Diablo III coming to 360

[QUOTE="Blue-Sky"]As if 360 has Diablo fanbase...FunkyHeadHunter

True..Unlike PC gamers...Console gamers have tons of choices for "fanbase"..Keep playing your rehashed Diablo games that do not really appeal to consolers..lol...PCgamers a cute like puppydogs..;)

Hmmm...

[QUOTE="Blue-Sky"]As if 360 has Diablo fanbase...FunkyHeadHunter

True..Unlike PC gamers...Console gamers have tons of choices for "fanbase"..Keep playing your rehashed Diablo games that do not really appeal to consolers..lol...PCgamers a cute like puppydogs..;)

I would laugh right in the hermits faces if it went to consoles.TMontana1004

Why should hermits even care? I say port as many games to consoles as you want. The PC is safe and will carry on. The consoles will all die eventually and be replaced by next generation hardware.

Whether a console gets a game that is initially released for the PC doesn't matter at all. The war seems to be between the PS3 and the 360.

I think that a game like Diablo III would do well on consoles. Starcraft II however would suck on a oonsole.

[QUOTE="Stonin"][QUOTE="WillieBeamish"]

For all you Hermits who bashed my threads about how dumb it would be if Blizzard didn't port D3 to its true platforms of choice, the 360 & PS3, I now laugh at you.

While not confirmed, the fact that Vivendi stands to pocket an additional HALF A BILLION DOLLARS on a console port, do you honestly think Blizzard has ANY SAY in whether or not it gets the port?

Veterngamer

I hope they do port it....so I can laugh at how bad it looks, the lack of mods, its high price and so you can enjoy what PC gamers have enjoyed for decades.

You've been playing it for decades?? OMG, can i borrow your copy?

Err I was talking about the Diablo series rather than this specific game ... and yes, I have :).

[QUOTE="Supafly1"][QUOTE="WillieBeamish"]

For all you Hermits who bashed my threads about how dumb it would be if Blizzard didn't port D3 to its true platforms of choice, the 360 & PS3, I now laugh at you.

While not confirmed, the fact that Vivendi stands to pocket an additional HALF A BILLION DOLLARS on a console port, do you honestly think Blizzard has ANY SAY in whether or not it gets the port?

WillieBeamish

Yes they do because without them the game wouldn't made and Vivendi wouldn't want to piss off Blizzard staff because WoW is making such an income for them.

You don't seem to get it. Vivendi OWNS Blizzard. They OWN the WoW, Diablo & Starcraft franchises. That means they can do whatever they want with them. If they want one of their other devs to do a console port, they can do it. You don't seem to grasp that they are in the business world, not fanboyland.

ok. And Blizzard makes enough money that they could theoretically buy themselves out of Vivendi.

Blizzard made more money last year than the ENTIRETY of Activision. Activision posted a revenue of $1.5 billion. Blizzard makes $100 million per month on SUBSCRIPTIONS ALONE. So, do the math. That is $1.2 billion of subscriptions. Plus, the revenue from Burning Crusade, which was the fastest selling game of all time until the Halo 3 launch. Math suggests that Blizzard is worth more than 50% of Activision Blizzard. They could technically buy themselves out of that company if they felt so inclined.

I would laugh right in the hermits faces if it went to consoles.TMontana1004

The first thing you notice when hermits claim something is superior, is the fact that they find it necessary to point it out. You don't see Ferrari owners rolling their window down to tell you that your toyota is a piece of trash. I guess they do when their Ferrari is really a 20 year old Fiero with a body kit.

The first thing you notice when hermits claim something is superior, is the fact that they find it necessary to point it out. You don't see Ferrari owners rolling their window down to tell you that your toyota is a piece of trash.WillieBeamish

You don't see owners of cheap toyota claiming their little car is better than Ferrari and you don't see those toyota owners driving around Ferrari's owner backyard, destroying the garden and throwing out trash on his grass. So no wonder Ferrari owners don't have to bother themselves with toyota guys. Trust me, if console fans would leave us and our games alone we wouldn't give a damn about you.

ok. And Blizzard makes enough money that they could theoretically buy themselves out of Vivendi.

