Approvals 10/3 ▼
Alexious (2) - 4046d ago Cancel
Pozzle (4) - 4045d ago Cancel
Treezy504 (2) - 4046d ago Cancel
Astargatis (1) - 4045d ago Cancel
maddskull (1) - 4046d ago Cancel
160°

Blizzard’s Mysterious Unannounced Game to Be Released on Consoles

Blizzard has been working on an unannounced game for a while now, surfaced through the company’s career opportunity ads, and today a new one indicates that it's going to be on consoles as well.

Read Full Story >>
dualshockers.com
Create Report !X

Add Report

Reports

+ Updates (2)- Updates (2)

Updates

Changed from Pending to Approved
Community4045d ago
Changed: content
Abriael4046d ago
ZodTheRipper4046d ago

Well I certainly hope so as I prefer gaming on a console. But I'll buy their games on PC as well if there's no choice just like Starcraft 2 or Diablo 3 (which I've bought a second time for PS3 afterwards :D)

Chrischi19884045d ago

So it is basically confirmed, that the game will be not so good. Diablo 3 for PC was bad in so many aspects and most of it resulted by Blizzard changing the skill system and all, so it is possible to play it with a normal gaming controller, which harmed the game so much, I did not even get the expansion, even though I played Diablo2 before Diablo 3 release, because I used to love the series. But they changed it so drastically to make the controlls fit on a controller, that the game is soooo bad...

annus4045d ago

The hate for D3 was mainly the loot system, and partially about the original difficulty of inferno. The loop system was so bad, combined with the weirdly scaling difficulty, that you basically farmed easy crap until you had enough gold to buy better gear from the AH. It went against everything Diablo was about. It didn't really have much to do with the combat.

Perjoss4045d ago

You could not be more wrong. On PC left click mouse controls both the movement of your character and the main attack, how is this ever a good idea? On consoles you can move and choose targets/attack at the same time. Add to that the tumble move and it totally changes how the game plays, specially for ranged classes like mage or demon hunter.

I've completed Diablo 3 both on PC (multiple times) and 360, its a great game on PC but it just plays so much better with a controller. Last time I checked there is no controller option on PC, so you're forced to use a bad control method.

The same applies for Torchlight, brilliant game on PC, but it just plays better on consoles.

" they changed it so drastically to make the controlls fit on a controller, that the game is soooo bad..."

The game is bad BECAUSE there is no controller support for PC.

Volkama4045d ago

Yet so many of those skills were designed around the mouse interface, and needed heavy reworking to fit the console versions.

The problem with Diablo was and a game like that is massively reliant on having good progression systems, but with loot and difficulty tiers flawed + limited activities available it simply lacked the hooks that would make it fun for any length of time.

Reaper of Souls really does address most of those problems well.

Chrischi19884045d ago

Ok, it seems nobody understands, what I was saying. I am comparing it to the old Diablo games, which were by far better. You guys seem like you only played D3, why what you say is sooo wrong.

Yes, the hate was for the Loot system, but the loot system directly interfered with the skill system. In D2 you could level up and put skillpoints in attacks you like, making one skill, which is normally stronger than another one, at the end weaker, because it had no real purpose for your class anymore. In D3 all skills were always a percentage of your DPS strong, no way to make one attack better. So at the end of the game, you had only your loot and the loot system itself also sucked. The game was bad and it was bad, because of Blizzard wanting it on a console, all the bad decisions for the game, were because of the console playability. I am not saying, that the console version turned out better, but that is because of the dumb decisions overall, they had to do, because they wanted to bring it to consoles. Everyone who actually played the old Diablo games and who I talked to, said the same thing. Of course these are console forums here...

brish4045d ago

@Chrischi1988
"The game was bad and it was bad, because of Blizzard wanting it on a console, all the bad decisions for the game, were because of the console playability."

Umm, no. The game was originally a PC only product and was ported to console later when console players asked for it. They had to completely redo the interface/controls for the console version because the PC interface/controls didn't work well with a controller.

D3 was a bad PC game because it was a bad PC game.

Chrischi19884045d ago (Edited 4045d ago )

No they did not. The whole system about only having 6 skills to choose from, is all for console gaming. They made it later for consoles, but they created the game with consoles in mind. Blizzard said so themselves. You can all disagree, but if nobody of you played D2, nobody can actually truly understand my point. People who only played D3, dont know, what the big differences were and of course would disagree with me, because they couldnt know any better. Almost every fan of D1 and D2 I know, agree with me. Blizzard just crapped on its fans, who supported D2 for over 10 years. You dont know the loot system from back then, you dont know the skill system from back then, if you knew, you would understand, what I am saying.

