Blizzard Says No to Console Cash-in Games

[PingoBlack]

CCP is releasing Dust 514 in spring of next year which interfaces PS3 players with PC players on one server.

I havent seen anything from Trion that would be releasing before then?

They are making a tie-in game for SyFy Channel series, supposedly multi platform. Release should coincide with the show somehow.

http://www.trionworlds.com/en/games/defiance

What you kinda have to get from this looking widely is the fact that cross platform (especialy open platform like PC vs. closed garden platform like PS3 or XBOX) is not really financially feasible. Specially when you consider license fees for console development.

It would most likely cost more to develop less of a game that has to meet lowest common denominator among platforms it shares.

 

[mogamer]

... *tips over laughing*

oh Blizzard Blizzard Blizzard... do you try to insult our intelligence more?

Of course you don't have to make crappy console game cash ins. You only control some unspecified majority of the freakin' PC industry, and have for nearly a decade! as an early commenter said, you have no one able to compete, so even if your products wain, nobody cares. except some do.

oh, nice to see that the PA strawman comic is STILL being posted even to preempt arguements over blizzards sliding quality, or crazy business tactics as of late

no, blizzard doesn't have to cash in. they already DO on the PC demographic with the sparkle ponies (awesome though they may be) and nonsense. if they do release Diablo III on console, it would only rake in more sales. blizzard doesn't make crap games (most of the time), but the crap AROUND the good game is what drives me up the wall. its usually something to big to ignore, considering how the prior games of their franchises seeded the install base for the sequels the ways they did.

No duh SCII outsold starcraft's entire lifetime in no time at all. a prior installer base who had been playing the game off and on for a decade, and people just getting wind the E-sports done on it created its own sales. everyone else jumped on in wonder.

So I guess they posted just to go "ha-ha!" and "promise" us a Console port of whatever they are gonna make is good. Thanks for the telegraph blizzard. I'm still not buying D3. if i could skip my entire purchase year (and i did), then skipping another one of your releases is doable. stop taking away the things that can make games so good- OPTIONS OF PLAY.

Blizzard won't make a "crappy console port" of D3 unless they can get the same money-grubbing AH set-up thay have for the pc. MS is pretty strict on stuff, so that's why Blizzard and Valve both critized Live. Both companies make good games. But they take big advantage of their positions in the industry to screw customers. The sad thing is customers love it. I've said it before and I'll say it agian. DRM is like a turd. The extras Steam and Battle.net offer is like covering that turd in whipped cream, nuts and a cherry. But it's still a turd.

Regarding th PA strip. I don't hold those guys in high regard because they basically kiss the industry's ass in their support of DRM. And they really kiss Valve's and Blizzard's asses. For them, Valve and Blizzard can do no wrong and if you disagree with what those two companies do, then you're an idiot.

 

[Draitheryn]

Im glad they arent making it for console, the games works perfect for a keyboard/mouse setup and having it on console typically means a change in controls and interface etc that often times fails imo

 

[wolf92]

Says no to console game cash ins.

Says the company that, if you want to change a feature such as your horns or gender, you'll have to pay $25. Or, if you're friends have the gull to start playing on a different server (or if you meet new people who play), you're going to have to pay $25 to change servers. Are they Alliance, and you're Horde? That one runs you $30. Hey, lets not forget. Tauren players are SO 2006. Want to play a Troll? $25. I'd also like to mention the ingame pets, which will run you $15 per pet (but they throw snowballs, so its ok). Or if you want a shinier version of a horse, you guessed it, $25.


All fairly legitimate things, that customer service usually does for free (or a very low cost, such as $10 for a faction change/race change). This is the company that make money by milking its customers already. They are legitimately killing Diablo 3 just to make a few extra dollars (because who wants balance).

Now you're gonna tell me you have integrity for not making shitty console ports?

You, sir, have grapefruit sized balls.

Well said

 

[Rouzeki]

Blizzard won't make a "crappy console port" of D3 unless they can get the same money-grubbing AH set-up thay have for the pc. MS is pretty strict on stuff, so that's why Blizzard and Valve both critized Live. Both companies make good games. But they take big advantage of their positions in the industry to screw customers. The sad thing is customers love it. I've said it before and I'll say it agian. DRM is like a turd. The extras Steam and Battle.net offer is like covering that turd in whipped cream, nuts and a cherry. But it's still a turd.

Regarding th PA strip. I don't hold those guys in high regard because they basically kiss the industry's ass in their support of DRM. And they really kiss Valve's and Blizzard's asses. For them, Valve and Blizzard can do no wrong and if you disagree with what those two companies do, then you're an idiot.

y'said it on blizzard as for at least the 360... but i wouldn't quite rule the PS3 userbase out just yet. as for bringing valve into this, i know steam isn't the best thing in the world, but at least it helps propagate the indie market, the only market I've really bought into in the last year.

Whats Bnet 2.0 gonna give ya? headaches, and nothing more.

*claps in response to the second paragraph* THANK YOU! its gotten really tiring to constantly see that stinking strawman comic whenever blizzards coming under fire. frankly they deserve it, I use to shine blizzes shoes for a very long time, but I've been forced off the track even if I wanted to stay by the D3 always-online mess, which everyone just writes off as "A wave of the future"...yeah well, the waves still to early for its own good.

 

[Inkidu]

Oh God! No! Don't do that, Blizzard. I think I'll have to slash my wrists if you don't make a console port of Diablo III. What will I do? You can't do this to me.

Now I'm going to go have a good long cry, if it sounds like laughter it isn't. It's crying. Seriously. Crying.

-_-

 

[qeinar]

Oh course they dont need to "cash in" on console games. They already have an olympic sized swimming pool full of money from all the micro transactions in wow.

Still all-too appropriate.