Blizzard made more money last year than the ENTIRETY of Activision. Activision posted a revenue of $1.5 billion. Blizzard makes $100 million per month on SUBSCRIPTIONS ALONE. So, do the math. That is $1.2 billion of subscriptions. Plus, the revenue from Burning Crusade, which was the fastest selling game of all time until the Halo 3 launch. Math suggests that Blizzard is worth more than 50% of Activision Blizzard. They could technically buy themselves out of that company if they felt so inclined.

horrowhip

Where do you get this drivel from? It behooves no company to be 'owned' by any other company if they could afford not to be. If Blizzard could buy themselves out, there would be no reason for them not to. But it doesn't work that way. In order to buy themselves out, the stakeholders would have to agree to SELL THEIR STAKE. Just like if someone off the street wanted to buy my house. Even if he offered me double what its worth, it doesn't mean he can buy it out from under me.

You have a lot to learn about business before debating the subject.

I don't know... Vivendi and Blizzard may want to avoid the PC-gamer hissyfit factor. They know that if they put a popular PC game on consoles, PC gamers will throw a tantrum and piss and moan and a lot of the most pigheaded ones will eventually turn their backs on the game and the company because it isn't just theirs any more. Shafftehr

no, Blizzard just wants to get the game out.

They take enough time as is. Now imagine how much work it would take to port their engine to the 360, port the game, and then rework everything to actually get the game to play well(gameplay wise).

Blizzard is busy enough. 4 games currently in production. They will be finishing all of those before they divert resources to port anything, and by that time they will be wanting to work on NEW games, not port old games.

So, what is a better business decision? Release their existing games that are pretty much guarranteed 5 million sales as fast as possible, or port the LEAST successful of all their franchises to a console where it doesn't have a proven userbase at the cost of making all 4 games take LONGER to develop?

The comment refered to in the article came from an "anonymous Blizzard rep." And he said that a port to 360 would have 10 million "guarranteed" sales. Despite the fact that on the PC, Diablo never even broke 10 million when you combine the sales of Diablo AND Diablo 2... And, that would be assuming a nearly 50% attach rate which would NEVER happen. And that is on a non-proven userbase that has yet to prove that they would even be INTERESTED in an Isometric RPG.

So.... how full of **** is this rumor? I'd say about 100%.

[QUOTE="horrowhip"]

ok. And Blizzard makes enough money that they could theoretically buy themselves out of Vivendi.

Blizzard made more money last year than the ENTIRETY of Activision. Activision posted a revenue of $1.5 billion. Blizzard makes $100 million per month on SUBSCRIPTIONS ALONE. So, do the math. That is $1.2 billion of subscriptions. Plus, the revenue from Burning Crusade, which was the fastest selling game of all time until the Halo 3 launch. Math suggests that Blizzard is worth more than 50% of Activision Blizzard. They could technically buy themselves out of that company if they felt so inclined.

WillieBeamish

Where do you get this drivel from? It behooves no company to be 'owned' by any other company if they could afford not to be. If Blizzard could buy themselves out, there would be no reason for them not to. But it doesn't work that way. In order to buy themselves out, the stakeholders would have to agree to SELL THEIR STAKE. Just like if someone off the street wanted to buy my house. Even if he offered me double what its worth, it doesn't mean he can buy it out from under me.

You have a lot to learn about business before debating the subject.

And you just have a lot to learn.

I don't know... Vivendi and Blizzard may want to avoid the PC-gamer hissyfit factor. They know that if they put a popular PC game on consoles, PC gamers will throw a tantrum and piss and moan and a lot of the most pigheaded ones will eventually turn their backs on the game and the company because it isn't just theirs any more. Shafftehr

Oh don't be so sour. Just because you are looking forward to Fallout 3 doesn't mean that fans of the old series haven't got very valid arguments as well :P.

[QUOTE="horrowhip"]

ok. And Blizzard makes enough money that they could theoretically buy themselves out of Vivendi.

Blizzard made more money last year than the ENTIRETY of Activision. Activision posted a revenue of $1.5 billion. Blizzard makes $100 million per month on SUBSCRIPTIONS ALONE. So, do the math. That is $1.2 billion of subscriptions. Plus, the revenue from Burning Crusade, which was the fastest selling game of all time until the Halo 3 launch. Math suggests that Blizzard is worth more than 50% of Activision Blizzard. They could technically buy themselves out of that company if they felt so inclined.

WillieBeamish

Where do you get this drivel from? It behooves no company to be 'owned' by any other company if they could afford not to be. If Blizzard could buy themselves out, there would be no reason for them not to. But it doesn't work that way. In order to buy themselves out, the stakeholders would have to agree to SELL THEIR STAKE. Just like if someone off the street wanted to buy my house. Even if he offered me double what its worth, it doesn't mean he can buy it out from under me.

