Diablo 3 'theoretically possible' for console port
In our interview with Diablo 3 lead designer Jay Wilson, it was explained that there were no plans to bring the long-awaited title to any platform other than PC and Mac. However, in the six days that have passed since said interview, a couple of Blizzard higher-ups weren't quite as dismissive of the possibility of the dungeon crawler making an appearance on our primitive gameboxes -- though the language used to describe this possibility hasn't exactly given us high-apple-pie-in-the-sky hopes.
When asked about a console rendition of the third entry in the Lord of Terror-slaying franchise, Blizzard COO Paul Sams gave an inconclusive "I don't know yet," though Vice President of Game Design Rob Pardo suggested a console port was "theoretically possible," as out of all of Blizzard's franchises, Diablo would be the most console-friendly. We guess a theoretical "yes" is better than an actual "no", or a metaphorical "maybe", but we're still not holding our bated breath for a non-compy version of Diablo the Third.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
livefirewire @ Jul 5th 2008 4:43PM
I would pay as much as 300(I a fanatic for Diablo) for a console version of Diablo 1,2,3. Though I would want some upgraded visuals for the first two.
Iwa @ Jul 5th 2008 5:21PM
Scour eBay, Diablo was released for the Playstation.
tcc3 @ Jul 6th 2008 2:43PM
And it was awful. Thus why a console Diablo game is a bad idea.
Intentless @ Jul 5th 2008 4:48PM
I would only get it for the console if I could still play it with my PC friends online... Otherwise there is no point...
Jakka @ Jul 5th 2008 4:59PM
Even if they did, why bother playing in that case?
Unless they used some kind of artificial disadvantage such as the huge-ass recoil in Shadowrun, your PC friends would kick your ass.To them you'd be an above-average bot...at most.
Haggard @ Jul 5th 2008 5:18PM
Well, the focus of the game will be on co-op
Jakka @ Jul 5th 2008 7:07PM
Yeah, but PC Gamers will find the "console levels" too easy, while Console Gamers won't be able to keep up when playing "PC Levels".How do you find the middle-ground in terms of level generation?
I'd love to have Diablo for a console but cross-platform MP is a bad idea.
Word Up, North Korea! @ Jul 5th 2008 8:04PM
well since a ps3 will support a mouse and keyboard, i disagree
Jakka @ Jul 5th 2008 8:19PM
The console version won't be designed with keyboards in mind because:
A) This would mean separate versions for 360 and PS3 which would lead to further delays.
B) How many people actually use Mouse and Keyboard to play games on their PS3's? I'm guessing that 1-2% at most.
But you got me, I did forgot about M&K when writing the other comment.That still doesn't make any difference for the other 99,9% of console gamers though.
hotnutz @ Jul 5th 2008 9:01PM
well it's a basic hack/slash game (fun as hell and one I will enjoy playing) so it's already pretty dumbed down so it would be perfect for a console game.
Though I cringe at the high probability of listening to teenagers scream "Barbarian N*****R" into my ears all the time during a coop game.
Haggard @ Jul 5th 2008 9:10PM
If a console version were to exist I agree that cross-platform wouldn't be in there - but at the moment I think most of the original Diablo 1 and 2 fans will still be PC gamers, and even if they're not, it won't be costly to run this game, a $60 graphics card should let you max it out.
Vidikron (FU) @ Jul 5th 2008 10:49PM
@Jakka
Do you even understand what type of game Diablo is? There's no reason to expect console players to be at anymore than a very minor disadvantage in PvP play. It's not a twitch game. Besides, if it were on the PS3 it would almost certainly support KB/M.
Crono (NDF - Knight of the Old School) @ Jul 5th 2008 11:51PM
Not to mention that the console port should play more like champions of norath, aka you control movement with the dpad and actions with a button, instead of having a pointer with context sensitive clicks. This would work very well for most of diablo, with targeted spellcasting being the only difference. And even that would have a very easy workaround: cast a spell, have a cursor appear for targeting.
Crono (NDF - Knight of the Old School) @ Jul 5th 2008 11:55PM
Not to mention that the console port should play more like champions of norath, aka you control movement with the dpad and actions with a button, instead of having a pointer with context sensitive clicks. This would work very well for most of diablo, with targeted spellcasting being the only difference. And even that would have a very easy workaround: cast a spell, have a cursor appear for targeting.
