Blizzard Not Rushing To Console Development

[Andy Chalk]

Blizzard Not Rushing To Console Development

Activision [http://www.blizzard.com] has given the studio the capability to move to console development pretty much whenever it wants, but there's no great hurry to do so.

Morhaime told GamesIndustry [http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/morhaime-being-first-won-t-guarantee-console-success] that he's not concerned about the possibility of another company being the first to become "the lead MMO provider on consoles," saying that being first isn't nearly as important as the quality of the games themselves. "I think that it comes down to games, so I'm not too worried about being first to make a claim or first to take a market share," he said.

"Actually Blizzard has rarely been the first to create a genre, unless you consider Diablo [http://www.blizzard.com/us/diablo/] a new genre, nobody said that at the time, they all said it wasn't new," Morhaime continued. "For us we're looking for what is the next thing, what is the next step, what is the next evolution and I think that it's not really dependent on platform."

And while Blizzard has achieved phenomenal levels of success as a PC publisher, Morhaime added that its partnership with powerhouse publisher Activision will greatly facilitate an inevitable entry into the console market. "Activision will have a strong business on consoles so whenever Blizzard decides to go and enter the console market we have this huge infrastructure of people that is already successful in the console business, so I don't think we're losing anything," he said.


Permalink

 

[Amnestic]

consider Diablo a new genre

Isometric action RPG isn't it? Was Diablo really the first?

publisher Activision will greatly facilitate an inevitable entry into the console market.

Starcraft: Ghost please. Was originally intended as a console game before it was quietly scrapped and made non-existant iirc. Shame really, I really liked the look of it.

 

[John Funk]

Diablo was the first game to require spam-clicking of THAT magnitude, perhaps?

 

[Amnestic]

Diablo was the first game to require spam-clicking of THAT magnitude, perhaps?

You're not wrong. Mice were forever crippled after playing Diablo.

 

[rougeknife]

Vivendi profits.

I cannot in good conscience buy any game that benefits them anyway.

 

[Amnestic]

Vivendi profits.

I cannot in good conscience buy any game that benefits them anyway.

Care to explain why?

 

[Danny Ocean]

I don't mind. It's not like there isn't a load of developers saying, "We're in no great rush to move to PC."

 

[Jursa]

I'm quite interested in how they intend to implement spam clicking diablo into consoles... They'll either have to dumb down the PC version, making the game more shitty, or give auto-attack to the consoles, which kinda kills the whole gameplay of diablo. And while RTS have indeed moved to consoles. Multitasking strategy games with a consoles is a wee bit more(a hell of a lot more) difficult and a lot less intuitive. The reason they had unbelievable PC success is because they made games, MADE for the PC, giving you the feel of control. Games that are made for PC and Consoles that are simply begging for more than 6 possible button variations. The reason blizzard is not rushing to console development the way I see it is because of what they are now. What they are is a colossus of great games, conversion might give them an unnecessary 180 degree shift.

 

[Amnestic]

I'm quite interested in how they intend to implement spam clicking diablo into consoles...

Remember quick time events? How you'd have to button mash? Yeah, just imagine that...except doing it all game. ;D

 

[John Funk]

Games made for the PC often don't translate well to the consoles. Anyone remember Starcraft 64? One of the best PC games of all time turned into a raging steaming pile of guano.

(This can sometimes go the other way around, too. GTA San Andreas doesn't control all that well on PC, you'll find)

But I think if they go to console, they'll be developing a game for console - not porting it.

 

[TsunamiWombat]

Make Starcraft Ghost, damnit!

*sighs, sits and waits to start working*need moneys to buy games...need moneys to buy games...

 

[ElArabDeMagnifico]

I don't think Blizzard has rushed to do anything - slow and steady for them.

 

[bittman]

They don't take their time taking your money though.

But yeah, I still can't see MMO's being considerably successful on consoles yet. And that's not because I think it's impossible to do, but rather there is little to base off. World Of Warcraft was not the first MMORPG, and because of that they learned a lot from mistakes of others and then, naturally, a lot more from their own mistakes.

Console games also typically have a smaller longevity in the press/stores than PC games, when an MMO relies heavily on longevity.

 

[rougeknife]

Vivendi profits.

I cannot in good conscience buy any game that benefits them anyway.

Care to explain why?

How much of a bile rant do you want?

In brief:
Want a list of good developers that tanked or where even 'liquidated' after VU acquired Serria? The fantastic IP's that where raped for all their worth, then left dead and dying in the gutter? Hell, I might as well also mention that VALVe sued them in order to become independent; what if they hadn?t?

There are a lot of people that dislike and outright hate Vivendi, and with good reason. They didn't endear themselves to anyone, and to be blunt, I fucking hate them. Since 05' have never bought a game they have their finger in since.

Over the years, I've become bitter, jaded, pessimistic as all hell and it has been in no short measure due to these bastards.

EDIT: Oh, and another thing. I kind of consider it childish now, but i turned down a good, secure and well paying job from Veolia Environment. Why? Because Vivendi and Veolia used to be part of the same company. Thank god my current job was a better offer.

 

[Andy Chalk]

Isometric action RPG isn't it? Was Diablo really the first?

This is kind of an interesting topic, and of course completely unrelated to the thread topic.

Whether Diablo was "first" really depends on your definition of new. At its core, Diablo is a Roguelike, which of course came on the scene many years prior, but it wraps that gameplay in such an intensely cinematic and story-driven package that it's hard to tell you're playing something that dates back almost 30 years. So is it new, or is it just a really fancy, flashy wrapper?

And does it matter?

 

[Redlac]

I know what Diablo 3 would play like on a PS3.. probably very similar to the way they did Baldur's Gate on the PS2. It was a similar experience, except instead of breaking my fingers with a thousand mouse clicks an hour, it was a thousand pressings of X.

Still, the possibility of Blizzard games on a console? Yes please.

...and no, it doesn't matter if it's new or just something in a flashy wrapper, as long as the gameplay is awesome.