I think with all the effort they've invested into Battle.net and upgrading it as a social platform, they're not looking to move away from the strong PC crowd for some time yet.
That's a given; look at that Shadowrun game. What I'm saying is, I don't really see dual analog being a handicap.
KBam you click to walk to a spot. Stick you press until you get there. Movement speed is not limited by controller. Precision differences are negligible. It's a wash.
KBam you press a button for a skill. Controller you... press a button for a skill. Wash.
I think we may have found a genre where the input method isn't a big factor; in fact, I'd bet on Controller Compatibility in the PC version.
I could see it going either way for servers, and I really don't think it'll be a big deal. If anything, the console guys will complain about the frequent number of patches to combat PC guys hacking. :P
Well this is some oversimplification. Tell me how something like Meteor or Fire Wall would work on a console compared to PC.
Then of course there's the major issue of consoles not having keyboards for guaranteed communication capability.
Edit: Also, my console controllers have four shoulder buttons.
The only problem i see with diablo 3 on consoles is aiming long range aoe spells. Everything else would work just as well. Diablo is a very simple game.
That's a given; look at that Shadowrun game. What I'm saying is, I don't really see dual analog being a handicap.
KBam you click to walk to a spot. Stick you press until you get there. Movement speed is not limited by controller. Precision differences are negligible. It's a wash.
KBam you press a button for a skill. Controller you... press a button for a skill. Wash.
I think we may have found a genre where the input method isn't a big factor; in fact, I'd bet on Controller Compatibility in the PC version.
I could see it going either way for servers, and I really don't think it'll be a big deal. If anything, the console guys will complain about the frequent number of patches to combat PC guys hacking. :P
Well this is some oversimplification. Tell me how something like Meteor or Fire Wall would work on a console compared to PC.
Then of course there's the major issue of consoles not having keyboards for guaranteed communication capability.
Edit: Also, my console controllers have four shoulder buttons.
Correct. Now, the easy solution there is to give Meteor and Fire Wall static ranges. So no matter what, you'll always cast it in the direction you're facing... but it'll be at a set distance. That's an easy adjustment, and one the company would be likely to make. It also illusrates my point of there being a disparity between the console and PC population. PC players are going to be SLIGHTLY more powerful through their ability to control the distance at which a Meteor drops or a Fire Wall springs up.
Ramp that up and multiply it by considering all the people posting items on the RMAH. You can bet that if one segment of the population has a SLIGHT advantage in getting a type of item via a SLIGHTLY faster clear time through an area, it'll be exploited. It'll be known that PSN players have an easier time acquiring _____ runes, so they've cornered the market. But console players run the gem market because by running _____ they have an easier time acquiring _____ gems.
That's a given; look at that Shadowrun game. What I'm saying is, I don't really see dual analog being a handicap.
KBam you click to walk to a spot. Stick you press until you get there. Movement speed is not limited by controller. Precision differences are negligible. It's a wash.
KBam you press a button for a skill. Controller you... press a button for a skill. Wash.
I think we may have found a genre where the input method isn't a big factor; in fact, I'd bet on Controller Compatibility in the PC version.
I could see it going either way for servers, and I really don't think it'll be a big deal. If anything, the console guys will complain about the frequent number of patches to combat PC guys hacking. :P
Well this is some oversimplification. Tell me how something like Meteor or Fire Wall would work on a console compared to PC.
Then of course there's the major issue of consoles not having keyboards for guaranteed communication capability.
Edit: Also, my console controllers have four shoulder buttons.
Correct. Now, the easy solution there is to give Meteor and Fire Wall static ranges. So no matter what, you'll always cast it in the direction you're facing... but it'll be at a set distance. That's an easy adjustment, and one the company would be likely to make. It also illusrates my point of there being a disparity between the console and PC population. PC players are going to be SLIGHTLY more powerful through their ability to control the distance at which a Meteor drops or a Fire Wall springs up.
Ramp that up and multiply it by considering all the people posting items on the RMAH. You can bet that if one segment of the population has a SLIGHT advantage in getting a type of item via a SLIGHTLY faster clear time through an area, it'll be exploited. It'll be known that PSN players have an easier time acquiring _____ runes, so they've cornered the market. But console players run the gem market because by running _____ they have an easier time acquiring _____ gems.
Right analog stick. You aren't going to need super-precise aiming for those spells, so flicking the RAS should work.