But since this is a console gamer board and PC hater board, only a few probably really played D2 to its full potential.

brish4045d ago

@Chrischi1988

Ummm, no.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...

--- from wikipedia ---
Development on Diablo III began in 2001 when Blizzard North was still in operation, and the game was first announced on June 28, 2008, at the Blizzard Worldwide Invitational in Paris, France.

...

On January 10, 2012, Blizzard community manager Bashiok tweeted "Yup. Josh Mosqueira is lead designer for the Diablo console project"[66] however a Blizzard spokesperson later clarified that Bashiok's tweet was only "intended as a confirmation that Blizzard is actively exploring the possibility of developing a console version of Diablo III," adding, "This is not a confirmation that Diablo III is coming to any console platform."
---

Volkama4045d ago (Edited 4045d ago )

Chrischi, the changes from Diablo 2 that you list have nothing to do with any compromises made for consoles.

The auction house, the loot, the progression were the major failings in D3, and they don't lend themselves to consoles any better than PC.

You can say that the 6 skill limitation was made with controllers in mind, but 6 isn't a number that maps particularly well to controllers and heaps of the skills themselves would not work with a controller either. The combat is very much made for the PC interface.

By all means, hate it for being different to D2. But stop making this tenuous link that the difference is because of the console versions. And stop claiming everyone that disagrees just hasn't played the Diablo games.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 4045d ago
3-4-54045d ago (Edited 4045d ago )

Blizzard PS4/XB1 game is going to sell a Ton.

* Could it be console version of Heroes of the Storm ?

Roccetarius4045d ago

Well, i have a sneaking suspicion about what it could be, but it'll still take at least 5 years to a decade before release.

disKinected4045d ago

After the awesomeness that was diablo 3 on consoles, I just can't wait for blizzard's next game on consoles. :D

KentBlake4045d ago

Whatever it is, I just hope it has a single player campaign.

Show all comments (23)
200°

FTC drops case against Microsoft’s Activision Blizzard deal

The FTC has officially dropped its case against Microsoft’s acquisition of Activision Blizzard.

Read Full Story >>
theverge.com
Create Report !X

Add Report

Reports

+ Updates (1)- Updates (1)

Updates

Changed from Pending to Approved
Community29d ago
slate9129d ago

The sweet smell of tax dollars burning

Killa7829d ago

From the unemployment this deal caused, no doubt.

Obscure_Observer29d ago

"The sweet smell of tax dollars burning"

They never stood a chance. It was a lost cause from the start. And yet, still, they´d decided to go ahead and double down on their bs to bleed the taxpayer even more.

dveio29d ago

The IRS demands 29bn USD in not paid taxes from Microsoft.

If we're talking bleeding.

1Victor29d ago (Edited 29d ago )

@slate: “ The sweet smell of tax dollars burning “

The smell of political donations endorsements under the table.
There I fixed it it for you
We all knew Microsoft plan of “10 years of all systems publishing “ and some of its supporters happy that after all the games would be “exclusive to Xbox “ now that things have changed and Microsoft got humbled by the lost of money from CoD going down from OVER A BILLI🤑N to
MILLI😩NS the sales failing of games that would released on PlayStation and be forced by INVESTORS asking for their M🤑NEY to grow faster than the next 10 years it is obvious that it would be a waste of money to continue this litigation.
Edit:@obscured: “ They never stood a chance. It was a lost cause from the start “

Same as your grievance stages.
Have you passed the bargaining stage yet ? Or are you still on the anger stage 🤣

slate9129d ago

I knew my singe bipartisan sentence would bring out the crazies. Thanks for the wall

Astrokis29d ago

Not sure if I’m disturbed or entertained but either way I hope you are alright

OtterX29d ago

I think they're convinced now that MS won't (and can't) withhold releases from conpeting platforms. MS on the street corner now like, "Who wants a taste?!"

PhillyDonJawn29d ago

I wont be too sure of that. Gotta wait and see till after these deals expire

OtterX29d ago

That's how it always starts, "I'll just work this street corner for a short while until I get caught up on my bills..."

