Ben-DutkaObviously, the game is designed with the PC in mind and is best played on PC.
That much has been clear from the start. But considering the sheer amount of backlash and complaints surrounding Diablo III , and all these promises from Blizzard that they'll work on the issues, I'm wondering if the console versions of the game will be…well, you know, playable.
Maybe they will have ironed out all the significant problems by then, that's all I'm saying. The fact that we waited a whole bunch of years to get a game that essentially doesn't even work correctly is exclusive to the realm of PC, which is why that platform blows vile massive chunks, as far as I'm concerned. That being said, I do believe Blizzard's claims to fix things (even if many don't) and supposedly, Diablo III is still coming to the PS3 and 360 at some point. So wouldn't it be safe to assume that with the extra time, the console versions will be a little less…um…infuriating?
Those well-documented errors really don't seem to be disappearing at a rapid clip, as many ticked-off players in forums around the Internet will tell you. And I thought we left game-breaking bugs back in the 90s. But with PC gaming being perpetually stuck in the 90s, I suppose that's normal and in truth, I don't think anyone is surprised at the myriad of technical issues. Then there's this whole "have to be connected" thing, which I won't even dignify with a reaction. Nevertheless, it would be cool if a cleaned up version of Diablo III eventually arrived for consoles.
Let me be clear, however- I do realize that at that time, the game should be fixed up nicely for the PC as well. And of course, it really would be better played on PC, as that's the platform for which it was initially designed. I'm just saying that by the time it's ready to come to different platforms, the game should be much better than it is now in terms of stability.
Related Game(s): Diablo III
"PC gaming being perpetually stuck in the 90s"
Really?
Last edited by Hynad on 7/21/2012 10:11:21 AM
Really.
And what exactly do you mean by that?
Would it even matter what I said?
Of course it would Ben :). Beyond delivery mechanisms (Steam, Gamersgate, whatever Impulse is called these days) it's a pretty fair statement at the big-budget game level. Hell, most of the big, ongoing PC games are over half a decade old these days (granted, not the 90s, but CS:S was a remake of a 90s game). MMOs could be argued to be more early 2000s than 90s, but they're still getting a bit long in the tooth in terms of design. Blizzard's last two big releases (which were, with Skyrim, also the last two big PC releases) were updates to franchises last released in the 90s that didn't make huge changes to core gameplay.
That said, big-budget gaming on console is getting a bit stuck in a rut as well. I'd say consoles aren't quite as 'rutted', but they're generally heading down the same path.
The main defence for innovation is the indie scene on both platforms (and Facebook/Zynga, but I'm focussing on innovations that are fun!).
You said it, not me. 😉
But with Beyond: Two Souls and The Last Guardian out there, I wouldn't say console gaming is stuck in too much of a rut. Plus, let's not forget the digital world where both old-school stuff (Rainbow Moon) and new, innovative titles (Journey, The Unfinished Swan) flourish.
There has been no gameplay innovation exclusive to the PC realm since the 90s. Shadow of the Colossus, Heavy Rain, even Uncharted (in terms of sheer production value and bringing Hollywood type cinematic quality to the industry) have somehow strangely left the PC in the dust.
Meh!
If you know how to tune your computer and don't mind spending way more money on hardware… PC owns ALL other systems in terms of multiplatform games and it also has some nice exclusives from time to time.
Loading times? When on my PC we are nearly not aquainted. loading games on Raid 0 corsair 128giga SSDs 😀
Controller… PS3 and Xbox both fit on it if I want to take it easy in the couch 😀
Graphics? Smoother and FPS hanging at over 120… Not like on my consoles where a lot of games struggle around 30 😛
But I will say that I really love my PS3 for it's exclusives. And I do play the Xbox just for Halo lol.
I do not believe that PCs are a thing stuck in the past though. They are evolving at a much faster rate than consoles. And they are the last battalion of freedom of the internet army of freewill! They give you an infinite amount of possibilities and give you no restrictions. You forge your PC yourself and put a bit of your own soul in it!!! lol
So yeah don't hate on my beloved PC lol 😀 it can do more than any other gaming console and play all the same games MUCH better with way more customization options 😛 As long as you know what you are doing I guess lol. I know some people don't want to bother toying with their machines so for them it's much better to just get a console. But those people shouldn't diminish the worth of the Computers just because they don't know how to fully master it 😛
Last edited by Neo_Aeon666 on 7/21/2012 11:35:18 PM
Sorry I think my comment is totally out of place. You made me think about why I like my PC since I could feel your *kind of* hate towards them lol.
