Sad reality. They don't care about their fans, they have a brand name and will use to make as much money in the shortest time possible. Whether that's a wise long-term strategy is arguable of course, but investors want money as soon as possible, destroying the franchise in the process isn't one of their concerns.

Typos in last sentence ?

Diablo: Immortal was a distasteful display and a real slap in the face to long time fans who've been playing the franchise since its release on PC in the 90's. Diablo 2 was a gem in my personal opinion, but 3 not so much.... I know people were waiting for 4 to come out and hopefully re-kindle that lost long love for the series that so many of us didn't find in 3.

NetEase the co-developer (known for re-skinning games and horrid bugs) working on Diablo doesn't interest me.

This is just yet another example of the main stream industry attempting to fleece the loyal user-base of their franchise. I would only be interested in Diablo: Immortal if the release was on PC and contains Diablo style elements that we've seen in Diablo 2. I'm not interested in a re-skinned product.. I also personally refuse to play games with "fee to play" elements. I don't know if a price tag has been established yet, but in no way would I pay any amount of money for a game that is loaded with micro-transactions. Considering NetEase is working on this, there is a good chance we will see Pay 2 Win elements available through micro-transactions.

I own every Blizzard title to date, and simply will not be buying this, or playing it.

PS. Yes Blizzard we all have "phones", but that doesn't mean the PC user-base that has been playing Diablo since the 90's on PC wants to use our "phones" to play this re-skinned looking game.

I don't know, bliz is often ahead of the curve save for d3. I'm waiting to see how well it does though I have no interest in it. I heard some folks say that this game is not replacing d4 which will still be pc. I find it hard to believe that bliz would disappoint d3 fans so much -  but then again they did it with d2 fans and never looked back. Maybe bliz is working its way to the dark side like so many pc companies of late (da2/3, morrowind). 

I kinda think that this wasn't the time nor the place to announce this.

For what I've heard many of these people attending the event were die-hard PC gamer, so this was just distasteful of Blizzard to do that.

It's a bit like talking about Xbox to a Sony crowd.

(Personally I think that making a mobile game need a whole lot of consideration and UX knowledge. You can't just plop a virtual joystick and call it a day)

This is almost the same case as fans of Phantasy Star Online 2 by SEGA right now, by the way. The fans were slapped by a new upcoming Phantasy Star mobile game called Phantasy Star Idola, an apparently 2D turn-based game that looks closely similar to Fate: Grand Order (and this format is kinda popular in mobile gaming right now). The likes/dislikes ratio in the video of the game is almost as horrible as Diablo Immortal, though of course different size of views.

So I can only assume these big companies kinda have the same agenda and they aren't showing any sign to stop it I think. It's as if they are putting a bet to get new wave of fans from mobile gaming community regardless of their previous hardcore fans say.

Blizzard lost their way a few years ago.  World of Warcraft has lost most of its appeal and although Diablo 3 was fun for a short while, it’s a huge departure from the near perfection that was Diablo 2.

If Blizzard want to retain their existing customer base and see continued growth, all the need to do is go back to their roots.  What they’re doing in this day and age just doesn’t work.

Blizzard clearly (despite claiming otherwise) does not know their customers.  The irony of naming the game Immortal when it's already dead I think was hilarious though.  They did this to themselves though, with their tweets telling people they had a couple Diablo projects/announcements (forget which it was) for BlizzCon then a bit later telling people to tone down their excitement.  Then you announce a mobile only game with features Diablo 3 players have been requested for years (poor Lord Fluffy no one knows who he is haha) in front of PC gamers was idiotic to say the least.  I'm glad they got boo'ed.  Maybe they'll wake up.  Some people are saying new content is coming for Diablo 3 soon (don't hold your breath please), but I've not seen confirmation of that announcement.

Blizzard has no plans to put Diablo Immortal on PC, and you don't want it, either.  You think you do, but you don't.

Blizzard had been turning into Activision for quite a while, and now seems like a good time to remind everybody that Blizzard didn't make Diablo 1 nor 2.  That was Condor Games,, a.k.a. Blizzard North.  Blizzard proper couldn't figure out the formula (between WoW and Diablo 3, they're theme-park people), but now we really get to see how little they understand it as they release it on a platform whose only form of control is a mouse with 1 button.

I freely admit, though, that I couldn't have predicted them to be so out of touch as to proudly present an Eastern mobile product to a Western PC crowd.

Mobile gaming account for more than twice the total revenue of PC gaming, and that revenue is growing at ~15x the rate PC gaming. Any AAA games company not looking for revenue opportunities in mobile are likely signing their own death warrant at this point.