Jakka @ Jul 6th 2008 6:25AM
@ Vidikron
Yes, I've played Diablo and as far as I remember being swarmed by twenty monsters was a little unpleasant and required a lot of clicking.
Sure, you can always get it to work on a controller but it won't come anywhere near the flexibility of a keyboard.
A Pissed-off English Gamer @ Jul 6th 2008 9:43AM
To be honest, fuck console players. I'm tired of arguing that RTS, MMO and (yes) FPS games all play infinitely better with a mouse and keyboard. I don't care if the 360 is compatable with them, how many people have a USB keyboard lying around?
Also, the 360 usually gets most PC games as it is, and I will always maintain that any avid fps fan who goes and makes most of the cross-platform purchases for a console instead of a PC is making the wrong choice, but i understand that not everyone can afford a decent gaming PC. I just wish that the stubborn console fanboys would admit the mouse ans keyboard superiority when developers already have; that auto-aim in the new unreal on the 360 and halo 3 that you can't turn off? That's because you're using a pad.
Vidikron (FU) @ Jul 6th 2008 4:50PM
"how many people have a USB keyboard lying around?"
Everyone?
And I think most console gamers are aware that the mouse is faster for aiming than a thumb stick. Only a few die hards won't admit that. But in the end it normally doesn't matter since the playing field is generally level (i.e. everyone has the same control options). I have more than capable gaming PC (quad core, etc...), but I still do most of my gaming on console because I enjoy them. I enjoy gaming in my home theater and I have no interest in having a second PC in my entertainment center. I don't give a shit that I can aim a half second faster with a mouse. I just don't care.
Jakka @ Jul 5th 2008 4:53PM
Of course it is possible.They managed to pull this off with SupComm, a game that requires two monitors to get the full experience.
The real question is, how much it is going to suck compared to the PC Version?
BananaBoat @ Jul 5th 2008 4:59PM
I don't think a Diablo III version on a console would make much sense. D3's market is basically the same market that owns both a computer and atleast one console, so they'd be taking sales away from one version and giving them to another, instead of getting more sales. Then again, maybe I'm underestimating how many people that never played Diablo II in the day, want to play Diablo III now, but don't have a computer handy. I doubt it though.
Donald @ Jul 5th 2008 6:08PM
"so they'd be taking sales away from one version and giving them to another, instead of getting more sales"
That makes no sense at all. The people that would buy Diablo 3 regardless would still buy it and they'd get more sales from people that other wise wouldn't get it but would consider it if it was ported to consoles. It wouldn't hurt sales, it would boost them.
Will @ Jul 5th 2008 6:19PM
It makes perfect sense. What he's saying is that a lot of the console version buyers would have bought the PC version had it not been ported to consoles. These sales don't generate any additional profits, which would only come from console owners who are uninterested in the PC version. Frankly speaking, most non-PC gamers don't care any more about the Diablo series than they do about Starcraft. It would be just another hack and slash. A well made one, certainly, but that doesn't always drive sales as much as developers would like.
Lots of additional cost to port to consoles, and likely low returns on the investment. I'm not saying it won't happen, but PC Diablo is a big deal. Console Diablo is not.
BananaBoat @ Jul 5th 2008 9:59PM
Exactly. The only additional market segment they might pick up with a 360 or PS3 version, would be kids that don't have their own computers (but have expensive videogame consoles?), anyone else that wanted to play Diablo would have already purchased it for the PC, negating any sizable profits they might have made from the port.
Instead of them wasting time and effort on that, I want them to spend time setting up an auction house for the game (in game money auction house) or an easy market system (no bidding). My memories of Diablo mostly consist of me making a room named "Selling Elite Lance" etc, and waiting for an eternity until someone finally showed up. That's the first thing they need to fix, IMO.
Vidikron (FU) @ Jul 5th 2008 11:16PM
I think you may be underestimating the potential. I'm a huge fan of the series and I'd be tempted to buy both version myself. Especially if they not only made cross platform play possible, but also made it possible to use your same characters on each... that would be win all the way.
BananaBoat @ Jul 6th 2008 9:23AM
What scenario are yyou going to be in where you don't have a computer with you, but you have a console? Or the other way around, what scenario would you have a console and not a PC? Either way, the amount of people that don't have both (in D3's demographic) is probably so small that it'd be insane to waste the time and effort getting the game running on the console(s).