@Neo
How much money did you spend on *that* kind of hardware again?
An $2000+ PC outperforming an $250 PS3 is as normal as a Sports Car outperforming a good Sedan. The big difference is that Sedans are cheaper and more practical than a sports car, so more people buy them.
It can't "do" anything besides graphics. And even that isn't even remotely impressive unless you spend a ton of time and cash.
No gameplay innovation. None. Exact same for fifteen years.
Last edited by Ben Dutka PSXE on 7/22/2012 12:36:15 AM
That's hypocritical to say the least.
The console has been playing catch-up to the PC throughout history, more-so than the opposite. But now that it can be a viable option for FPS… things have kinda been evened out, even if RTS are hardly doable on the same level as those on PC and FPSs aren't as fast as on PC (input wise).
Few game types on Consoles are not found on the PC. You could hand pick some titles from some exclusive developers, saying that game isn't available for PC, but that would be a cop-out.
The fact that most multi-platform games out there can be found on the PC as well, running better and smoother, tell me that you just blindly hate the PC and nothing more.
Now, since I am speaking in defence of the PC, people will tag me as a touchy PC fan or whatever. The truth being, I play all consoles, and love them all for unique reasons (mostly the exclusive content). But to say that console gaming is somehow innovating more than PC gaming is just a big fat ignorant lie. Say that you don't like the kind of gameplay that is found on PC exlusives, say that you don't enjoy the control method for some of those games, or whatever (Or that you just don't follow the PC releases would seem more accurate to me) But don't come up with a reason you just can't back.
Last edited by Hynad on 7/22/2012 7:10:05 AM
Console is playing catch up to pc? How old is the ps3 again? Back when the PS3 is released, is there a PC that can match it? I mean not a super high end PC but a decent PC. What games are released back then in PC that is better than the launch exclusive title of PS3? Playing catch up?
@ Doppel
Thats why I said *if you don't mind spending *way* more money on hardware* lol
And Ben, 90% of the games we play are available on all platforms. I mostly use the PC for multiplats. I keep my consoles for those very *few* unique games.
*No gameplay innovation. None. Exact same for fifteen years.* I think that's pretty harsh to say since most games come out on all platforms XD That means you think that games like Batman Arkham City or Skyrim has no innovation + it runs not as good on consoles than on PC so… It makes it crap on consoles?
Last edited by Neo_Aeon666 on 7/22/2012 11:08:00 AM
There are a lot of PC exclusive indy games that have innovated hugely in the last 15 years. I list them and you can research them yourself, I'm not going to explain what all the game play evolutions are.
E.Y.E. Divine Cybermancy, Binding of Isaac, Bit trip runner, Blocks that matter, AAAAaaaaHHHHHHHHH, The stalker games, Metro 2033, Portal, Sanctum, Zeno Clash, Slender, Amnesia: Dark Decent, Eufloria, Minecraft, The witcher series, Lugaru, and yet it moves, Crayon Physics, Night Sky, VVVVVV, Lone survivor, Dungeon defenders, and there are probably some more I am forgetting but yeah.
These are all games I have on my steam list and I think they were all pretty innovative stand out examples would be, Portal, Slender, Amnesia, and Minecraft. But yeah, its a pretty bold statement to say that NONE have been innovative in 15 years as most of these are all from well after 2000.
Consoles do have innovation but really the only stands outs for me in the last say 15 years are, all of the team ICO games, Journey, and maybe limbo, oh right Heavy Rain was a big one too. I'm sure there are more but I think the PC has contributed a lot, considering how many awesome Indy games there are.
Hynad: Back up my reason? Really shouldn't have asked.
What has the PC done? What? Pick a genre. What has it done for fighting games? Well, absolutely nothing. What has it done for the straight action genre? God of War, Devil May Cry, about a hundred others…you can try this crap that they "play better on PC," but few – if any – have any desire to play those games on a PC; they were designed for consoles, which is obvious.
Action/adventure is broader. Besides MMORPGs with sandbox worlds, I fail to see where PC has ever done anything. Uncharted, Gears, everything from Resident Evil to Dino Crisis, the games that have defined the genre. Platforming? Yeah, basically none there, either.
