kxmode wrote on Apr 14, 2011, 15:08:
Save your sanity. Here are !TrMHCTg9is's comments grammatically cleaned up so that your head doesn't explode. I understand why Blizzard fired the kid.

Spoilers...

So basically, they not only WoWified the graphics, they WoWified the gameplay too. Good one blizzard. I really hope its not true, because I was hoping for a real diablo sequel, not something thats WoWified and consolized.

Dades wrote on Apr 14, 2011, 19:24:

Krovven wrote on Apr 14, 2011, 18:39:
Incorrect. Blizzard operates with it's own corporate leadership and control.

No, you are incorrect. Blizzard as a company may possess it's own internal leadership but those people still answer to the parent company. They are only in control of their own destiny in the sense that a rational person wouldn't kill the goose laying the golden eggs. Of course rationality and the corporate side of the industry always go hand in hand so there is no cause for concern.

ex: Infinity Ward

Dirwulf wrote on Apr 14, 2011, 19:34:

Krovven wrote on Apr 14, 2011, 18:39:

bhcompy wrote on Apr 14, 2011, 17:54:
Bobby Kotick is CEO and president of the parent company,

Correct.

and thus he has complete control over Blizzard.

Incorrect. Blizzard operates with it's own corporate leadership and control.

No that is not correct, the CEO of the parent company, Vivendi is Jean-Bernard Lévy

Bobby runs Activision
Mike Morhaime runs Blizzard.

Bobby is CEO of the parent company. Vivendi is the majority owner of outstanding shares(Activision-Blizzard has its own stock ticker because it is its own company). Technically, that puts Vivendi in charge(in a way, as much in charge as a majority shareholder can be), but that doesn't make Vivendi the parent company

Krovven wrote on Apr 14, 2011, 18:39:

bhcompy wrote on Apr 14, 2011, 17:54:
Bobby Kotick is CEO and president of the parent company,

Correct.

and thus he has complete control over Blizzard.

Incorrect. Blizzard operates with it's own corporate leadership and control.

No that is not correct, the CEO of the parent company, Vivendi is Jean-Bernard Lévy

Bobby runs Activision
Mike Morhaime runs Blizzard.

Well the only interesting part seems to be the Torchlight comparison. If that should be even halfways true, I'd set an end to my support for Blizzard. Gladly I don't belive it a bit.

No idea what others found in Torchlight, I desperately tried to find the fun in this casual product and could finally only concede a waste of money and, far more annoying, precious time.

And if Diablo 3 should really really fail, maybe Dungeon Siege 3 will succeed. Or Sacred 3 perhaps?

Krovven wrote on Apr 14, 2011, 18:39:
Incorrect. Blizzard operates with it's own corporate leadership and control.

No, you are incorrect. Blizzard as a company may possess it's own internal leadership but those people still answer to the parent company. They are only in control of their own destiny in the sense that a rational person wouldn't kill the goose laying the golden eggs. Of course rationality and the corporate side of the industry always go hand in hand so there is no cause for concern.

Krovven wrote on Apr 14, 2011, 18:39:

bhcompy wrote on Apr 14, 2011, 17:54:
Bobby Kotick is CEO and president of the parent company,

Correct.

and thus he has complete control over Blizzard.

Incorrect. Blizzard operates with it's own corporate leadership and control.

That's not really how subsidiaries work. Ultimately, Blizzard is beholden to the same shareholders and Kotick is the man in the General's spot, not anyone from Blizzard. Sure, they may have autonomy to a degree, but that doesn't mean they operate with impunity. Mythic and Verant were autonomous, too.

bhcompy wrote on Apr 14, 2011, 17:54:
Bobby Kotick is CEO and president of the parent company,

Correct.

and thus he has complete control over Blizzard.

Incorrect. Blizzard operates with it's own corporate leadership and control.

MattyC wrote on Apr 14, 2011, 18:08:

necrosis wrote on Apr 14, 2011, 16:22:

MattyC wrote on Apr 14, 2011, 15:17:

necrosis wrote on Apr 14, 2011, 14:47:
If all this is to be believed it sounds like I am going to skip this like I skipped Starcraft II.

Your lost to be honest.

Exactly why I did not get it. I lost LAN support, ability to play single player how I see fit, ability to play without a internet connection...

Was supposed to be loss, but text prediction on my iPod likes to be a jerk. Anyway you can just hit play offline for the single playe and while I do think they need to add LAN for tourneys and the like, for home LANs, nothing has really changed.

The SC2 competitive scene is quite strong, with gatherings like Dreamhack, MLG, Intel Extreme Masters. LAN really isn't going to add anything to the scene. And the thing about not being able to play SC2 without an internet connection, what is it with people believing in ridiculous bullshit about Blizzard games? Anyways, I'm not a huge fan of Diablo, but the last thing I'm going to trust is some random anonymous post on 4chan of all places.

necrosis wrote on Apr 14, 2011, 16:22:

MattyC wrote on Apr 14, 2011, 15:17:

necrosis wrote on Apr 14, 2011, 14:47:
If all this is to be believed it sounds like I am going to skip this like I skipped Starcraft II.