Also, consoles have voice chat so no keyboard isn't a huge issue.
Yeah, I concede that without some modification, console players may be at a disadvantage in using some of the currently shown skills.
0
ZarathustraEckUbermenschnow with stripes!Registered Userregular
And from a balance standpoint... that's all good. They can just simplify some of the current skills and if needed nerf the content slightly here and there to make up for the simplification. That's the PvE game.
The PvP game and trading are where the slight differences are going to warrant segregation.
And from a balance standpoint... that's all good. They can just simplify some of the current skills and if needed nerf the content slightly here and there to make up for the simplification. That's the PvE game.
The PvP game and trading are where the slight differences are going to warrant segregation.
Haven't they already stated that PVP will have 0 impact on game balance? Wouldn't this invalidate a need to segregate for PVP?
Controller config off the top of ny head (PS3 controller):
Left stick: Move/interact
X: Standard attack
Square: Hotkey 1
Triangle: Hotkey 2
Circle: Hotkey 3
Hold LB and use above to access 4, 5, 6.
RB: Plant (for ranged attacks)
LT and RT: Additional hotkeys if necessary (potions etc)
D-pad: Yet more hotkeys
Select: Inventory/Character sheet/Skill access
Right stick: aim aoe spells
I don't see an elegant way to aim a spell with the right stick at the same time you cast it with a face button. Cast first, then aim seems like way too long a delay.
Something like this might work, if there was some way to fit basic attacks in...
Left stick: move
Right stick: aim (click right stick to show/hide aiming reticule)
LB, RB, RT: active skills 1-3
LT + (LB, RB, RT): active skills 4-6
Controller players would have a disadvantage in the time it takes to aim a spell, but the advantage of being able to cast on the run, in a direction they are not facing.
Also, consoles have voice chat so no keyboard isn't a huge issue.
But not all players have the equipment for it. So if you mixed PC and console players, you'd have PC people trying to type to console players who in some cases will have no way to communicate back.
Also, consoles have voice chat so no keyboard isn't a huge issue.
But not all players have the equipment for it. So if you mixed PC and console players, you'd have PC people trying to type to console players who in some cases will have no way to communicate back.
They could just use that sentence building system that FF MMO used for Japanese and English speaking players to communicate! Mostly because it'd make me laugh.
First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKER!
Considering that it sounds like they are approaching D3 on consoles at the tail end of the D3 for PC development, I don't think we need to worry as much about the typical "console port" issues, such as terrible user interfaces or limited control schemes. Then again, SC2 doesn't have my favorite out-of-game UI, so maybe it'll be mediocre without any interference from consoles. The in-game interface, though, seems pretty well suited for a gamepad, as people have already mentioned. As an example of a game which splits the difference, I find it easier to control Magicka with a gamepad, but find it harder to cast elaborate spells quickly. With the keyboard, it's the opposite. I think that D3 will hit a nice middle ground where both control schemes are solid, with slight pros and cons. Nothing requiring separate servers that I can see, but I might be missing specific things, as I'm probably a Diablo "casual."
As for the number of skills being limited, I think that this is a good way to handle it for a PC, let alone a console. I personally prefer games with a smaller group of useful skills, rather than a giant pile of skills that even if they are all useful, are difficult to switch around. As someone who isn't in the top tier of game players in general, I tended to spam just a few D2 skills, so Diablo 3 may be limited for some, but for me it is actually less limited, because it makes access to a set of skills easier. Like WoW, but without the large number of skills there.
I think WoW is a good example of a game where I knew how to use all of the skills of my chosen classes, but you end up cutting it down to a reasonable rotation, because that's simply the best way to do things. You then have a ton of other skills that are either useless (underwater breathing on a warlock, as an old example) or useful, but rarely used (hellfire as an old warlock skill that only had a few practical applications besides suicide when wiping). So, rather than giving you a ton of skills like WoW, where you only use a few, you'll instead be choosing a subset of skills and using them exclusively (until you change it up). It makes it easier for me to get my head around it all, and I have a feeling I'll enjoy D3 more than D2 from a skill usage perspective.
TL;DR: I don't think we need to fear D3 consolification, because the D3 changes that I see making it work for a console are also changes that I like on the PC for the most part. If it ships with gamepad support, or gains it in a later patch, I would at least give it a try, because I might enjoy it.