Unless another studio did the port, ala EA doing the PS3 version of Orange Box. Then again...having seen the results of that, I wouldn't want that scenario to happen for D3 anyway. Playing it while sitting on the couch would be nice though...nevermind, everyone would be on vent anyway, and unless there were a ventrilo client released with the game (which could only happen on the PS3 probably) you couldn't hear anyone you were playing with.
Saga @ Jul 6th 2008 2:07PM
I don't understand why you think it wouldn't make any sense for them to make a console version of Diablo 3. It would make a lot of sense if they did. I also like Diablo 1 & 2 and would definitely buy Diablo 3, the only problem is, I don't have a computer that is capable of running Diablo 3. In my case, I would buy the console version of the game rather the PC version.
The console version would be for:
1) People that don't have a computer that do have a 360 or PS3(which can happen with any age group, not just kids).
2) People that do have a computer and a 360 or PS3, but they're computer is not powerful enough to play the game(in which they would decide, do they pay $50-$60 for the PC game AND $60+ to get the upgrades necessary to play the game or do they just pay $60 for the console version.
3) People that have both a fully capable computer and a 360 or PS3 but they have to share the computer with other people, which they would probably get the console version so they can get more time to play the game.
Number 2 would be the most common as most people don't want to pay or cant afford to pay extra money for upgrade to play a game on their PC. These people would not bother to buy the game because of this unless there was a console version available to them.
I am both a PC and a console gamer, and since my computer is not capable of running any games made after 2003 :P (can't afford to get a new computer right now), I would definitely buy the console version.
Saga @ Jul 6th 2008 2:08PM
I don't understand why you think it wouldn't make any sense for them to make a console version of Diablo 3. It would make a lot of sense if they did. I also like Diablo 1 & 2 and would definitely buy Diablo 3, the only problem is, I don't have a computer that is capable of running Diablo 3. In my case, I would buy the console version of the game rather the PC version.
The console version would be for:
1) People that don't have a computer that do have a 360 or PS3(which can happen with any age group, not just kids).
2) People that do have a computer and a 360 or PS3, but they're computer is not powerful enough to play the game(in which they would decide, do they pay $50-$60 for the PC game AND $60+ to get the upgrades necessary to play the game or do they just pay $60 for the console version.
3) People that have both a fully capable computer and a 360 or PS3 but they have to share the computer with other people, which they would probably get the console version so they can get more time to play the game.
Number 2 would be the most common as most people don't want to pay or cant afford to pay extra money for upgrade to play a game on their PC. These people would not bother to buy the game because of this unless there was a console version available to them.
I am both a PC and a console gamer, and since my computer is not capable of running any games made after 2003 :P (can't afford to get a new computer right now), I would definitely buy the console version.
Vidikron (FU) @ Jul 6th 2008 5:02PM
@Banaboat
"What scenario are you going to be in where you don't have a computer with you, but you have a console? Or the other way around, what scenario would you have a console and not a PC?"
Who said that has anything to do with it? My PC is upstairs in my office. It's a very nice PC that capable of playing Crysis, but I still game most often on my consoles. There just something about the true home theater quality speakers, the SVS shaking the house, etc... I just simply enjoy gaming on my consoles. I enjoy my PC as well, but it's a different experience. And, no, I have no interest in maintaining a second gaming capable PC in my entertainment center.
BananaBoat @ Jul 6th 2008 7:47PM
I don't know how to explain it any better. I'll defer to will's comment that a Diablo game on the PC is a huge deal, and that a Diablo game on a console wouldn't be. Diablo has a huge following on the PC, but it has never had a following on a console, and I don't think there are really any additional demographics beyond that PC market (and hardcore gamers in general) that they would likely pick up with a console port. Considering that they set out to make Diablo III as easy to run as possible, I don't see many situations where Diablo II fans can't run III because their computers are lacking, and would be forced to run it on a console (or situations where someone would just simply buy two versions of the game, one on PC, one on console). I'm sure they've got guys out on the internets right now polling and finding out just how well a dual console/PC release might do compared to a PC only release, and only if their findings are favorable will we see a console port.