The PC has three genres and has always had three genres RPGs (specifically WRPGs), RTS, and FPS. That's basically it. Everything else is on console AND designed for console. On top of which, what the hell innovations have we even seen in the three areas in which the PC specializes? Have we seen ANY new gameplay in those fields? RPG? RTS? FPS? No. Exact same foundation they used when they were revolutionizing the industry in the 90s.
Am I missing something? Sports maybe? Yeah, don't see that happening much on PC. Puzzle? Nah. True innovation in gameplay, that which has inspired developers and designers to make the industry head in the direction it's heading, has come from the likes of Uncharted, Heavy Rain, Shadow of the Colossus, and many others. The PC has had some independent original hits; I know what they are. They've also made not a ripple and haven't really done anything for the future benefit of the industry.
More evidence? Can you even name a game designed exclusively for PC that has received Game of the Year this entire past generation? If you look at annual award categories in various genres and creative disciplines, you will find a whole lot of PC domination in the 90s, as well you should. Since that time, PC titles are essentially nonexistent when the awards are handed out every year.
But I suppose there's some good reason for that, too. I mean, besides the obvious facts. "A big fat ignorant lie?" Continuing to defend such a poor platform is the only enduring LIE we need to kill, so the elitist "we're better than everyone else so we can make a game suck after 12 years of waiting" devs might actually have to get better. And yeah, play catch up.
You honestly think teams like Naughty Dog are playing catch up to the archaic world of PC gaming? Heh…whatever dude.
Last edited by Ben Dutka PSXE on 7/22/2012 7:30:04 PM
@ Ben – I wouldn't say PC in and of itself is a poor platform (while I prefer console, I have a PC 2-3x as powerful as a PC, that I play _PC_ games on – ie, games that suit PCs better such as deep strategy games and flight sims), piracy is what has hammered it. There have always been 20-30 million high-ish end PC gamers at any point in time, easily enough to support a range of relatively high-profile exclusive titles, if a substantial proportion of their userbase didn't pirate titles – and, ironically, often pirating the big-budget titles even more – so making it even harder to get those exclusive, big-budget experiences.
If a large enough number of PC gamers stood by the people that make PC-exclusive games, there'd still be plenty. But unfortunately the PC gamers themselves made it very hard for studios above the size of indie developers to actually make money from the platform, _and_ made it necessary to have the kind of DRM we have in Diablo III.
Although, as a platform, the lack of standardisation and nature the standard input device (only two analog axes) means that certain games will always play second fiddle on PC, just like strategy always struggles on console (which has plenty of axes, but those axes have less pinpoint precision).
Doooood Ben that's just pure PC hatred lol. Did your PC murder someone in your family? O_O
Even in what you say there is a lot of weird stuff. My Jedi power feels passionate disdain 😛
Like you basically say: Games play better on PC :then: But no one wants to play on it since they were made for consoles.
So like… I could push this further… And not have bought Mass Effect on PS3 since it was designed for Xbox? Makes no sense no? If the game is made available on a platform and it runs much better/smoother and looks prettier… You won't play it because it was released first on a another system?
And when you say designed for consoles, I say: Designed for a *controller*
Now plug in the controller in the PC… And voila! No?
It hasn't been long since I stopped buying multiplats on my consoles. (I built my new PC last winter) But after experiencing it with Skyrim/Batman/Mass Effect/Dragon Age on PC vs Consoles ( I have all these games on both platforms LOL yeah I know I waste money T-T ) , I will never buy a game that I know will be released on PC on a current gen console again. The difference is just HUGE. I feel like you have not even witnessed the difference.
Overall I guess it would have been nice if you could just understand our point of view:
The PC is a money pit. Yes. It's a pain to tweak for some. Yes. But it offers the best gameplay/graphics experience for games released on all three platforms and also boasts a few unique games of it's own (It also has millions of other advantages unrelated to gaming but I leave that aside) If you can't acknowledge that then you did not play a recent game on a recent PC or are just purely hating the platform without a neutral eye.
Last edited by Neo_Aeon666 on 7/23/2012 12:43:23 AM
@ Neo – _if_ PC games had consistent and well-thought out gamepad support (which they don't), and if PC games ran straight out of the box without literally hours of forum-searching to find the right VB.Net odd or end to download, then I'd be right with you for multiplats. But for Mass Effect, it took me four hours just to get it to start, it had no gamepad support the mouse control was twitch and immersion breaking. Mass Effect 2 on PS3, on the other hand, had a slightly lower framerate, slightly (but not much) lower texture quality, exactly the same animation, quality gamepad support and four hours after trying to fire it up for the first time I was around four hours into the game.