Battle.net/SC2: Kwisatz.868 | Steam/XBL/PSN/Gamecenter: schmads | BattleTag/D3: Schmads#1144 | Hero Academy & * With Friends: FallenKwisatz | 3DS: 4356-0128-9671
0
lu tzeSweeping the monestary steps.Registered Userregular
Have you heard of the LAMP stack? Completely open source and it powers most of the web. Including the secure parts. Go figure.
Because jeez it's not like web servers ever get hacked ever right guys?
Like I said, you people cannot be argued with. So okay, you're right, the systems you describe are exactly the same. They are 100% equivalent situations and in no way completely different.
Making D3s server architecture completely obfuscated and inaccessible to anyone but Blizzard would not affect security in any way! In fact it would even make it less secure! I mean, that's completely fucking retarded... but if it'll shut you the fuck up, you're right! Blizzard are just lazy and want to fuck you over!
I'm pretty sure the Xbox's patching policy red tape would make the decision for Blizzard as far as mixing console and PC players. In PC world, Blizzard has the authority to shoot a patch out and force all (online) players to download it whenever they need to. The Xbox version would have delayed patches, so there's no way the two could be in the same games.
Also, consoles have voice chat so no keyboard isn't a huge issue.
But not all players have the equipment for it. So if you mixed PC and console players, you'd have PC people trying to type to console players who in some cases will have no way to communicate back.
They could just use that sentence building system that FF MMO used for Japanese and English speaking players to communicate! Mostly because it'd make me laugh.
How about text-to-speech with some smartphone autocorrect? I'd love to get called a "donkey riding ship eater" or a "mother ducking gaggle" by someone playing from a console.
Edit: I do see patching and communication as possible barriers to shared servers, now that everyone has pointed it out. As the sort who prefers playing with friends in virtually any online game (or else mutes/ignores communication -- thank you Counter-Strike), I'm less concerned about that part.
schmads on
Battle.net/SC2: Kwisatz.868 | Steam/XBL/PSN/Gamecenter: schmads | BattleTag/D3: Schmads#1144 | Hero Academy & * With Friends: FallenKwisatz | 3DS: 4356-0128-9671
0
Warlock82Never pet a burning dogRegistered Userregular
Also, consoles have voice chat so no keyboard isn't a huge issue.
But not all players have the equipment for it. So if you mixed PC and console players, you'd have PC people trying to type to console players who in some cases will have no way to communicate back.
Oh, I didn't realize you were arguing that point - I agree. I meant, in general, console players have a way to communicate with each other. But yeah, I don't see them mixing console and PC.
BTW, as for the Diablo 1 Firewall question - it was based on your character's facing direction. It fired horizontal from the direction you were looking at the spot you clicked.
So:
#
o> # (facing right)
#
#
# (facing diagonally up and right)
_ #
o| #
BTW, as for the Diablo 1 Firewall question - it was based on your character's facing direction. It fired horizontal from the direction you were looking at the spot you clicked.
So the PS1 version used a cursor?
0
Warlock82Never pet a burning dogRegistered Userregular
BTW, as for the Diablo 1 Firewall question - it was based on your character's facing direction. It fired horizontal from the direction you were looking at the spot you clicked.
So the PS1 version used a cursor?
I have no idea - this is the PC version.. I probably should have read your original post better :P
I'm guessing the spell was removed though. I seem to recall hearing about certain spells being removed that "didn't work" on the PSX version.
Have you heard of the LAMP stack? Completely open source and it powers most of the web. Including the secure parts. Go figure.
Because jeez it's not like web servers ever get hacked ever right guys?
Like I said, you people cannot be argued with. So okay, you're right, the systems you describe are exactly the same. They are 100% equivalent situations and in no way completely different.
Making D3s server architecture completely obfuscated and inaccessible to anyone but Blizzard would not affect security in any way! In fact it would even make it less secure! I mean, that's completely fucking retarded... but if it'll shut you the fuck up, you're right! Blizzard are just lazy and want to fuck you over!
Happy now? Can we move on?
Unpatched web servers =/= patched web servers. You're still going on about bugs that should be or have already been fixed and also still making it out that ALL open source software is unsecure simply because its open source. Is it really that hard to understand how small of a fix some of these duping bugs would be when someone could fix it through reverse engineering nevermind Blizzard that actually has the source?
Console patching methods are going to get in their way the entire time.
0
lu tzeSweeping the monestary steps.Registered Userregular
Haven't we known about the console aspirations for a while now?