You have a lot to learn about business before debating the subject.

the reason that they don't is because Vivendi has proven that they will allow Blizzard to basically remain independent without needing to do as much work from a financial point of view.

Blizzard publishes, develops, distributes, and advertises for their own games. The ONLY thing that Vivendi does for them is handle the bottom level financial work. Blizzard has no reason to leave because they are essentially independent as is.

I would laugh right in the hermits faces if it went to consoles.TMontana1004

If so well your own motives and attitude is more questionable or bizzare than that of the wildest fanboy.

[QUOTE="Shafftehr"]I don't know... Vivendi and Blizzard may want to avoid the PC-gamer hissyfit factor. They know that if they put a popular PC game on consoles, PC gamers will throw a tantrum and piss and moan and a lot of the most pigheaded ones will eventually turn their backs on the game and the company because it isn't just theirs any more. horrowhip

no, Blizzard just wants to get the game out.

They take enough time as is. Now imagine how much work it would take to port their engine to the 360, port the game, and then rework everything to actually get the game to play well(gameplay wise).

Blizzard is busy enough. 4 games currently in production. They will be finishing all of those before they divert resources to port anything, and by that time they will be wanting to work on NEW games, not port old games.

So, what is a better business decision? Release their existing games that are pretty much guarranteed 5 million sales as fast as possible, or port the LEAST successful of all their franchises to a console where it doesn't have a proven userbase at the cost of making all 4 games take LONGER to develop?

The comment refered to in the article came from an "anonymous Blizzard rep." And he said that a port to 360 would have 10 million "guarranteed" sales. Despite the fact that on the PC, Diablo never even broke 10 million when you combine the sales of Diablo AND Diablo 2... And, that would be assuming a nearly 50% attach rate which would NEVER happen. And that is on a non-proven userbase that has yet to prove that they would even be INTERESTED in an Isometric RPG.

So.... how full of **** is this rumor? I'd say about 100%.

First of all, your facts are skewed. There are almost 40 million PS3/360 owners as of TODAY. How is 10 million D3 copies sold a 50% attach rate? Its 25%, and that is if the game came out today. End of this year, expect the PS3/360 installed base to be closer to 50 million, and so-on.

Secondly, you act as if Blizzard would be forced at gunpoint to port the game. Why would Activision even WANT Blizzard to port the game? Why wouldn't they want to use a developer already experienced in programming consoles to do the ports? Furthermore, its a known fact that the Xbox 360's dev kit makes it damned easy to port PC games over to it. To top it off, the Diablo 3 engine isn't exactly a tour de force when it comes to sophistication.

Your arguments are weak.

[QUOTE="TMontana1004"]I would laugh right in the hermits faces if it went to consoles.WillieBeamish

The first thing you notice when hermits claim something is superior, is the fact that they find it necessary to point it out. You don't see Ferrari owners rolling their window down to tell you that your toyota is a piece of trash. I guess they do when their Ferrari is really a 20 year old Fiero with a body kit.

:|

Now correct me or is the whole purpose of this thread - in your own logic - pratically telling a ferrri owner that their automobile is wore than a toyota, based on no facts

[QUOTE="horrowhip"]

ok. And Blizzard makes enough money that they could theoretically buy themselves out of Vivendi.

Blizzard made more money last year than the ENTIRETY of Activision. Activision posted a revenue of $1.5 billion. Blizzard makes $100 million per month on SUBSCRIPTIONS ALONE. So, do the math. That is $1.2 billion of subscriptions. Plus, the revenue from Burning Crusade, which was the fastest selling game of all time until the Halo 3 launch. Math suggests that Blizzard is worth more than 50% of Activision Blizzard. They could technically buy themselves out of that company if they felt so inclined.

WillieBeamish

Where do you get this drivel from? It behooves no company to be 'owned' by any other company if they could afford not to be. If Blizzard could buy themselves out, there would be no reason for them not to. But it doesn't work that way. In order to buy themselves out, the stakeholders would have to agree to SELL THEIR STAKE. Just like if someone off the street wanted to buy my house. Even if he offered me double what its worth, it doesn't mean he can buy it out from under me.

You have a lot to learn about business before debating the subject.