Metro 2033 also took some working, and while it had gamepad support, it never felt quite right – as if it had been designed for PC with gamepad support slotted on afterwards.
Yes, there's applications like Xpadder, but they don't work with all games (yes, they should in theory, but they don't in practice, and take a good amount of time to set up as well), and yes there's _usually_ a fix when a game won't run on your system, but some of us like to play games, rather than spend a good proportion of time getting them to work. One of the reasons I prefer strategy games on PC is if they take a few hours just to get running, it's a much smaller proportion of the overall gametime than your average action/adventure game! PC gaming – where gaming is only half the story….. (note, this isn't necessarily a bad thing – lots of PC 'gamers' actually get into the modding and hardware tweaking as much as the actual gaming, but there's plenty of folk out there that just like to game, and focus more on how the actual gameplay controls than framerates and texture resolutions, and suggesting that PC is always just better for everyone is just not true. If it was, I'd be playing all my multiplats on PC as well – but as it is, _after_ giving my PC a good shake, I won't go near anything on PC that I can get on PS3, with the exception of Bethesda games, 'cos they can't code and need a modding community to keep their games from being glitchy messes).
Ben I would say that in those three genres you listed as being PCs only real genres have had a lot of innovation.
I guess you over looked the list I put down but all of those games do something quite different.
Further more you keep bringing up team ICO and Naughty dog as innovative devs which I totally agree with. But I think your missing that a lot of PC exclusive titles get to the consoles later, but most PC exclusives are the smaller indy titles that you seem to over look.
Amnesia and Penumbra completely changed the horror genre and console horror games can't touch the scares that those two titles create. Slender was for a contest and is PC only and still one of the creepiest things I have ever played. Lone survivor is up there but I haven't played enough to know if its the scariest.
RTS, The warhammer 40k RTS changed a lot of things without making it not an RTS anymore. They got rid of the micromanaging and resources and changed things up with how squads worked. Company of heroes by the same devs I think? Also innovated on the RTS formula. There are really deep innovative space sims where you mine planets, fight space pirates etc. I can't remember there names but I have read up on some newer ones on steam.
FPS wise, well consoles haven't done much to innovate there either. But we have some good attempts on the PC like Dino D-day, Tribes: Ascend which is an evolution of an FPS genre that was dying out. Planetside 2, Firefall, are all MMOFPS but they are doing things different. Blacklight: Retribution is also an evolution of the original Blacklight Tango down, but its PC exlusive. Crysis was a PC exclusive and did push the FPS genre forward a bit I think. The new game from the creator of the original counterstike looks like its going to really evolve FPS games as well. Look that one up because its looking mighty good. Also ben dont forget the original Portal was a PC exlusive or still is right? You can't say that didn't do things different.
RPG wise, you have games like, Risen, the Gothic series, and the Witcher 1 and 2 both of which were PC exclusive and won many awards and were up for game of the year.
I know the Witcher 2 got GotY on several sights, or at least RPG of the year, while it was a PC exlusive.
Like I said the list I provided earlier is a great start for some really innovative PC only games or PC primary games.
I think the innovation is everywhere on both platforms, it just might stand out more on the consoles because its a more contained medium. Where as on the PC you might not hear of a cool indy game unless it hits steam or your part of reddit or something.
@ Xenris – Company of Heroes populised and polished, but they didn't innovate per se – there have been squad-based tactical games on PC from the very beginning (although it's nice not using text-sprites). And CoH _still_ required resource management – building tanks on the frontline, lol. It was relatively well done, and it was nice to see a popular RTS that wasn't built on the Dune 2 model, but it was more popularising than innovative. If you want real innovation in squad-based games, Battlefront.com is the place to go to.
Of course, there is great innovation in strategy on PC (no Starcraft 2 doesn't count – while it can be classified as strategy, its Dune 2 roots are very strong), but the size of the PC market that gets into it is pretty small. And there are the indie games on all three platforms (noting that Shatter, Limbo, Super Meatboy and others all came to console before they hit PC), but there's a dearth of innovation in larger projects – the list of big-to-medium budget PC games that are PC exclusive and innovative these days is pretty short, and has been for years.