So I don't really get the anger here. This isn't a zero sum game. D4 is clearly still in development (and just as clearly, nowhere near ready to show off). Betting some cash on NetEase to succeed in the mobile market is ensuring Blizzard can afford to float PC development for another decade, even if revenue on PC remains stagnant.

Yes in 2018 (estimates) mobile games are at 50% while PC games are 25% as well as console games at 25% in global revenue. However that doesn't change the fact that Diablo fans by large don't want a mobile release regardless of what the market share is. We simply don't care what is profitable for Blizzard, we want a good Diablo game on PC. They could as easily created new IP and went to the mobile market if they wanted to, but bringing Diablo which is primarily a PC user base to mobile was not a wise move, and clearly at BlizzCon we could see that displayed. Their promo videos have been down voted to death. It's very clear they're just looking to cash out at the expense of loyal fans, but it backfired. We already know the "Pay 2 Win" and "Micro-transactions" will plague this game as to be expected on the mobile market.

I'm sure the main reason for such revenue in the mobile market is largely due to the micro-transactions that continue to introduce gambling like mechanics which prey on those with addictive personalities to rake in the cash. This is why we see a lot of this now in AAA games at full price with their gambling crates, and the crap we see with EA and their sports titles. The amount of money to be made is very high, and I don't blame them from a business stand point for doing so, but as a gamer I find it exploitative.

At the end of the day it's smart to go where the money is, but it's not smart to attempt to force a PC user base loyal to the Diablo franchise and move them to mobile without testing the market to see how fans would feel about this. Diablo is an established franchise that has been around for awhile and should be treated with some respect. They could've saved themselves a lot of trouble by bringing up the idea of a Diablo game on mobile prior and at least fans at BlizzCon would know what to expect if the acceptance by the user base was high, otherwise they could scrap the idea.

People have spoken, and it's not all "good praise" at this time for Diablo Immortal which seems to have died before it even began.

Oh, and apparently there is some issue with down-votes being removed as the live counter shows a lot more:

http://likescounter.com/?vidid=RtSmAwpVHsA

I expect this kind of response from the "gamer" public, but less so on a developer site...

• A company the size of Blizzard is certainly working on multiple titles at the same time. The existence of this game has zero impact on the existence of Diablo 4.
• The youth demographic is extremely different to us. Many kids spend more time watching other people play games than actually playing them themselves   
• The East Asian countries are extremely different to the Western countries. There's literally billions of new customers being targeted here.
• Making games for these markets has zero impact on Diablo 4 for PC. They can make games for other people and still make games for you too.
• It would be negligent for them as a business to ignore these markets. This makes absolute business sense.
• Making mobile games has zero impact on Diablo 4 for PC. It actually strengthens an eventual Diablo 4 launch if they've recruited millions of new fans via the mobile game...
• Bringing Diablo to mobile is a hell of a lot more than a "re-skin". I expect that shit from people who've never made a game... but, really?
• Back in my day, I played Blizzard games on Nintendo ?
• They can make mobile games and PC games and Playstation games and Nintendo games ?
• Plenty of other AAA games have had respectful, well made mobile spin-offs in recent years...

20 minutes ago, Hodgman said:

The East Asian countries are extremely different to the Western countries. There's literally billions of new customers being targeted here.

If that would be the case then I think that Blizzard should have not have announced it at Blizzcon (IDK if Blizzcon-like event exists in Asia, though)

45 minutes ago, Hodgman said:

The existence of this game has zero impact on the existence of Diablo 4.

Banjo-Kazooie Nuts and Bolts, anyone? ?

2 hours ago, swiftcoder said:

Mobile gaming account for more than twice the total revenue of PC gaming, and that revenue is growing at ~15x the rate PC gaming

I've just looked at the Google Play Store top popular games list, and most of them were either strategy or puzzle games (there might have been one or two arcade games at best). While it's true that the market IS bigger on mobile it's only bigger within certain genera.

Right now Blizzard is literally trying to port Diablo's genera and overall gameplay to the mobile which is statistically not really viable.

As a rule of thumb, if you use virtual buttons or joysticks in mobile then you should really go back to the drawing board and really think about the UX...

For example, let's take arguably one of the most popular mobile game ever : Angry Birds.

The game uses intuitive controls that are simple to understand, which makes the game easy to play in short bursts.

But most importantly, there's no virtual buttons nor virtual joysticks (aside for really simple things like pausing and such)

So If the controls are too complex to understand in a fraction of a second then your mobile game is doomed to fail, and that even if the possible revenue is 15x bigger on phones than on PCs. (And so far, Immortal's screenshots aren't promising...)

