 
Yeah Diablo 3 for consoles seems like a great idea. More money for Blizzard and more people get to play the game. Out of all the current Blizzard properties to bring over this is the one that can make the jump while still preserving the gameplay. The only people who would be against this are PC fanboys.
 
Diablo 3 would only work on 2 consoles

PS3 - it supports Move or it supports Keyboard and Mouse, It is not an overly controlled platform (Steamworks from Valve).
NGP (PSP2) - it has a touchpad on the back that can be used as a track pad, it also has a touchscreen
 
KAL2006 said:
Diablo 3 would only work on 2 consoles

PS3 - it supports Move or it supports Keyboard and Mouse, It is not an overly controlled platform (Steamworks from Valve).
NGP (PSP2) - it has a touchpad on the back that can be used as a track pad, it also has a touchscreen
Click to expand...

Touchscreen is useless for a game that so desperately needs it's screen real estate for information UI elements. Covering up half the screen as you reach a finger towards the middle is hardly an ideal gaming solution.
 
hamchan said:
The only people who would be against this are PC fanboys.
Click to expand...
PC fanboys that love Diablo maybe. And could you blame them? i cannot think of a series, let alone one game, that made the transition from PC game to an all platforms game that hasnt been reduced in complexity to accommodate the limitations of consoles standard input device.
 
Diablo is the only blizzard game remotely suitable to consoles, but there are still such huge interface issues with such a heavily loot based game that it really would be a subpar experience.
 
iamblades said:
Diablo is the only blizzard game remotely suitable to consoles, but there are still such huge interface issues with such a heavily loot based game that it really would be a subpar experience.
Click to expand...


and if they "simplify" it, there is a high chance that the PC version would suffer as well, as has been the case in EVERY game that went to consoles. PC shooters even get gimped, losing things like left/right lean due to the lack of buttons for it on a gamepad
 
I don't think Diablo 3 is in danger of being simplified. I'd imagine it's far enough along. Future sequels? Maybe, depending on how successful the console versions ended up sales-wise compared to the PC version.
 
Felix Lighter said:
I don't think Diablo 3 is in danger of being simplified. I'd imagine it's far enough along. Future sequels? Maybe, depending on how successful the console versions ended up sales-wise compared to the PC version.
Click to expand...

It won't sell as well as the PC version. I can't see Diablo 3 blowing up among the dudebro crowd that makes CoD sell as well as it does.
 
water_wendi said:
PC fanboys that love Diablo maybe. And could you blame them? i cannot think of a series, let alone one game, that made the transition from PC game to an all platforms game that hasnt been reduced in complexity to accommodate the limitations of consoles standard input device.
Click to expand...

Dragon Age
 
ElectricBlue187 said:
Dragon Age
Click to expand...

Dragon Age was poorly designed in many ways, like the garbage inventory. Also, not including a storage chest for loot except as $10 DLC was clearly a mentality that only existed due to consoles.

And I suppose you haven't seen Dragon Age 2 either
 
There's really no point, as Blizzard games far outlive the current hardware cycle they're released in. Starcraft, Warcraft, and Diablo battlechests are still stocked in stores that don't even have PC gaming sections. People who can't run it on their PCs currently will still buy it 5 years down the road because the support and online community will be thriving.
 
Honestly, with how disappointing Blizzard games have been since vanilla WoW, I'm okay with them trying something new and going to consoles. Starcraft 2's Battle.net felt geared to consoles anyway, what with it being inferior in every way possible to WC3's and near nonexistent social features.
 
Kalnos said:
Honestly, with how disappointing Blizzard games have been since vanilla WoW, I'm okay with them trying something new and going to consoles. Starcraft 2's Battle.net felt geared to consoles anyway, what with it being inferior in every way possible to WC3's and near nonexistent social features.
Click to expand...
Never have I missed smilies more.
 
Zzoram said:
Dragon Age was poorly designed in many ways, like the garbage inventory. Also, not including a storage chest for loot except as $10 DLC was clearly a mentality that only existed before consoles.

And I suppose you haven't seen Dragon Age 2 either
Click to expand...

I think he was using DA 2 as an example of a game that was oversimplified for consoles. I'm personally cautiously optimistic that DA 2 will be better than people think when played on harder difficulties.