Anyways, I second the notion that the console controls will probably be a copy of Dragon Age's console controls (ie. A for Interact/Basic Attack, B/Y/X for Skill 1/2/3 and a trigger+B/Y/X for Skill 4/5/6 with other triggers and such dedicated to menus and maps and what not).
Depending on if they strip out the multiplayer aspect or not they could also steal DA's ranged AoE targeting system (ie. the game pauses when you're aiming your AoE). Or they could just say screw it and not pause it and you just have to deal with the half-a-second casting delay while you aim and hit the button again.
I figure there's pretty much no chance of cross-platform play (especially with the aforementioned patching issues), and doubt the console versions would even have any kind of AH (RM or not...though especially not RM since Sony and Microsoft would want pieces of that pie if they allowed it at all), so they wouldn't effect server economies anyways.
Overall, really don't have a problem with them making a console version, as long as they actually update it and don't just release it and abandon it. Between game's like Marvel Ultimate Alliance and the console version of Torchlight and stuff, they've got a fair bit more stuff to look at before figuring out how to make their console version, so it should be several magnitudes better than their Diablo 1 port.
The existence of the console version does throw a wrench into their online-only justifications though. They're pretty much not going to get away with online-only for the console versions, so that means either:
A)The console version uses the same drop calculations as the PC version, thus invalidating the security justification.
B)The console version uses a different drop calculation from the PC version, thus invalidating the idea that creating a second set of calculations for an offline PC mode would be too much work since it could just use the console version's.
Posts
Then of course there's the major issue of consoles not having keyboards for guaranteed communication capability.
Edit: Also, my console controllers have four shoulder buttons.
Battle.net: Fireflash#1425
Steam Friend code: 45386507
Correct. Now, the easy solution there is to give Meteor and Fire Wall static ranges. So no matter what, you'll always cast it in the direction you're facing... but it'll be at a set distance. That's an easy adjustment, and one the company would be likely to make. It also illusrates my point of there being a disparity between the console and PC population. PC players are going to be SLIGHTLY more powerful through their ability to control the distance at which a Meteor drops or a Fire Wall springs up.
Ramp that up and multiply it by considering all the people posting items on the RMAH. You can bet that if one segment of the population has a SLIGHT advantage in getting a type of item via a SLIGHTLY faster clear time through an area, it'll be exploited. It'll be known that PSN players have an easier time acquiring _____ runes, so they've cornered the market. But console players run the gem market because by running _____ they have an easier time acquiring _____ gems.
-Z
Left stick: Move/interact
X: Standard attack
Square: Hotkey 1
Triangle: Hotkey 2
Circle: Hotkey 3
Hold LB and use above to access 4, 5, 6.
RB: Plant (for ranged attacks)
LT and RT: Additional hotkeys if necessary (potions etc)
D-pad: Yet more hotkeys
Select: Inventory/Character sheet/Skill access
Right stick: aim aoe spells
Right analog stick. You aren't going to need super-precise aiming for those spells, so flicking the RAS should work.
Also, consoles have voice chat so no keyboard isn't a huge issue.
The Witch Doctor seems to have plenty.
-Z
The PvP game and trading are where the slight differences are going to warrant segregation.
-Z
Haven't they already stated that PVP will have 0 impact on game balance? Wouldn't this invalidate a need to segregate for PVP?
I don't see an elegant way to aim a spell with the right stick at the same time you cast it with a face button. Cast first, then aim seems like way too long a delay.
Something like this might work, if there was some way to fit basic attacks in...
Left stick: move
Right stick: aim (click right stick to show/hide aiming reticule)
LB, RB, RT: active skills 1-3
LT + (LB, RB, RT): active skills 4-6
Controller players would have a disadvantage in the time it takes to aim a spell, but the advantage of being able to cast on the run, in a direction they are not facing.
Edit: Also, D1 didn't have meteor, but I am curious how fire wall worked.
They could just use that sentence building system that FF MMO used for Japanese and English speaking players to communicate! Mostly because it'd make me laugh.
As for the number of skills being limited, I think that this is a good way to handle it for a PC, let alone a console. I personally prefer games with a smaller group of useful skills, rather than a giant pile of skills that even if they are all useful, are difficult to switch around. As someone who isn't in the top tier of game players in general, I tended to spam just a few D2 skills, so Diablo 3 may be limited for some, but for me it is actually less limited, because it makes access to a set of skills easier. Like WoW, but without the large number of skills there.