TC, I have one word for you:

UNCONFIRMED

>_>

[QUOTE="horrowhip"]

[QUOTE="Shafftehr"]I don't know... Vivendi and Blizzard may want to avoid the PC-gamer hissyfit factor. They know that if they put a popular PC game on consoles, PC gamers will throw a tantrum and piss and moan and a lot of the most pigheaded ones will eventually turn their backs on the game and the company because it isn't just theirs any more. WillieBeamish

no, Blizzard just wants to get the game out.

They take enough time as is. Now imagine how much work it would take to port their engine to the 360, port the game, and then rework everything to actually get the game to play well(gameplay wise).

Blizzard is busy enough. 4 games currently in production. They will be finishing all of those before they divert resources to port anything, and by that time they will be wanting to work on NEW games, not port old games.

So, what is a better business decision? Release their existing games that are pretty much guarranteed 5 million sales as fast as possible, or port the LEAST successful of all their franchises to a console where it doesn't have a proven userbase at the cost of making all 4 games take LONGER to develop?

The comment refered to in the article came from an "anonymous Blizzard rep." And he said that a port to 360 would have 10 million "guarranteed" sales. Despite the fact that on the PC, Diablo never even broke 10 million when you combine the sales of Diablo AND Diablo 2... And, that would be assuming a nearly 50% attach rate which would NEVER happen. And that is on a non-proven userbase that has yet to prove that they would even be INTERESTED in an Isometric RPG.

So.... how full of **** is this rumor? I'd say about 100%.

First of all, your facts are skewed. There are almost 40 million PS3/360 owners as of TODAY. How is 10 million D3 copies sold a 50% attach rate? Its 25%, and that is if the game came out today. End of this year, expect the PS3/360 installed base to be closer to 50 million, and so-on.

Secondly, you act as if Blizzard would be forced at gunpoint to port the game. Why would Activision even WANT Blizzard to port the game? Why wouldn't they want to use a developer already experienced in programming consoles to do the ports? Furthermore, its a known fact that the Xbox 360's dev kit makes it damned easy to port PC games over to it. To top it off, the Diablo 3 engine isn't exactly a tour de force when it comes to sophistication.

Your arguments are weak.

the rumor is a 360 port.

PS3 port will never happen. To many resources required to porting the engine and assets. Blizzard wouldn't do that. 360 port is less complicated and therefore the only port plausible.

Blizzard has said recently that everything done with a Blizzard IP will be done internally. They refuse to outsource. Any console ports will be handled by Blizzard. But they are busy enough as is.

First of all, your facts are skewed. There are almost 40 million PS3/360 owners as of TODAY. How is 10 million D3 copies sold a 50% attach rate? Its 25%, and that is if the game came out today. End of this year, expect the PS3/360 installed base to be closer to 50 million, and so-on.WillieBeamish

So? How many console games sell 10mln? Heck..no port from PC has ever passed even 3mlns on consoles, let alone a console unfriendly game like Diablo3. THere's no way it would sell more than 2-3mlns tops and those would be mostly cannibalized PC sales.

It makes no real sense financialy to port Diablo3

Secondly, you act as if Blizzard would be forced at gunpoint to port the game. Why would Activision even WANT Blizzard to port the game? Why wouldn't they want to use a developer already experienced in programming consoles to do the ports? Furthermore, its a known fact that the Xbox 360's dev kit makes it damned easy to port PC games over to it. To top it off, the Diablo 3 engine isn't exactly a tour de force when it comes to sophistication.

Your arguments are weak.

WillieBeamish

those arguments are weak, not only Activision can't force Blizzard to do anything, but Blizzard also won't give their baby to anyone else

Bassicaly the 10mln figure proves the rumor is complete BS and has no ground in reality

the rumor is a 360 port.

PS3 port will never happen. To many resources required to porting the engine and assets. Blizzard wouldn't do that. 360 port is less complicated and therefore the only port plausible.

You also completely missed the point of my arguement.

horrowhip

[QUOTE="horrowhip"]

the rumor is a 360 port.

PS3 port will never happen. To many resources required to porting the engine and assets. Blizzard wouldn't do that. 360 port is less complicated and therefore the only port plausible.

You also completely missed the point of my arguement.

AdrianWerner

PS3 port will never ever happen.

Blizzard already said that the primary condition for them to even consider a port is the least amount of effort to port. PS3 would mean a complete rewrite of the engine and assets. Too much work. Would never happen.

[QUOTE="WillieBeamish"][QUOTE="horrowhip"]

ok. And Blizzard makes enough money that they could theoretically buy themselves out of Vivendi.