Whatever. We're talking atleast Christmas 2009 here probably =P
mr nimblewick @ Jul 5th 2008 5:07PM
Wii port please. I don't want to buy a new computer for the game. Plus you can still do the point and click! Brilliant!
Catdogburger @ Jul 5th 2008 6:48PM
Wii port....YEAH RIGHT! do you really think it could support it!?!?!?
But then again, you guys did get rock band, and are getting spore.....so why not diablo 3?
Jakka @ Jul 5th 2008 7:16PM
Imo, it's far superior than DualShock or S-Pad in this case.
You could also deal with the hotkeys/interface by using a gesture system.
tmacairjordan87 @ Jul 5th 2008 8:40PM
Yeah right haha. There's a better chance for a dreamcast version than a wii version.
BananaBoat @ Jul 5th 2008 10:02PM
The Wii has plenty of power for Diablo III. Judging from the gameplay videos, you would only need one and a half gamecubes taped together to play Diablo III. The Wii might be overkill.
Vidikron (FU) @ Jul 5th 2008 10:54PM
The Wii lacks screen real estate due to its limited resolution. Something that may be important in a game like Diablo. Yeah, I know the previous games didn't run very high, but DIII may be different. Even going from 640x480 -> 800x600 made a big difference in DII.
mr nimblewick @ Jul 6th 2008 7:37PM
Dude, they did starcraft on N64, they can do D3 on Wii. Naysayers are losers.
Titanium_Orchid @ Jul 5th 2008 5:24PM
Cold Fusion is also theoretically possible.
I would really like to see Diablo 3 or starcraft 2 or any other RTS for that matter come to the PS3 or 360. I know that the PS supports keyboard and mouse inputs, I am assuming the xbox does as well. So why not?
Titanium_Orchid @ Jul 5th 2008 5:27PM
Blizzard: If you put Starcraft 3 onto the PS3, I'll but the game and a keyboard/mouse to play with.
HighFiveJesus @ Jul 5th 2008 5:31PM
maybe a keyboard and mouse bundle with the game (just a cheap one). i doubt many know you can use them, and i think even less will ever get around to getting one that isn't already used by their computer.
otherwise i think it'd be a control nightmare.
Charlie_Six @ Jul 5th 2008 5:55PM
Xbox does not support mouse, but it does support keyboard.
Jakka @ Jul 6th 2008 6:31AM
There's still Fall Update lurking somewhere in the shadows of MSHQ...
GoldenS1104 @ Jul 5th 2008 5:30PM
I feel like there would be a few drawbacks to a console version of Diablo III. I don't see any reason not to get it for PC or Mac given Blizzard's extreme flexibility with system requirements. I guess in cases where the person has a really old computer there's no other choice, but I imagine most people should be able to run it.
Moofree @ Jul 5th 2008 5:35PM
How about Diablo 3 Wii with DS controller support.
Tap-to-kill interface.
ben @ Jul 5th 2008 5:56PM
Part of Diablo II charm is having to click like a madman to clear waves of enemies. Things like targeted AoE, teleport, and the general play stay don't lend themselves to consoles. A Diablo gimped for a console would not be Diablo.
ben @ Jul 5th 2008 5:57PM
general play style*
Bigfoot @ Jul 5th 2008 5:59PM
It just wouldn't be the same without all of the clicking.
Tez (PSN: Tezasaurus) @ Jul 5th 2008 7:31PM
You're right. It'd be better.
BlaznGoldstein @ Jul 5th 2008 6:00PM
Please forgive my ignorance (I have never played Diablo), but what I've seen of Diablo III looks a lot like Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance (Which I have played). Not graphically of course, but in premise and gameplay the two seem similar
So unless I'm just way off base here, this type of game is certainly possible on a console. Now of course that's just my naive opinion, and please feel free to correct me. Just be gentle ok?
BlaznGoldstein @ Jul 5th 2008 6:14PM
Oh and By the way:
http://www.somethingawful.com/d/news/diablo-hate-internet.php
Cracked me up.
carg0 @ Jul 5th 2008 6:10PM
i wouldn't hold my breath...
|MaguS| @ Jul 5th 2008 6:57PM
The original worked fine on the PSX, Don't see why this couldn't work on current gen systems. PS3 would be the most logical choice seeing how tying BNET to PSN would be the easiest since its more open then XBLive.
They could also give the player the option of using KB&M if they want to like UT3 does.