5 hours ago, jb-dev said:

I've just looked at the Google Play Store top popular games list, and most of them were either strategy or puzzle games (there might have been one or two arcade games at best). While it's true that the market IS bigger on mobile it's only bigger within certain genera.

Right now Blizzard is literally trying to port Diablo's genera and overall gameplay to the mobile which is statistically not really viable.

As a rule of thumb, if you use virtual buttons or joysticks in mobile then you should really go back to the drawing board and really think about the UX...

So If the controls are too complex to understand in a fraction of a second then your mobile game is doomed to fail, and that even if the possible revenue is 15x bigger on phones than on PCs. (And so far, Immortal's screenshots aren't promising...)

That sounds like solid advice a few years ago. Not in 2018 though - the markets are shifting a lot.

Fortnite, a complex first person shooter that requires precise joystick controls, is making about $0.6B (billion!) per year just with the mobile version.
PUBG's mobile port (an even more hardcore, skill-based first person shooter) has over 20 million DAU (which I'd ballpark convert to at least $100M annual revenue).
ROBLOX is making about $185M per year on mobile.

As for what people are looking for on mobile outside of the Angry Bird demographic, just take a look at screenshots from the 8 most popular mobile games in China at the moment:
https://imgur.com/a/OXk2FDq
Complex MOBA, arcade racing, RPG, MMO and FPS games!

Young people's first "gaming machine" these days is their Android phone. And they're using it as such. They are playing complicated games that were typically reserved for PC/console now. The way that I think back fondly about the SNES is going to be the way people in thirtysomethings in 20 years time think about Android!

And yeah, to me, this really looks like Blizzard trying to extend the reach of Diablo globally to new demographics... It looks perfect for "gen Z" and south-east Asia. So, announcing it to a room of "gamers" who are expecting a D4 announcement, without prepping the Q&A staff adequately, is a complete PR fumble. On a gamedev site though I'd expect people to apply some industry insight to temper the backlash though.

2 hours ago, Hodgman said:

And yeah, to me, this really looks like Blizzard trying to extend the reach of Diablo globally to new demographics... It looks perfect for "gen Z" and south-east Asia. So, announcing it to a room of "gamers" who are expecting a D4 announcement, without prepping the Q&A staff adequately, is a complete PR fumble. On a gamedev site though I'd expect people to apply some industry insight to temper the backlash though.

Yup exactly, they ain't gonna stop. For the mobile gaming community that are teenagers and young adults, this Diablo will be entirely a new Diablo game for them. However, unlike Fortnite, it has no competition other than PUBG for battle royale genre on mobile, and they both went in in almost the same time. Diablo however, there are tons similar games already there even though mostly cluster-based dungeon. I look forward how well they will be.

8 hours ago, jb-dev said:

If that would be the case then I think that Blizzard should have not have announced it at Blizzcon (IDK if Blizzcon-like event exists in Asia, though)

Banjo-Kazooie Nuts and Bolts, anyone? ?

I've just looked at the Google Play Store top popular games list, and most of them were either strategy or puzzle games (there might have been one or two arcade games at best). While it's true that the market IS bigger on mobile it's only bigger within certain genera.

Right now Blizzard is literally trying to port Diablo's genera and overall gameplay to the mobile which is statistically not really viable.

As a rule of thumb, if you use virtual buttons or joysticks in mobile then you should really go back to the drawing board and really think about the UX...

For example, let's take arguably one of the most popular mobile game ever : Angry Birds.

The game uses intuitive controls that are simple to understand, which makes the game easy to play in short bursts.

But most importantly, there's no virtual buttons nor virtual joysticks (aside for really simple things like pausing and such)

So If the controls are too complex to understand in a fraction of a second then your mobile game is doomed to fail, and that even if the possible revenue is 15x bigger on phones than on PCs. (And so far, Immortal's screenshots aren't promising...)

Actually, MOBA game like Arena of Valor or Mobile Legends uses virtual joystick. These games hit 10m to 100m+ downloads. These are just a few examples exist.  Another is HIT, a top down RPG with 5m downloads. It also uses virtual joystick, and there are many others like these.

Anyway unlike PC/Console games with one-time buy at front, like it or not, these games keep profiting every month with their IAP model, and HIT, for example, has been here for a few years long.

Mobile community as I see it, dare to spend hundreds if not thousands on a single game, not hundreds or thousand dollars on many games on steam during discount, and that's every month, not one time. The money is there, again, like it or not, and they dare to keep spending.