Blizzard made more money last year than the ENTIRETY of Activision. Activision posted a revenue of $1.5 billion. Blizzard makes $100 million per month on SUBSCRIPTIONS ALONE. So, do the math. That is $1.2 billion of subscriptions. Plus, the revenue from Burning Crusade, which was the fastest selling game of all time until the Halo 3 launch. Math suggests that Blizzard is worth more than 50% of Activision Blizzard. They could technically buy themselves out of that company if they felt so inclined.

horrowhip

Where do you get this drivel from? It behooves no company to be 'owned' by any other company if they could afford not to be. If Blizzard could buy themselves out, there would be no reason for them not to. But it doesn't work that way. In order to buy themselves out, the stakeholders would have to agree to SELL THEIR STAKE. Just like if someone off the street wanted to buy my house. Even if he offered me double what its worth, it doesn't mean he can buy it out from under me.

You have a lot to learn about business before debating the subject.

the reason that they don't is because Vivendi has proven that they will allow Blizzard to basically remain independent without needing to do as much work from a financial point of view.

Blizzard publishes, develops, distributes, and advertises for their own games. The ONLY thing that Vivendi does for them is handle the bottom level financial work. Blizzard has no reason to leave because they are essentially independent as is.

Dude, please just stop.

There is no business case where porting Diablo to the consoles could be bad. At most, it would cost the publisher $10-20 million (being very generous) to port the game to the two consoles. If the game only sold 200,000 copies across both platforms, they've ALREADY made a profit.

NO BUSINESS CASE... sorry.. NEXT Argument Please.

Dude, please just stop.

There is no business case where porting Diablo to the consoles could be bad. At most, it would cost the publisher $10-20 million (being very generous) to port the game to the two consoles. If the game only sold 200,000 copies across both platforms, they've ALREADY made a profit.

NO BUSINESS CASE... sorry.. NEXT Argument Please.

WillieBeamish

UT3.

Multiplat, previous had a huge fanbase and following, great legacy of sucess.

It was a massive commercial failure.

-

Fact is dont snub the vast majority people who are going to buy your game, or comprimise the game design at their expense for a multiplatform title.

Because fact is the people who would have bought the game, know better not to, if its worse than its predacessors, because of compromising design for other platforms.

I have bad news for Hermits...

Not sure if you've seen the storm of Diablo 3 threads in the forums since I started the first thread, but guess what? Industry types tend to notice when there is a lot of uproar regarding highly hyped games... when they see the whirlwind about console gamers beliving there should be a Diablo 3 port, and they see all the hermits fanning the flames, all that the devs/publishers see are dollar signs..

So keep up the hate, hermits, its only fueling the fire of putting Diablo 3 on the consoles!

[QUOTE="WillieBeamish"]

Dude, please just stop.

There is no business case where porting Diablo to the consoles could be bad. At most, it would cost the publisher $10-20 million (being very generous) to port the game to the two consoles. If the game only sold 200,000 copies across both platforms, they've ALREADY made a profit.

NO BUSINESS CASE... sorry.. NEXT Argument Please.

skrat_01

UT3.

Multiplat, previous had a huge fanbase and following, great legacy of sucess.

It was a massive commercial failure.

-

Fact is dont snub the vast majority people who are going to buy your game, or comprimise the game design at their expense for a multiplatform title.

Because fact is the people who would have bought the game, know better not to, if its worse than its predacessors.

so you're saying that UT3 is a commercial failure? I don't hear Epic complaining about sales.

And why do you believe anybody has snubbed UT3? Not sure what your argument is.

I have bad news for Hermits...

Not sure if you've seen the storm of Diablo 3 threads in the forums since I started the first thread, but guess what? Industry types tend to notice when there is a lot of uproar regarding highly hyped games... when they see the whirlwind about console gamers beliving there should be a Diablo 3 port, and they see all the hermits fanning the flames, all that the devs/publishers see are dollar signs..

So keep up the hate, hermits, its only fueling the fire of putting Diablo 3 on the consoles!

WillieBeamish

Besides Blizz thinks about console development, hell World of Warcraft: Molton Core is console exclusive..

Since Diablo 2 has never come to consoles, I say the chances are nill.dgsag

The logic used to draw your conclusion is seriously, seriously busted.

[QUOTE="dgsag"]Since Diablo 2 has never come to consoles, I say the chances are nill.WillieBeamish

The logic used to draw your conclusion is seriously, seriously busted.