Actually that makes pretty much no sense at all in the context of this article.

well it does make sense if you look at the comments. ^^

 

[Jacob Haggarty]

Awww... i was hoping to see diablo on my xbox. Alas, some things are just not meant to be. Probably. Maybe.

 

[Asehujiko]

Sooo... why exactly are they stuffing Diablo III with always online DRM?

It starts with with an "A" and ends on "ctivisions's shareholders".

 

[OMGIllithan]

I'm getting tired of reading this cesspool of Blizzard hate in the comments every time a new Blizzard related news post is made. The only reason for a company's existence is to make money. One would like to think that a company would exists only for its passion in whatever work they're involved in, but when you get to the bottom line, its couldn't exist at all without a business model with the goal of making money.

1. Creating a business model based partly on micro transactions isn't greedy, its smart. You can increase your income without affecting those who don't wish to participate, its a win/win for everyone. More specifically on RMAH, people were going to buy and sell shit online outside of Blizzard's jurisdiction whether Blizzard liked it or not. It happened in D2, it was gonna happen in D3. Creating the RMAH made that practice (which would have happened anyways) safe for everyone involved and even gave Blizzard a small commission on the deal. Thats not greedy thats smart business.

2. On Battle.net:

The guy makes a great point. They are making PC games of high quality and their competition is not really taking PC market seriously. So they reign with very little serious competition.

Sooo... why exactly are they stuffing Diablo III with always online DRM? Eh, it'll still sell like hotcakes.

My friends will probably pressure me into buying it anyway.

Calling it Always On DRM is overgeneralizing.

Just get over the fact Diablo 3 is a CORPG, like Guild Wars was. No one complained about always online requirement in Guild Wars, now have they?

It's just time to accept this. PC market is specific, open and complicated. As long as always online is clearly stated as requirement and it adds significant added value, you have no leg to stand on.

What's worse, just blindly throwing Ubisoft DRM into same category as Blizzard DRM is also not very critical thinking. There are mayor differences between DRM approaches, we should be way more savvy about discussing that critically.

I think this is one of the more sensible posts I have seen. Personally, I ran D2 off dial up and I'm pretty sure I wouldn't have a problem running D3 the same way.

And finally my thoughts on the actual post, I agree with Blizzard's decision. They have a high quality standard to keep and I would hate to see another Starcraft 64.

 

[Vykrel]

but they say "Yes" to releasing SC2 in three pieces?

 

[Metalrocks]

not that i disagree with them. i find it good they stick with pc only games, but valve is still the best company out there who makes really good games for the pc.
never liked the games from blizzard. never cared for diabolo or any of the games they have made.

 

[PissOffRoth]

Says no to console game cash ins.

Says the company that, if you want to change a feature such as your horns or gender, you'll have to pay $25. Or, if you're friends have the gull to start playing on a different server (or if you meet new people who play), you're going to have to pay $25 to change servers. Are they Alliance, and you're Horde? That one runs you $30. Hey, lets not forget. Tauren players are SO 2006. Want to play a Troll? $25. I'd also like to mention the ingame pets, which will run you $15 per pet (but they throw snowballs, so its ok). Or if you want a shinier version of a horse, you guessed it, $25.


All fairly legitimate things, that customer service usually does for free (or a very low cost, such as $10 for a faction change/race change). This is the company that make money by milking its customers already. They are legitimately killing Diablo 3 just to make a few extra dollars (because who wants balance).

Now you're gonna tell me you have integrity for not making shitty console ports?

You, sir, have grapefruit sized balls.

And you absolutely HAVE to change from horde to alliance on a different server with a new set of horns and every single mount/pet available to purchase. It's just not a full game unless you do all that like 20 times a year.

And who wants a legitimized value for gold when you can just let chinese farmers rake in thousands and exploit young people for 18 hours a day. That's imbalance and totally a cash grab move.

And who wants DRM when you can have people pirate the hell out of your game.

And who wants reason when you can be bitter and hateful.

 

[Ulquiorra4sama]

Diablo 3 seems like a game that's better served on the PC anyways so trying to maintain a certain standard might not be bad for Blizzard for once.

I mean... would someone who's not interested in the game by now change their mind if it came out for consoles? Not likely methinks.

 

[KingsGambit_v1legacy]

Thank you Blizzard, thank you for those words. I may just buy more of your games to support you now, though in fairness you will be making dumptrucks of the stuff even without my contribition. If only other developers still understood this.

 

[Sniper Team 4]

So...is Diablo III going to be on the PS3 or not? You're killing me here Blizzard. I need to KNOW!

 

[ReiverCorrupter]

"We don't believe you can make a Starcraft-style RTS and make it great - Blizzard great - on console,"

I just find this funny because of Starcraft 64. If you can't make good console Starcraft games, why make them at all?

They really aren't saying anything. "Starcraft-style RTS" Really? You mean the style of RTS that requires 30 hotkeys and where the top players don't even use a mouse? You don't think that'll work on a controller? You don't say.

They could make a great RTS for consoles, it would just have to work differently than Star Craft. Halo Wars, as unpolished and simplistic as it is, proves that an RTS can work on the console, you just have to get a little creative. Personally, I think the controller is well suited to unit micro because of the wheel system. Sure you can't do everything as easily as if you had hotkeys, but that just makes dexterity part of the required skill set.

 

[Atheist.]

Sooo... why exactly are they stuffing Diablo III with always online DRM? Eh, it'll still sell like hotcakes.

My friends will probably pressure me into buying it anyway.

I believe that's for a combination of anti piracy, and preventing the ridiculous amount of hackers we had in the previous two games.

 

[pepitko]

That's a shame, there's no real reason not to port a game to consoles (360/PS3), other than to please the "hardcore" PC gamers. Oh well, I'll spend my time playing Skyrim for the next couple of months.