Also...
a bioware developer created a storage chest mod for the PC version for free right around the game's release
 
Zzoram said:
Touchscreen is useless for a game that so desperately needs it's screen real estate for information UI elements. Covering up half the screen as you reach a finger towards the middle is hardly an ideal gaming solution.
Click to expand...

The backtouch could be used as a trackpad. Diablo 3 would be perfect for NGP (PSP2)
 
water_wendi said:
PC fanboys that love Diablo maybe. And could you blame them? i cannot think of a series, let alone one game, that made the transition from PC game to an all platforms game that hasnt been reduced in complexity to accommodate the limitations of consoles standard input device.
Click to expand...

Portal and Half Life 2.

Don't get me wrong, if they have to touch the PC version to accommodate the consoles then I'm against. But I don't see them doing that and I think a ported console release would be a good thing.
 
Zzoram said:
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.
Click to expand...

If there is a way, there is a will.
 
Zzoram said:
Dragon Age was poorly designed in many ways, like the garbage inventory. Also, not including a storage chest for loot except as $10 DLC was clearly a mentality that only existed due to consoles.

And I suppose you haven't seen Dragon Age 2 either
Click to expand...
Well we should be worried about Diablo 4 then if Diablo 3 ends up selling more on consoles.
 
Ikuu said:
Never have I missed smilies more.
Click to expand...

Cool position you have there. I guess you're fine from going from: clans, integrated tournaments, overall ladder, good (and at release) chat, better custom game system, and RT vs RT games (no AT vs RT) to a mediocre Battle.net that can't even manage to keep the things that its predecessor did correctly.

Factor in the garbage single player that's eclipsed by nearly every other RTS on the market (DoWII, COH, etc) and all you have left is an online 1v1 game. The game took no chances anywhere, it tried nothing differently than SC1 as far as the single-player goes. Chris Metzen(?)'s writing is bad for even a video game story and manages to not only ruin a good opportunity for a new great single player, but he destroys many great things about the previous games story.

As far as gameplay SC2 is an A+ in polish, but man was it disappointing. Man, I really miss smilies.
 
Kalnos said:
Cool position you have there. I guess you're fine from going from: clans, integrated tournaments, overall ladder, good (and at release) chat, better custom game system, and RT vs RT games (no AT vs RT) to a mediocre Battle.net that can't even manage to keep the things that its predecessor did correctly.

Factor in the garbage single player that's eclipsed by nearly every other RTS on the market (DoWII, COH, etc) and all you have left is an online 1v1 game. The game took no chances anywhere, it tried nothing differently than SC1 as far as the single-player goes. Chris Metzen(?)'s writing is bad for even a video game story and manages to not only ruin a good opportunity for a new great single player, but he destroys many great things about the previous games story.

As far as gameplay SC2 is an A+ in polish, but man was it disappointing. Man, I really miss smilies.
Click to expand...

I agree on Battle.net and the story but I think the SC2 campaign was way better than the DoWII campaign, and SC2 gameplay >>> DoWII gameplay.

As much crap as they get for making SC2 similar to Broodwar, there are so few RTS games right now in that style that it actually stands out from the rest by doing what it does.
 
Zzoram said:
I agree on Battle.net but I think the SC2 campaign was way better than the DoWII campaign, and SC2 gameplay >>> DoWII gameplay.
Click to expand...

The gameplay? Debatable, both games are good in their own right, and I think that comes down to personal preference honestly. In terms of how the game feels and controls, I would probably give it to Blizzard.

The story/writing? SC2 isn't even in the same league, sorry, it's a literary abortion.
 
Kalnos said:
The gameplay? Debatable, both games are good in their own right, and I think that comes down to personal preference honestly. In terms of how the game feels and controls, I would probably give it to Blizzard.

The story/writing? SC2 isn't even in the same league, sorry, it's a literary abortion.
Click to expand...

Wait, the SC2 story is balls, but the DoW2 story is equally balls. I beat the game and couldn't even remember the name of a single character a week later.
 
Kalnos said:
The gameplay? Debatable, both games are good in their own right, and I think that comes down to personal preference honestly. In terms of how the game feels and controls, I would probably give it to Blizzard.

The story/writing? SC2 isn't even in the same league, sorry, it's a literary abortion.
Click to expand...
Variety? Which campaign wins in that?
 
hamchan said:
Variety? Which campaign wins in that?
Click to expand...