Explain why they haven't ported Diablo 2 then, oh smart one. :roll:

For all you Hermits who bashed my threads about how dumb it would be if Blizzard didn't port D3 to its true platforms of choice, the 360 & PS3, I now laugh at you.

While not confirmed, the fact that Vivendi stands to pocket an additional HALF A BILLION DOLLARS on a console port, do you honestly think Blizzard has ANY SAY in whether or not it gets the port?

WillieBeamish

Its true Platforms of choice? This is Blizzard. True platform of choice is PC.

[QUOTE="skrat_01"][QUOTE="WillieBeamish"]

Dude, please just stop.

There is no business case where porting Diablo to the consoles could be bad. At most, it would cost the publisher $10-20 million (being very generous) to port the game to the two consoles. If the game only sold 200,000 copies across both platforms, they've ALREADY made a profit.

NO BUSINESS CASE... sorry.. NEXT Argument Please.

WillieBeamish

UT3.

Multiplat, previous had a huge fanbase and following, great legacy of sucess.

It was a massive commercial failure.

-

Fact is dont snub the vast majority people who are going to buy your game, or comprimise the game design at their expense for a multiplatform title.

Because fact is the people who would have bought the game, know better not to, if its worse than its predacessors.

so you're saying that UT3 is a commercial failure? I don't hear Epic complaining about sales.

And why do you believe anybody has snubbed UT3? Not sure what your argument is.

SERIOUSLY?

Mark Rein released a statement on how poor UT3 sales were, its entire PC fanbase has ignored it sticking to 2004, its console sales have been so poor it doesent even have an online community.

I BOUGHT the Collectors Edition on release, and there are less than half as many people playing UT3 than UT2004.
Im a UT fan and I, as the community know better to stick to 04 - which I still do.

[QUOTE="horrowhip"][QUOTE="WillieBeamish"][QUOTE="horrowhip"]

ok. And Blizzard makes enough money that they could theoretically buy themselves out of Vivendi.

Blizzard made more money last year than the ENTIRETY of Activision. Activision posted a revenue of $1.5 billion. Blizzard makes $100 million per month on SUBSCRIPTIONS ALONE. So, do the math. That is $1.2 billion of subscriptions. Plus, the revenue from Burning Crusade, which was the fastest selling game of all time until the Halo 3 launch. Math suggests that Blizzard is worth more than 50% of Activision Blizzard. They could technically buy themselves out of that company if they felt so inclined.

WillieBeamish

Where do you get this drivel from? It behooves no company to be 'owned' by any other company if they could afford not to be. If Blizzard could buy themselves out, there would be no reason for them not to. But it doesn't work that way. In order to buy themselves out, the stakeholders would have to agree to SELL THEIR STAKE. Just like if someone off the street wanted to buy my house. Even if he offered me double what its worth, it doesn't mean he can buy it out from under me.

You have a lot to learn about business before debating the subject.

the reason that they don't is because Vivendi has proven that they will allow Blizzard to basically remain independent without needing to do as much work from a financial point of view.

Blizzard publishes, develops, distributes, and advertises for their own games. The ONLY thing that Vivendi does for them is handle the bottom level financial work. Blizzard has no reason to leave because they are essentially independent as is.

Dude, please just stop.

There is no business case where porting Diablo to the consoles could be bad. At most, it would cost the publisher $10-20 million (being very generous) to port the game to the two consoles. If the game only sold 200,000 copies across both platforms, they've ALREADY made a profit.

NO BUSINESS CASE... sorry.. NEXT Argument Please.

um... if they take longer to release their games, they are taking a hit financially. They aren't in some desperate situation to sell copies. All they need to do is release the games. 4 games as fast as Blizzard can go is better than 4 games taking longer because of a port... They can make more money in the long run by not wasting time on a port. From Blizzard's perspective it will be more profitable to release more games to appeal to their already proven several million strong fanbase on the PC, than take a longer time to release games and divide that userbase. The overall sales probably won't increase on Diablo 3 by a port. And if they DID increase, they would increase by 1 million maximum. The game will sell regardless of the platform. They aren't going to increase their sales by porting to the 360 because they game will run on any computer. All they would do is divide the userbase, make less money from the 360 versions that they sell(MS gets a cut rather than everything going straight to Blizzard), and take more time.