Tacoboto29d ago

Oh yeah, they're totally gonna make Xbox exclusives again, with the hardware they're totally committed to selling and making available lol

raWfodog29d ago

As far as I'm aware, the only 'deal' that was discussed was for Call of Duty. Xbox had no obligation to make any of their other games multiplatform. They did that of their own accord.

OtterX29d ago (Edited 29d ago )

**btw, I'm talking about street food vendors, just in case there's any confusion!

https://external-content.du...

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 29d ago
Lightning7729d ago (Edited 29d ago )

I've seen videos and talk a online speculating MS long game. Some think that MS multiplat move is use to appease the FTC so they can buy more and is somehow a move that could get Sony to open up their platform. In other words them going third party and letting their games go everywhere. MS possible scheme and ulterior motives, speculated by Jeff Grubb is that putting Xbox store on PS via regulation Which would hurt PS buissness very badly because that 30% cut would be even less or not a cut at all. MS buys more because they're "playing nice" by opening up its platform to Epic store and steam which would force Apple and Sony to open up their ecosystem to other stores like MS.

If that's the case that'll mean as I said before, PS fans buying Cod on PS via MS store would give 100% maybe even 90% of the money being pocketed by MS while Sony's store front wanes when it comes to third party because guess what? MS is buying more third party and preying off the extreme ignorance of the FTC. Manipulation of the FTC and MS overtaking the PS store and customers

My thing is this. I know it's a opinion and speculation but why does Sony have to open up its store or force them to go multiplat? If they still believe in selling their freakin console then let them do it. If they want to provide the best games and the best content for its fans then let them do it!? Why because the competition is trash at selling games and consoles for 14 years now Sony has to change? MS using the ignorance of the FTC to overtake gaming as we know it?

Again it's just talk and opinion but man this seems very, very possible imo.

dveio29d ago

Well, at the time, I actually did think the FTC and CMA did a poor job in court. But also the judge.

Having said that - it is what it is.

If 75bn mergers in any industry ain't a threshold to deny them, then I don't know what is.

As far as your thoughts about other 3rd parties getting taken over in the future go:

I think publisher buyouts are off the list now. I think it would be reeeeally difficult for MS to win another trial try taking over any other publisher.

But smaller studios ... maybe.

However, right now I can't see studios out there advocating for a buyout from Microsoft.

That isn't to say an announcement of such couldn't drop on Monday already. Because we today know that Microsoft had approached a plethora of other studios in 2018 to 2021, such as IOI, CD Project, etc.

We'll see. And we can't do anything about it. It's up to trade commissions and then probably courts to decide.

Lightning7729d ago (Edited 29d ago )

"I think publisher buyouts are off the list now. I think it would be reeeeally difficult for MS to win another trial try taking over any other publisher."

That's the thing MS is ticking all the boxes by not have anything be exclusive so the CMA/FTC see that they're doing "fair practice" in games and content distribution. Which technically greenlits more aquisions or it makes it easier for acquisitions because MS is a mega publisher now.

"However, right now I can't see studios out there advocating for a buyout from Microsoft."

Hopefully not but them going multiplat could entice Studios to join MS because nothing is not longer exclusive which means more money for them, studio and teams.

We can't do nothing about it but Sony can. They can block xbox games on their console (lose that 30% cut) but Sony won't do that because that's money that will be lost and Sony runs a buissness. That's the only way to hurt or slow down Xbox.

I'm probably over thinking it as I do these things but it's something we shouldn't just ignore and be weary of MS motives here. I'm keeping an eye on them.

Rancegamerx29d ago

The idea that Microsoft is manipulating the FTC and forcing Sony to open its platform is silly and has no evidence to back it up. Microsoft’s multiplatform approach is 100% due to past failures and its laughable position in the gaming industry. Their best attempt was a fluke and a lie, brought on by Sony’s missteps and a poorly made machine that broke down too often.

Sony would never allow themselves to be "forced" to do anything; they control their platform and storefront perfectly fine without the need or desire to add an unnecessary Microsoft storefront. Even if, by some flaw on Sony’s part, Microsoft were able to introduce its store on PlayStation, Sony would adapt rather than collapse. Digital storefront competition already exists (Steam, Epic Games Store, Xbox Store), and PlayStation’s business won’t suddenly "wane."