DoW2 campaign had no variety. There were like 2 types of levels, and you just kept getting them. Not a single mission was memorable in any way.

I don't think anyone can forget the supernova level of SC2.
 
Zzoram said:
DoW2 campaign had no variety. There were like 2 types of levels, and you just kept getting them. Not a single mission was memorable in any way.

I don't think anyone can forget the supernova level of SC2.
Click to expand...

You need to play Chaos Rising, it's infinitely better (than the original DoW 2), in both story and gameplay. You aren't bombarded with throwaway missions either.
 
Minsc said:
You need to play Chaos Rising, it's infinitely better (than the original DoW 2), in both story and gameplay. You aren't bombarded with throwaway missions either.
Click to expand...

I don't like the central gameplay so I can't be bothered to buy the expansion right now. It's not fast and precise in the way SC2 or Diablo 2 are, it's like some bastardized middle ground that's not good at what either type of game does. It's an ok game but not something I'd want to invest any more time in playing.
 
Majine said:
It's not happening for one reason:

Battle.net.
Click to expand...
Pretty much, and who would want it on consoles anyways? With MS and their strict policy about updates it would take forever to get them. Console crowd would be pissed if a game breaking bug couldn't be patched asap.
 
Zzoram said:
I don't think anyone can forget the supernova level of SC2.
Click to expand...

It's basically just a level with a countdown timer, nothing new there. I remember the level just because of how lame it was honestly (on hardest difficulty). Variety in DoW2 is pushed through the characters, not the levels.

Seriously though, most of the characters in SC2 are just as forgettable, you remember many of them because they're SC1 characters. I don't remember any character, save Tychus, that was introduced in SC2. I also love their writing: random rebel #12 reminding me that 'He's a commander I can get behind' when referring to Jim Raynor, rather than me just knowing that by his actions. I felt like I should be watching a Plinkett Starcraft review.

I'm honestly glad that you don't remember the DoW2 characters, as that's not really what that lore is about. It's more a story about races on a small scale, rather than about a rag-tag group of rebels that pull off the impossible and save the universe.
 
I don't think I need to say this would be an insta-buy. PC gaming just doesn't work for me right now, so I welcome great PC games getting in-house ports if done right. I think with PSN getting some for of steam integration that there is the opportunity for something like battle.net for work through the game as well. I don't really know the extent of the steam melding though.
 
Shared play with one account on PC and Console would be great. I'd buy both versions and chill out on the couch for some fun sometimes and when I want to get really into it could only be doable on the PC.
 
All I can say is, if Torchlight on consoles is possible, Diablo III should be too!

But focus on the PC version first!

/waits patiently for console version.
 
Uh, so what?

They put Diablo and Starcraft on consoles before. They sucked ass. If they put them on consoles again, they'll suck ass again.

Enjoy your terrible, low res, low frame rate, poorly controlled and barely supported console versions, chumps.
 
Draft said:
Uh, so what?

They put Diablo and Starcraft on consoles before. They sucked ass. If they put them on consoles again, they'll suck ass again.

Enjoy your terrible, low res, low frame rate, poorly controlled and barely supported console versions, chumps.
Click to expand...

Starcraft came out on consoles? What system(s) did the game come out on?
 
ZombieSupaStar said:
Doesnt Kotick answer to Blizzards old boss (activision as a whole too?)

yeah VU would want it to tho, so :P.
Click to expand...

Yes, but in the realm of "Activision Blizzard" I believe Kotick is over everyone (not concerning Vivendi).
 
nextgeneration said:
Starcraft came out on consoles? What system(s) did the game come out on?
Click to expand...
starcraft64pqzy.jpg


It even had an exclusive canon mission.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Rod Fergusson Departs Blizzard, Diablo Franchise
2 3
110
3K
Hawk The Slayer replied
Diablo 2 now on Steam
38
922
J3nga replied
Blizzard says it's open to even more Diablo 2 expansions and reworks unless people get really mad at it
2
66
851
I collect VHS tapes replied
Jeff Kaplan on what made him leave Blizzard
2
71
807
phant0m replied
Take-Two CEO Thinks Next-Generation Consoles PS6 and Xbox Next Won’t Be Delayed by the Memory/Storage Crisis
2
62
790
PeteBull replied
Top Bottom