This is hardly surprising – pirates butchered the PC market, and continue to make it hard for anything with a decent budget to do well. Basically, on PC, you've got 20-30 million 'core' users (out of 70-odd million PC gamers all up), but such a large percentage pirate regularly that the install base from a revenue perspective is likely half that – and trying to pitch an innovative big-budget game to a 10-15 million install base is always going to stretch publishers.
I think though, we're going to see more and more PC exlusives in the future. Steam in particular has really opened a gateway for selling games without the fear of pirates.
RTS games weren't my main example but sure they are all based on a similar model. But the same can be said for all the innovative console games except a few, like the team ICO games and thatgamecompany and the souls series.
Third person shooters on consoles I could say are based off of the original PC TPS games and the only innovation has been the cover system that Winback introduced. Note how I don't say gears of war because Winback was the first Cover shooter and gears just tightened it up.
I mean the way you were talking about RTS games following the dune model I could say that I guess really few games across all platforms really have innovated.
But I don't think that is true. Also innovation was bound to slow down as the industry matured, which is probably why we get less really unique feeling games these days.
I made a pretty big list of games that I'm pretty sure could be considered innovative on the PC and most of them are PC exclusive or PC is the first platform. I think thats another thing, most games are multiplatform and the games that are exlusive to consoles while they are good I wouldn't say that all of them are crazy innovative except the few I listed.
Anyway I think innovation is everywhere but I honestly think its the small guys who are taking more risks. Naught dog makes amazing games although I didn't like UC3 as much as 2, they aren't really innovating or taking risks, at least I don't think.
I guess its perception though, I spend a lot of time on my PC and keep up with the cool little indy games and yes some of them are more memorable and innovative than anything I have played on any console period. However I don't discredit games like Journey which is a truly amazing experience and definitely up there with some of the most amazing games I have ever played.
But I just thought it was a bit extreme when he said that in 15 years no PC exclusives have even evolved. Thats why I made the list, as I thought those were stand out PC games.
Yeah, totally fair to highlight that there is innovation in the PC realm (as there is). I guess, thought, that 'mainstream' PC gaming still seems to be going through either the same motions of PC gaming from the 90s, or it's console gaming with a mouse/kb.
As for RTS though, there's _plenty_ of room for innovation – hell, even RUSE was a good step away from the Dune 2 model (although it struggled at retail because it was a little too different for the mainstream PC crowd, even if it was far more strategic than your average RTS, but then maybe that was the problem ;)) – and then there's the Paradox grand-strategy RTS games, which are excellent (although haven't innovated a heap in recent years, bar adding in lineage and the like through CK2 and Sengoku).
The indie scene is great, but it doesn't seem to get a lot of attention on PC, outside of a few standouts (Terraria would be the standout, I reckon, after Minecraft of course), and in terms of my mates on Steam or Raptr on PC, and the stats of the top 100 games played on Steam, it suggests pretty strongly that the 'core' of PC gaming is still stuck about ten years ago (the TW games kicked off in the early 2000s, and they're plenty popular now :)).
Yeah I dig that. I guess I'm repeating myself but I just think innovation is on both platforms but in all honestly we have only seen a handful of real innovation.
I think its true most of the PC gamers like there shooters, traditional RTS games, and the Diablo type aRPG. I'm among them but I think warhammer 40k is quite an evolution from starcraft although its in the same genre.
I wish some of the steam indie games would get to the PSN. Lone survivor is a really interesting survival horror game. Plus I would love to see people play amnesia or slender, and see what survival horror can be when the focus is on horror and not … action(dead space 3 :P)
I agree with you Ben. D3 will be a better game if it comes out on the PS3. Right now the PC is the guinea pig. The PC players are paying the price right now. I have not bought this game and I am sad. I really want to play it. But I am holding out for the following:
PS3 Release
Manual skill point allocation (HUGE)
Always online 100% fixed so there is no lag in SP
I don't care about the auction house as I can guarantee you I won't use it. I just want SP and maybe a chance to play COOP with a buddy alone. My inner-Diablo is screaming to play this but I have to be patient.
We've still got some game breaking bugs on consoles (that are never fixed) but it's usually Bethesda. Oblivion, Skyrim, Fallout 3 GOTY.
But as far as Diablo 3 is concerned, blah who cares? It's an isometric game that a console dev could have knocked out in a year or two.
You mean a developer like Square-Enix, or Team Ico, right?
Last edited by Hynad on 7/21/2012 10:32:15 AM
Hynad: You don't really want us to list the hundred developers and publishers who routinely put out console games on a annual and bi-annual basis…do you?