I think WoW is a good example of a game where I knew how to use all of the skills of my chosen classes, but you end up cutting it down to a reasonable rotation, because that's simply the best way to do things. You then have a ton of other skills that are either useless (underwater breathing on a warlock, as an old example) or useful, but rarely used (hellfire as an old warlock skill that only had a few practical applications besides suicide when wiping). So, rather than giving you a ton of skills like WoW, where you only use a few, you'll instead be choosing a subset of skills and using them exclusively (until you change it up). It makes it easier for me to get my head around it all, and I have a feeling I'll enjoy D3 more than D2 from a skill usage perspective.
TL;DR: I don't think we need to fear D3 consolification, because the D3 changes that I see making it work for a console are also changes that I like on the PC for the most part. If it ships with gamepad support, or gains it in a later patch, I would at least give it a try, because I might enjoy it.
Like I said, you people cannot be argued with. So okay, you're right, the systems you describe are exactly the same. They are 100% equivalent situations and in no way completely different.
Making D3s server architecture completely obfuscated and inaccessible to anyone but Blizzard would not affect security in any way! In fact it would even make it less secure! I mean, that's completely fucking retarded... but if it'll shut you the fuck up, you're right! Blizzard are just lazy and want to fuck you over!
Happy now? Can we move on?
How about text-to-speech with some smartphone autocorrect? I'd love to get called a "donkey riding ship eater" or a "mother ducking gaggle" by someone playing from a console.
Edit: I do see patching and communication as possible barriers to shared servers, now that everyone has pointed it out. As the sort who prefers playing with friends in virtually any online game (or else mutes/ignores communication -- thank you Counter-Strike), I'm less concerned about that part.
Oh, I didn't realize you were arguing that point - I agree. I meant, in general, console players have a way to communicate with each other. But yeah, I don't see them mixing console and PC.
BTW, as for the Diablo 1 Firewall question - it was based on your character's facing direction. It fired horizontal from the direction you were looking at the spot you clicked.
So:
# o> # (facing right) # # # (facing diagonally up and right) _ # o| #I have no idea - this is the PC version.. I probably should have read your original post better :P
I'm guessing the spell was removed though. I seem to recall hearing about certain spells being removed that "didn't work" on the PSX version.
Unpatched web servers =/= patched web servers. You're still going on about bugs that should be or have already been fixed and also still making it out that ALL open source software is unsecure simply because its open source. Is it really that hard to understand how small of a fix some of these duping bugs would be when someone could fix it through reverse engineering nevermind Blizzard that actually has the source?
Console patching methods are going to get in their way the entire time.
Anyways, I second the notion that the console controls will probably be a copy of Dragon Age's console controls (ie. A for Interact/Basic Attack, B/Y/X for Skill 1/2/3 and a trigger+B/Y/X for Skill 4/5/6 with other triggers and such dedicated to menus and maps and what not).
Depending on if they strip out the multiplayer aspect or not they could also steal DA's ranged AoE targeting system (ie. the game pauses when you're aiming your AoE). Or they could just say screw it and not pause it and you just have to deal with the half-a-second casting delay while you aim and hit the button again.
I figure there's pretty much no chance of cross-platform play (especially with the aforementioned patching issues), and doubt the console versions would even have any kind of AH (RM or not...though especially not RM since Sony and Microsoft would want pieces of that pie if they allowed it at all), so they wouldn't effect server economies anyways.
Overall, really don't have a problem with them making a console version, as long as they actually update it and don't just release it and abandon it. Between game's like Marvel Ultimate Alliance and the console version of Torchlight and stuff, they've got a fair bit more stuff to look at before figuring out how to make their console version, so it should be several magnitudes better than their Diablo 1 port.
The existence of the console version does throw a wrench into their online-only justifications though. They're pretty much not going to get away with online-only for the console versions, so that means either:
A)The console version uses the same drop calculations as the PC version, thus invalidating the security justification.
B)The console version uses a different drop calculation from the PC version, thus invalidating the idea that creating a second set of calculations for an offline PC mode would be too much work since it could just use the console version's.
Urgh, those armour designs are just atrocious.
http://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/147062/diablo-iii-welcome-to-the-inferno.#Item_1
ftfy
― Marcus Aurelius
Path of Exile: themightypuck