By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - MS told Blizzard 900p was "unacceptable" for Diablo 3 on Xbox One.

Mineisbetter on 20 August 2014
Xevross said:
QuintonMcLeod said:


How is it superior? Care to explain?

Sorry for the late reply, I went to sleep

It has quite a few features that aren't in the PC version:

When you die the mob that kills you becomes a Nemesis, a really powerful mob that goes round hunting your freinds (or you) until someone kills it and everyone gets rewards.

Mailbox to send items/gold to friends.

Gifts for freinds drop when you get a legendary, which you have to ssend to your friend So you mail it to them (you benefit from friends playing)

Friends are levelled up to you when joining your game to increase ease of paying together.

Massacre bonuses now give an EXP multiplier for a minute instead of just a small bit of XP. 

Destruction bonuses give a speed boost for a certain, scaling, amount of time.

Playstation also gets TLOU mobs and a transmog set.

1.  That is actually pretty cool
2. Trading was in the PC Version - Went as usually with Blizzard Games pretty bad.
Why?Cause of botters and China Gold farmers.Trading at the same time had to go cause of sites like D2Jsp and so on.
Everyone who played D2 back then or even at the beginning of D3 see has seen how Items changed the owner for many many thousands of $.
Im pretty sure i've seen stuff getting sold for 5000+ $ multiple times in the first year of D3 on 3rd Party trading websites.Even higher prices back then in D2.
The black market for Blizzard Games and especially Diablo is far to big to let trading stay in the game.Before they find a way to prevent
Gold sellers and Item Sellers from profiting to big and others of course buying their way into the game its better to disable it completely.

3. Cool Idea
4/5/6. Pretty useless - Takes at best 1 hour to reach Level 70.Currently on PTR we do it in under 20 Minutes.
The Streamer DatModz did a Chill 24 Hour PS4 Version Marathon - Even that way while doing mostly everything but playing the Game he could do T1 pretty quick.Don't know how much he played or tried to achieve after that.But if someone currently wants you could be ready to farm T6 in under 1 Day.

The PC Version is better cause it gets the patches faster.
And hopefully next week the best thing that could happen to D3 gets released > 2.1
Seasons/2.1 on the PTR were more fun the last 2 months than D3+RoS ever were.Even though they are still missing the big catchphrase it gives the game so much value.
You will face pretty soon the same issues on the console version we did on PC - Absolutely nothing to do and no reason to farm for the best gear.
Console has now the Patch Support am i right?Hopefully you don't have to wait that much.Greater Rifts,Leaderbords and overall the Seasons give the game so much value.
Bounties and normal Rifts get boring pretty fast and once you can do T6 you start to feel there is something missing which is sadly the content that keeps you going.



Around the Network
QuintonMcLeod on 20 August 2014
eva01beserk said:

Sure, all you have to do is buy another PC if you dont have one and another copy of the game and expansion. That sounds the same as just getting another controler. And f**k the big screen in the living room, we could just buy another 1080p big screen so we could both enjoy the awsomeness, unstead of one on the monitor and one on the hdmi tv. And it works for up to 3 players, 4 players is when it starts to get expensive to be on pc.


Actually, no you don't. You can plug another controller to the same PC and use multi-clienting on a single PC using this baby:
http://www.dx.com/p/single-pc-multi-user-extender-box-70634

And this device supports up to 32 people at one time.



eva01beserk on 20 August 2014
QuintonMcLeod said:
eva01beserk said:

Sure, all you have to do is buy another PC if you dont have one and another copy of the game and expansion. That sounds the same as just getting another controler. And f**k the big screen in the living room, we could just buy another 1080p big screen so we could both enjoy the awsomeness, unstead of one on the monitor and one on the hdmi tv. And it works for up to 3 players, 4 players is when it starts to get expensive to be on pc.


Actually, no you don't. You can plug another controller to the same PC and use multi-clienting on a single PC using this baby:
http://www.dx.com/p/single-pc-multi-user-extender-box-70634

And this device supports up to 32 people at one time.

Thats pretty cool, I have never seen something like that. But that proves nothing. This means that the pc needs to be powerfull enoughf to split the resourses in 2 or 4. A pc like that will cost you over $1000 anyways so its still way more expensive since the pc game was not build to be multyplayer on the same pc unlike the console version.



It takes genuine talent to see greatness in yourself despite your absence of genuine talent.

Nem on 20 August 2014
Nettles said:
framerate is more important


This should always be the priority. Gameplay over graphics.



QuintonMcLeod on 20 August 2014
eva01beserk said:
QuintonMcLeod said:
eva01beserk said:

Sure, all you have to do is buy another PC if you dont have one and another copy of the game and expansion. That sounds the same as just getting another controler. And f**k the big screen in the living room, we could just buy another 1080p big screen so we could both enjoy the awsomeness, unstead of one on the monitor and one on the hdmi tv. And it works for up to 3 players, 4 players is when it starts to get expensive to be on pc.