Face it Hynad, Diablo III looks like a pretty good downloadable title for consoles.
I agree with world, I watch Diablo III and first thing in my mind? ''it's a 19.99 PSN game.''
Diablo 3 is just a little more beautiful than Champions of Norrath, which is a PS2 game.
As much as I liked Diablo 2. I have to agree that D3 is crap as soon as you are max lvl. (And it is so easy to be max level now… I remember it took months for people to reach 99… Now you can be 60 in 3-5 days lol…) Ah yeah and it's now easier to be max level… And they didn't even bother to put something to do once you reach that max lvl XD XD XD
So yeah if I did not get this game for free by paying for WoW for 1 year (lol) I would have regretted to have paid 60$ for it.
At the moment it is not worth more than 19.99$ like you guys said. I hope they fix that soon.
By the way, I expect the extremely touchy defend-it-to-the-death PC fans will be in here, but really, don't bother. I've always hated PC and you're not going to change that.
Diablo III was broken when it launched. There's not much else to say. And please note I said twice in the article it's definitely best played on PC. 🙂
I used to be a PC gamer until I got my PS2. Money is tight for me and a PS3 and an old laptop and console games is all I can get. My laptop handles everything but games, and my consoles handles everything else the laptop can't do.
The biggest advantage of consoles is physical media, unlike steam, I can list it on Kijiji (Canadian equivalent of Craigslist) and get money back or trades.
Sure PS3 doesn't get anything close to Steam Sales, but with a little traveling, street smarts to negotiate with people, and talking to the right people, you can get games for really cheap.
I can't say I have any prejudices or hatred towards PC gaming. Growing up I played games like Kings Quest, Space Quest, Monkey Island, wolfenstien, duke nukem, lawrenece hollands Xwing and also Tie Fighter and several RTS games and more. Though, once Xbox happened a bridge happened. Many devs who once premiered on PC started premiering on consoles. And now, these days, there's very few exclusive reasons to do PC gaming.
Some years back I determined upgrading my gaming PC just wasn't worth it. I wasn't going to spend tons on hardware anymore and I determined to stick to console cycles. That feeling didn't and hasn't changed. These days though I need a powerful PC for other reasons, so now suddenly the desire to have some PC games with the DVD to Blu Ray like benefits is compelling. Definitely would never spend what I have for PC gaming alone. If things changed back, back like how things were in earlier days where many devs produced exclusive content on PC I'd say different. But these days the vast majority of the shakers and movers in the industry happens on PS3 and Xbox
Return to castle Wolfeinstein was like the BEST GAME EVAR! I was too much of a wuss to get past the first three or four levels – I was like 7 years old – but those first three or four were just brilliance. If only the game didn't include monsters I might've continued on. It's like when those skeleton things started coming out of the ground I was like "Yeah okay screw THAT!" and quickly quit the game, started up my PS2 and played some spongebob. Ahhh 😛
I was referring to Wolfenstien 3D. You know? The game that spawned the FPS genre in less than 12 par secs?
Hmmm, wait that's a 70's movie reference. Lemme think…. Movies… 90's … Hmmm Will Smith… Nah, never mind
=p
Temjin: Oh, I played on a PC all the time. Played through Hero's Quest like ten times on my old IBM Tandy that could barely run it, and I did whole seasons on Earl Weaver's Baseball. Also played a ton of multiplayer with friends in Baldurs Gate II, Diablo II, Icewindale, Heroes of Might and Magic, etc.
But when a platform shows me absolutely zero gameplay innovations in over a decade and still has the same frustrating issues that are the opposite of "user friendly," I don't care about it.
Last edited by Ben Dutka PSXE on 7/21/2012 4:17:06 PM
@Temjin: Everything you just said just went wayy over my head, but, you know, yeah, cool. xD
EDIT: I kinda agree with Ben. There are so many things that can go wrong with a computer, & I just don't find it worth the hassle. That, and when I play games, I wanna relax. I don't feel like I can do that when I have to operate a keyboard & mouse, because I'd have to be sitting up right.
Also, when you have to point to indie games when asked 'what's good about PC gaming', is that not a bad sign? Yeah sure it may produce more creativity, but at the end of the day, they are what they are – indie games i.e not a big budget production. Thusly, you will never get the same experiance as in say, Uncharted. I'm not trying to make a console vs PC debate, but it's all true; in the last 10 (or so) years, PC gaming has really become second to console gaming.