12 hours ago, swiftcoder said:

Mobile gaming account for more than twice the total revenue of PC gaming, and that revenue is growing at ~15x the rate PC gaming. Any AAA games company not looking for revenue opportunities in mobile are likely signing their own death warrant at this point.

So I don't really get the anger here. This isn't a zero sum game. D4 is clearly still in development (and just as clearly, nowhere near ready to show off). Betting some cash on NetEase to succeed in the mobile market is ensuring Blizzard can afford to float PC development for another decade, even if revenue on PC remains stagnant.

So your position is that, simply because a company has stumbled upon a new way of gathering to themselves a bazillion dollars by fleecing whales and selling lootboxes to people with poor impulse control, the former fans of the company's previous work are supposed to just be super duper happy about it and not express any of their sadness or anger for a bygone age? Just shut up and take it? Seems an odd position to take, but eh.

10 hours ago, Hodgman said:

I expect this kind of response from the "gamer" public, but less so on a developer site...

Climb down off your smug high horse, ffs. A gamer doesn't suddenly put on their cold robot suit just because they also become a developer.

10 hours ago, Hodgman said:

The East Asian countries are extremely different to the Western countries. There's literally billions of new customers being targeted here.

Not very many of those billions were at Blizzcon, though. The folks that WERE at Blizzcon certainly weren't looking for this kind of drek.

11 hours ago, Hodgman said:

The existence of this game has zero impact on the existence of Diablo 4.

11 hours ago, Hodgman said:

Making games for these markets has zero impact on Diablo 4 for PC. They can make games for other people and still make games for you too

There is such a thing as messaging, and it's pretty important in this day and age. Making the announcement of this thing at Blizzcon, in lieu of any actual real news of D4, sent a pretty clear and strong message, spelled out in two raised middle fingers.

11 hours ago, Hodgman said:

Bringing Diablo to mobile is a hell of a lot more than a "re-skin". I expect that shit from people who've never made a game... but, really?

LOL. Just... no. C'mon, man. Many of those gacha games are just Diablo clones, made by people who have a hell of a lot more experience making Diablo clones than Blizzard has experience actually making Diablo. Quite a few Chinese players have commented in the wake of this cluster#*@! about how reskinning lootbox games is a large part of Netease's schtick. People who have played the Diablo thing have done side by side comparisons with Netease's existing fare, and the evidence of a reskin is there.  Reskin their game, drop some Blizzard polish on it, start selling lootboxes and soul gem packs.

39 minutes ago, JTippetts said:

11 hours ago, Hodgman said:

 

Climb down off your smug high horse, ffs. A gamer doesn't suddenly put on their cold robot suit just because they also become a developer.

Most of the ones I know did. They have to. Putting on a "cold robot suit" (assuming I understand what you mean by this) is the most straightforward way to deal with abusive rhetoric from their own fans, the loudest of whom are entitled shitheads who don't understand how the game development process works and make constant demands that have nothing to do with technical or business realities. Many developers live in active fear of their own fanbase. If I ever start publishing my side projects, I'm not sure I won't release my games anonymously, just to avoid that harassment nonsense.

We live in the world where Reddit did its best to get a developer fired and the employer caved in and fired the developer. Perhaps you can forgive me for being startled and worried to see a fellow developer echoing the exact same kind of angry rhetoric that the entitled shitheads are using.

On the mobile thing - I expect young teenagers as much as the Asian markets are the target audience here. My employer sent a few people to an industry event a little while ago where loads of kids came to see a booth we had. We discovered - but should really have expected, considering the way things are going - that these days kids under 10 don't know what a computer mouse is or how to use one. They expect everything to be a touchscreen, because in their world, everything is a touchscreen. Blizzard is, presumably, aiming at the kids who grew up with touchscreens - the Fornite demographic - rather than us, so in my mind this is all whining about the fact that Blizzard isn't catering to your whims with this particular product.

3 minutes ago, Oberon_Command said:

so in my mind this is all whining about the fact that Blizzard isn't catering to your whims with this particular product.

That's good, because that is exactly what it is. If I had a cookie, I'd give it to you.

As I said in my OP, I just can't get all that worked up about it because I've already walked away, but the reason for the ongoing anger in the community was 100% about the message they sent by taking this announcement and giving it prime featuring at Blizzcon. (Final announcement, first panel discussion.) That message is "see this? This is what we're gonna focus on. It's not what you came here for, it's not why you've been buying our games, it's not what you want, but we honest to God don't give a shit because there's boatloads of lootbox cash to be made so all y'all can just piss off." They have every right to do so, and if such a business plan fits their overall company vision then like has been said repeatedly, they'd be fools or worse not to. Had they kept that thing low-key, though, instead of putting it center stage at Blizzcon, it'd probably have just flown under the radar. But putting it where they did in the way that they did made for some pretty funny memeable moments and just a lot of warm and happy memories.