Also, regulators like the FTC don’t operate on ignorance—they actively assess market behavior to prevent monopolies. Microsoft isn’t secretly overtaking gaming with some ultimate scheme. The industry might be changing or shifting (for the worse, in my opinion), but Sony will continue evolving based on market trends, not because of alleged schemes.

Gaming isn’t about one company "playing nice" or another being "forced" to change—it’s about making money with games, something Microsoft has yet to achieve in 25+ years.

Lightning7729d ago

"The idea that Microsoft is manipulating the FTC and forcing Sony to open its platform is silly and has no evidence to back it up."

That's why I said it was all speculation that's what Jeff Grubb opinion. I made that clear several times. You know what's funny? When Jim was in court ppl got mad at the FTC for protecting Jim Ryan instead of the consumer. Maybe he was right to worry about his business. Now look Releasing Xbox games on PS keeps MS studio an a float. Now Xbox games are all over PS now. Maybe Jim was onto something.

MS is still competing with Sony just in a very different way. The FTC back down mainly means they can buy more and MS next steps can proceed. We'll have to see what happens in the future but I wouldn't be so sure on your stance.

InUrFoxHole29d ago

@Lightning77
MS putting games everywhere is the most consumer friendly thing I've seen a game company do.

dveio29d ago

@InUrFox

What does "putting everywhere" actually mean?

This book has so many pages.

• Xbox was dying in revenue
• Regulators put a 10 year deal on CoD
• Microsoft had to give away the streaming
• Spencer himself only offered 3 yrs initially

And most importantly

• Again, Xbox was dying in revenue

Xbox have the benefit of their actual financial situation giving regulators and courts the impression they release games everywhere, what they actually do.

But for reasons they can't be proven guilty of anything in court.

I'm not judging, it's just what it is.

IF the Series generation would have developed differently and was much more successful, I don't hesitate any second to believe in what Spencer had originally planned to do:

• Make everything Xbox exclusive
• We today know that Spencer had also approached Sega, From Software, CD Project, Nintendo, and even Valve was on their list of buyouts.

MS are playing a card here everyone knows why they are doing it.

Putting Doom "everywhere", which even was it already before it got bought, ain't a MS thing.

It would had hurt them in many ways if they'd put it exclusively to Xbox.

But, no matter what - it is what it is.

Xbox bought themselves back into the game. And I think many people just don't have very fond feelings towards this behaviour, wether on corporate nor private levels.

Let's see how they'll run with it.

In 2030, but most importantly after regulations will have expired we will learn better.

Reaper22_29d ago (Edited 29d ago )

Seemed like a lost cause anyway. Microsoft gambled and it paid off big time. That's what you call a big boss move. Sony played a huge part in the success of that acquisition.

wesnytsfs29d ago

Bout time. Pointless from the start.

Show all comments (26)
60°

Blizzard, 2K Games And More Formally Return To PAX East

PAX EAST has officially confirmed that Blizzard and 2K Games are amongst the bigger names attending the show. This would be two of the bigger names to return to live U.S. shows since the Covid Pandemic.

Create Report !X

Add Report

Reports

+ Updates (1)- Updates (1)

Updates

Changed from Pending to Approved
Community67d ago
elJoker566d ago

Good to hear. Past couple of years the show floor is getting smaller & smaller, with more space everywhere. Food truck trucks made their way on to the expo hall floor last year. Haven't seen that since 2012.

Garethvk66d ago (Edited 66d ago )

We stopped going to PAX West and let local team cover it. We could not justify airfare, rental car, food, hotel, etc for indies.

80°

Overwatch and World of Warcraft Mourn the Loss of a Legend

The gaming world is in mourning following the unexpected passing of longtime Blizzard art director Bill Petras at the age of 54. Bill Petras began his Blizzard journey in 1997, earning his first credits on the groundbreaking real-time strategy game StarCraft.

Read Full Story >>
insightgirl.co.uk
Create Report !X

Add Report

Reports

✔ Fixed
Add/remove tag
Remove game and platform tags as this story isn't about them add Bill Petras tag
cl198376d ago WhoDisagree(0)Agree(0)
✔ Fixed
Bad Editing
Fix truncated sentence: A cornerstone in the
Knushwood Butt76d ago WhoDisagree(0)Agree(0)
+ Updates (2)- Updates (2)

Updates

Changed from Pending to Approved
Community75d ago
Changed: content
Bahdnerd76d ago