I say that in terms of which platform developers choose to develop their games. And if Diablo III, which had a torrid launch on the PC, releases without a hitch on consoles, does this not signify what I just said (that PC gaming has become second to console gaming)?
Last edited by Ludicrous_Liam on 7/21/2012 6:11:37 PM
Yea, Ben PC gaming isnt what it was. I say ever since Moleneux, Perry, Carmack, and essentially the Bioware founders, Spector, Cliffy B, Levine, the Bethseda guys, also now Crytek's seeming withdrawal from being a tech innovator, and several others left PC as a home base, not to forget the landscape blazing MMORPG explosion due to ultimately WoW, and EA abondoning Madden, a franchise born on PC, PCs are left relatively barren, with only strategy, sim, and Indy games making up the bulk of their exclusive value.
Man, Tandy? Phew jeesh, glad I missed that one 😉
Oh, it was bad-ass. 😉 Had so much fun with that thing…which had 640k of RAM, by the way.
Blizzard just isn't the same these days. They're a fragmented representation of their former self. I don't care to ever see a Diablo 3 port on console.
Te very nature of the PC platform pretty much condemns PC games to having the most bugs and problems. It's an inherent problem when software and hardware design don't happen all under one house. It's kinda like the Apple vs Windows debates.
I haven't experienced any bugs playing D3 thus far. I think the game is just bad overall though. Nothing console gamers will really miss if it's not released. But, here's what you can look forward to if blizz decides to put D3 on consoles.
-Cookie cutter builds in inferno.
-Having to farm millions in gold rather than gear because
-Random stats on all the gear. "Awesome, a legendary dropped!! Oh, is worse than my level 56 yellow…"
-Real money AH is a joke
A console version of Diablo 3 would be a very good business decision by Blizzard. If my friends and I decided to jump in right now, every one of us would have to upgrade our computers. My computer could probably handle it with the settings turned down but what's the point?
Most of my gaming friends are not in a position to spend the money right now but every one of us has a PS3. If it were released tomorrow we could all bypass the cost of entry and start playing without having to spend hundreds of dollars more to play it on PC.
Because of this I was certain that a console version was quickly being developed but now I'm not so sure. I thought we'd have heard confirmation by now. I still think it will happen but I wouldn't bet as much money as I would have 3 months ago.
Regardless, Blizzard is not known for its timely releases. Even if they do announce a console version, it won't be released any earlier than late 2013, giving them PLENTY of time to fix the mistakes of the PC version and giving us a polished product. My guess is that they'll announce it at BlizzCon this year (if it's not cancelled) and we'll see it early 2014 maybe as part of the next gen release lineup?
About manual skill point allocation, you can manually chose your powers and perks if you go into options and choose to add skills manually.
Seriously! Well, that's great! I wonder what all the noise was about then. Maybe people just didn't know this. Why make the auto option default!?
I've been a Diablo fan for years, The problem isn't the errors, its the fact that it's not even Diablo anymore. It's a watered down WoW. Not to mention consoles will probably be around for only another generation. Then they'll PC's without the freedom of a PC. They'll basically be MAC's.
Why is it always online? Just to stop piracy?
Control. But they market spin it's purpose as being a benfial one. I think it ironic, Blizzard was once recognized as the gamers game company who didn't do anything for "selling out." it seems the many years they sat on WoW raking in the cash their standards have changed, changed too when several of their minds left the company years ago.
I think PC gaming is better for some things and consoles better for others its as simple as that.
I think in Diablo 3s case though that it really isn't worth the amount of money they are charging for the game. Considering Torchlight 2 is coming out soon at a 20 dollar price tag and is said to be just as big as D3 plus the ability to mod it well…lets just say D3 starts looking like a big rip off. Not to mention the issues that have plagued it and the always online DRM nonsense.
By the time it does get to consoles yes it will be a much better game. Heck it might even feel better on the console, considering how streamline D3 is compared to most PC ARPGS.
I think we'll have to wait and see because it might launch just as buggy as the PC version because the console architecture and networking is much different than doing it on the PC. Plus with online always well….D3 might be a mess on consoles especially if PSN is down for whatever reason.
Yep, as you probably know, important heads of Blizzard North (the diablo guys) defected and helped form, and are a part of, Runic games and now we have Torchlight. Great game. It's also not a mainstream corporate cashcow.