Your lost to be honest.

Exactly why I did not get it. I lost LAN support, ability to play single player how I see fit, ability to play without a internet connection...

Was supposed to be loss, but text prediction on my iPod likes to be a jerk. Anyway you can just hit play offline for the single player and while I do think they need to add LAN for tourneys and the like, for home LANs, nothing has really changed. I LAN SC2 all the time with my friends.

The best part of it is playing online anyway imo.

Dirwulf wrote on Apr 14, 2011, 15:57:
Since people keep getting this wrong, Activision did not buy Blizzard. Vivendi, Blizzard's parent company, bought Activision, and changed the name to Activision-Blizzard. Activision has no control over what Blizzard does.

Not quite true. Bobby Kotick is CEO and president of the parent company, and thus he has complete control over Blizzard. Kotick is a man that only cares about shareholder value. Blizzard is still a subsidiary.

Does the art style still look like it was ripped right out of a Disney cartoon?

"As a tester, my job is finding bugs and doing what they call 100% coverage run test. They also called us into meetings and asked us our opinions about a lot of things. I said the game was boring and doomed to be a failure."

This stuck out to me...

Now see, I've been bounced around as QA for years amongst a lot of products, Blizzard's being one...they don't generally do anything of that sort and unless something changed in how their system works, it's highly improbable that what they said is true.

QA at Blizzard is like QA pretty much anywhere in the industry. He's actually describing out-of-house QA (you know, closed/open beta tests which do nothing other than gauge user-feedback).

100% coverage run? What the hell is that? Thats not regression testing, that's not white/black boxing, and if I guess is right, that is nothing more than going "they wanted us to play all of it completely", which is actually not even part of internal QA scheduling at any company I've worked with (again, Blizzard being one of them).

So I'm going to take everything they said with one huge grain of sea salt.

MattyC wrote on Apr 14, 2011, 15:17:

necrosis wrote on Apr 14, 2011, 14:47:
If all this is to be believed it sounds like I am going to skip this like I skipped Starcraft II.

Your lost to be honest.

Exactly why I did not get it. I lost LAN support, ability to play single player how I see fit, ability to play without a internet connection...

Krowen, fucking relax man. I was just speculating based on what I've seen in the past and up to this point reading what this guy is spouting off about. Nothing I said is far fetched, nor is it necessarily true. Hence why it's speculation.

Since people keep getting this wrong, Activision did not buy Blizzard. Vivendi, Blizzard's parent company, bought Activision, and changed the name to Activision-Blizzard. Activision has no control over what Blizzard does.

Wookiestick wrote on Apr 14, 2011, 15:46:
Fake. Not even going to waste my breath going into why I think it is. It's just a bunch of vague details that anyone could scotch tape together.
Moving on.

Your avatar scares me...

He also used the text "I will wait and see for confirmation" so it's not like he was going nuts with the consolitis stuff man but fair enough. Obviously for the purposes of discussion people are giving it a bit of credibility which admittedly is probably more than it deserves but it's not like we get a ton of other exciting Diablo 3 news.

I'll also point out that the "Blizzard Schedule" that was leaked, as so far turned out to be quite accurate...and there is zero mention on consoles on it.

This on the other hand is interesting. IIRC it had Diablo 3's release pegged for Q4 2011 but I can't recall if that was calendar or fiscal year end.

Fake. Not even going to waste my breath going into why I think it is. It's just a bunch of vague details that anyone could scotch tape together.
Moving on.

Verno wrote on Apr 14, 2011, 15:28:

He didn't cry anything and what he said wasn't stupid, you're just being argumentative and reactionary. Here's what he actually said:

Seems pretty reasonable to me. I am not personally concerned but I can see why people would be based on past precedent with PC exclusive franchises.

First, Im not the one being reactionary. Based on some trolls babble, Elessar made the comment he expects this to be watered down. Then made another comment in his next post about consoles having an adverse effect on PC development (with respect to the topic of Diablo 3). Diablo 3 has not been confirmed as getting a console treatment, only stated it's a possibility in the future, after D3 is done on PC. So his comments are completely unfounded when it comes to Diablo 3.

But hey, have at it if you really want to make irrational judgements based on some anonymous barely literate trolls rant.

There has been zero indication that Diablo 3 has been "consolized" as thousands of people (including myself) have already been able to play Diablo 3 at two BlizzCons, PAX, as well as several other conventions I'm sure.

I'll also point out that the "Blizzard Schedule" that was leaked, as so far turned out to be quite accurate...and there is zero mention on consoles on it.

This comment was edited on Apr 14, 2011, 15:47.