Actually, no you don't. You can plug another controller to the same PC and use multi-clienting on a single PC using this baby:
http://www.dx.com/p/single-pc-multi-user-extender-box-70634

And this device supports up to 32 people at one time.

Thats pretty cool, I have never seen something like that. But that proves nothing. This means that the pc needs to be powerfull enoughf to split the resourses in 2 or 4. A pc like that will cost you over $1000 anyways so its still way more expensive since the pc game was not build to be multyplayer on the same pc unlike the console version.


The point is, the PC can do it, and do it better than Diablo 3 on the console. You don't need a PC over $1000 dollars to handle it. A PC costing $500 dollars would be more than enough to do twice as many users than any of the consoles can do.



Around the Network
eva01beserk on 20 August 2014
QuintonMcLeod said:
eva01beserk said:
QuintonMcLeod said:


Actually, no you don't. You can plug another controller to the same PC and use multi-clienting on a single PC using this baby:
http://www.dx.com/p/single-pc-multi-user-extender-box-70634

And this device supports up to 32 people at one time.

Thats pretty cool, I have never seen something like that. But that proves nothing. This means that the pc needs to be powerfull enoughf to split the resourses in 2 or 4. A pc like that will cost you over $1000 anyways so its still way more expensive since the pc game was not build to be multyplayer on the same pc unlike the console version.


The point is, the PC can do it, and do it better than Diablo 3 on the console. You don't need a PC over $1000 dollars to handle it. A PC costing $500 dollars would be more than enough to do twice as many users than any of the consoles can do.

Now thats just unrealistic.



It takes genuine talent to see greatness in yourself despite your absence of genuine talent.

Doctorslim on 20 August 2014
Mr Puggsly said:
VanceIX said:
Honestly, it's kinda weird that Blizzard couldn't get a last-gen game at 1080p/60fps. Diablo 3 doesn't even look that great visually.

That being said, I'm not a fan of when console makers force devs to make changes to their games.


Blizzard clearly isn't the best at getting the most out of consoles. I've been playing Diablo III Ultimate on the 360 and I'm experiencing choppiness, slow down, screen tearing, etc. Even for 360 this isn't a particularly great looking game.

I doubt MS forced them to make the change. They encouraged 1080p and assisted.

Yeah I agree. I'm sure Microsoft offered some type of insentive too just to make sure they actually did it



Normchacho on 20 August 2014

Yikes. Patching a game and making it worse because the company that makes the console doesn't want to be on the wrong end of the resolution stick again. Poor showing MS, poor showing.



Bet with Adamblaziken:

I bet that on launch the Nintendo Switch will have no built in in-game voice chat. He bets that it will. The winner gets six months of avatar control over the other user.

Mr Puggsly on 20 August 2014
Nem said:
Nettles said:
framerate is more important


This should always be the priority. Gameplay over graphics.

Agreed, but 1080p for dips into the 50s ain't that bad.



Recently Completed: 
River City: Rival Showdown for 3DS (3/5) - River City: Tokyo Rumble for 3DS (4/5) - Zelda: BotW for Wii U (5/5) - Zelda: BotW for Switch (5/5) - Zelda: Link's Awakening for Switch (4/5) - Rage 2 for X1X (4/5) - Rage for 360 (3/5) - Streets of Rage 4 for X1/PC (4/5) - Gears 5 for X1X (5/5) - Mortal Kombat 11 for X1X (5/5) - Doom 64 for N64 (emulator) (3/5) - Crackdown 3 for X1S/X1X (4/5) - Infinity Blade III - for iPad 4 (3/5) - Infinity Blade II - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Infinity Blade - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Wolfenstein: The Old Blood for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Origins for X1 (3/5) - Uncharted: Lost Legacy for PS4 (4/5) - EA UFC 3 for X1 (4/5) - Doom for X1 (4/5) - Titanfall 2 for X1 (4/5) - Super Mario 3D World for Wii U (4/5) - South Park: The Stick of Truth for X1 BC (4/5) - Call of Duty: WWII for X1 (4/5) -Wolfenstein II for X1 - (4/5) - Dead or Alive: Dimensions for 3DS (4/5) - Marvel vs Capcom: Infinite for X1 (3/5) - Halo Wars 2 for X1/PC (4/5) - Halo Wars: DE for X1 (4/5) - Tekken 7 for X1 (4/5) - Injustice 2 for X1 (4/5) - Yakuza 5 for PS3 (3/5) - Battlefield 1 (Campaign) for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Syndicate for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: MW Remastered for X1 (4/5) - Donkey Kong Country Returns for 3DS (4/5) - Forza Horizon 3 for X1 (5/5)

kupomogli on 20 August 2014
Landguy said:
Seems that M$ found that Blizzard should have been able to hit 1080p. They then helped them get to it. Not sure what the point of this is about. This falls in line with the can't win for hitting 1080p, can't win if you don't. No matte what M$ does, people will complain.

Considering people are comoparing it to the PS4, why would they give a win when the Xbox One version has to drop frames to hit that 1080p resolution? 

--

I watched the framerate analysis.  They should have used a class that has more special effects with its attacks rather than what they did.