So either, release 1-2 years FASTER for all 4 games and get 1 million fewer sales on Diablo 3. OR, take longer, make less money per copy(360 would take some from the PC but per copy less profit is made) thereby taking away a chunk of the advantage that the possible increase in sales would give, divide the userbase base and get 1 million more sales...

A port would take significant resources on Blizzard's part. They would need to port the engine, assets, and game. And then, they would need to rework Battle.net to work on the 360(Blizzard wouldn't release without Battle.net). That is a team of 30-40 people working for about a year and a half to port the game... A team that could have been used elsewhere.

so you're saying that UT3 is a commercial failure? I don't hear Epic complaining about sales.

WillieBeamish

they've been crying Piracy quite a bit, from what I've heard.

Err... not confirmed, that boxart is from the Kotaku article which said it's possible but Blizzard has no plans at the moment...

http://kotaku.com/5022230/yes-a-console-diablo-iii-is-theoretically-possible

EDIT: Also, part of the contract with Activision was that Activision is not allowed to force Blizzard to do.. anything.

thrones

"Can't see Mii support and friend codes really fitting with the whole gates to hell thing."

Ha...pretty funny article.

Thats like saying WoW will now be ported over to any console. I'm pretty sure if Blizzard does not want it on anything but a PC, it will only stay on a PC. Also, isn't it part of the Blizzard-Activision contract that states Activision is not allowed to force Blizzard into doing anything at all? (i.e. porting games)

get real, man.

[QUOTE="L1qu1dSword"]

lol ok whatever but im not Willie. I love Diablo2 and never said a bad thing about three. so whats this nonsense about me hating something i cant have? basically i want it on a console so i dont have to buy a new PC. one way or another though i will get this game.

AdrianWerner

hehe im not even sure what willie was saying at that point. i mean i dont think he hates d3 either. but then again im not sure.

Thats like saying WoW will now be ported over to any console. I'm pretty sure if Blizzard does not want it on anything but a PC, it will only stay on a PC. Also, isn't it part of the Blizzard-Activision contract that states Activision is not allowed to force Blizzard into doing anything at all? (i.e. porting games)

get real, man.

-Karmum-

Blizzard may as well be independent. They publish, develop, distribute, advertise and hype their own games. Them being a part of any other company is merely a formality. For all intensive purposes, Blizzard is independent.

[QUOTE="WillieBeamish"][QUOTE="st1ka"][QUOTE="Pinkyimp"]

you know what..

i want this to go to consoles..

to show what crappy uncretive stupid games they have had in the past 5 years... and they should get a taste of the best pc has to offer..and show them that there games are uninspired crap..

i want this to go to consoles..

Pinkyimp

why so serious?

I know, right? Its sad that some people have this inate animosity toward people who enjoy different gaming platforms. Its like their trust has been violated or something.

I prefer this type of game on a console, and some people act like I just cussed out their mother.

im not mad at all..

im just saying..if you want this to go to consoles so bad..then bliz should...i have no problem with that..the supeior version is PC anyway..so even if consoles do get it..im not going to cry in a corner, its a game...get over it..even if it does move pc gamers know which platform is MUCH better suited for this game.

then stop acting as if you were

I don't think it would be worth the effort, when you consider that not only will it cost to port it ot consoles, but implementing the entire battle.net type system into XBL, as well as server costs, would not be worth it in the end, when they have to set it up for both PC and 360. Also, the people who say it would work so well with controllers, probably never played Diablo 2, it just doesn't work, targeting and all that does not make sense.

Also, like previously stated, Blizzard games are not demanding, if you have an older PC, you can probably run it on low or medium, so don't worry so much, and buy it for the platform that it was meant for, not the platform that might recieve sloppy seconds. (btw, I console game more then I game on PC, but I enjoy both platforms for different purposes, I would never play Diablo 3 on a console)

[QUOTE="st1ka"][QUOTE="Pinkyimp"]

you know what..

i want this to go to consoles..

to show what crappy uncretive stupid games they have had in the past 5 years... and they should get a taste of the best pc has to offer..and show them that there games are uninspired crap..

i want this to go to consoles..

WillieBeamish

why so serious?

I know, right? Its sad that some people have this inate animosity toward people who enjoy different gaming platforms. Its like their trust has been violated or something.

I prefer this type of game on a console, and some people act like I just cussed out their mother.

....You're embarrassing. You'd enjoy Diablo more on a console? I really don't know what to say. I'm speechless here.:| Dude, quit gaming.....