12 hours ago, Hodgman said:

I expect this kind of response from the "gamer" public, but less so on a developer site...

• A company the size of Blizzard is certainly working on multiple titles at the same time. The existence of this game has zero impact on the existence of Diablo 4.
• The youth demographic is extremely different to us. Many kids spend more time watching other people play games than actually playing them themselves   
• The East Asian countries are extremely different to the Western countries. There's literally billions of new customers being targeted here.
• Making games for these markets has zero impact on Diablo 4 for PC. They can make games for other people and still make games for you too.
• It would be negligent for them as a business to ignore these markets. This makes absolute business sense.
• Making mobile games has zero impact on Diablo 4 for PC. It actually strengthens an eventual Diablo 4 launch if they've recruited millions of new fans via the mobile game...
• Bringing Diablo to mobile is a hell of a lot more than a "re-skin". I expect that shit from people who've never made a game... but, really?
• Back in my day, I played Blizzard games on Nintendo ?
• They can make mobile games and PC games and Playstation games and Nintendo games ?
• Plenty of other AAA games have had respectful, well made mobile spin-offs in recent years...

Whether or not, Blizzard is making Diablo 4, we have no assurance that it's being made. We can easily infer that it is, but as far as official statements go, Blizzard hasn't mentioned that they even care about it.

Good luck selling games to people who just watch them.

Yes, the East is vastly different to the West.  Why, then, was this so assertively advertised to the West?

They -can- make games for everyone, but how do we know that they are?

It's negligent for a business to slag off its already-existing fanbase.

Whether or not, Blizzard is making Diablo 4, we have no assurance that it's being made. We can easily infer that it is, but as far as official statements go, Blizzard hasn't mentioned that they even care about it.

I remember watching an interview with a LucasArts exec, who said that they eventually had to realize that "fans wanted the Star Wars experience, not just the Star Wars brand."   Unless, Blizzard has figured out a way to combo abilities organically with one button, they aren't "bringing" Diablo to mobile any more than Master Of Teras Kasi "brought" Star Wars to Playstation.  Instead, all available indicators point to bringing Crusaders Of Light under the Blizzard umbrella.

Back in your day, Blizzard hadn't yet made Warcraft.

They -can- make games for everyone, but how do we know that they are?

Plenty of other AAA games also announced their spinoffs alongside continuations of the mainline games.

1 hour ago, Oberon_Command said:

Most of the ones I know did. They have to. Putting on a "cold robot suit" (assuming I understand what you mean by this) is the most straightforward way to deal with abusive rhetoric from their own fans, the loudest of whom are entitled shitheads who don't understand how the game development process works and make constant demands that have nothing to do with technical or business realities. If I ever start publishing my side projects, I'm not sure I won't release my games anonymously, just to avoid that harassment nonsense. Perhaps you can understand why someone of us would be startled - and irritated or worried - to see a fellow developer echoing the exact same kind of angry rhetoric that the entitled shitheads are using.

On the mobile thing - I expect young teenagers as much as the Asian markets are the target audience here. My employer sent a few people to an industry event where loads of kids came to see a booth we had. We discovered - but should really have expected, considering the way things are going - that these days kids under 10 don't know what a computer mouse is or how to use one. They expect everything to be a touchscreen, because in their world, everything is a touchscreen. Blizzard is, presumably, aiming at the kids who grew up with touchscreens rather than us, so in my mind this is all whining about the fact that Blizzard isn't catering to your whims with this particular product.

The heart of the matter is that the Diablo franchise goes back 2 decades when there were NO touch screens and more importantly, the fans feel that games were honest products back then. Players could play a free demo and decide whether or not to buy the full game without being hammered by micro transactions, wait timers, adds and what have you.

These guys love their pc games and love the old games known as the classic games. The Diablo games (1 and 2) are amongst these and considered by many to be some of the finest games ever made. Now these guys are at Blizzcon, Blizzard had hyped the fans up by means of a video msg back in August , and they get is Diablo on mobile. 

The fans aint silly Billy, they fully understand what direction this is all heading. That they are being considered cash cows by this company and are being introduced to Blizzard's brand new barn with Blizzard's brand new milking machine installed. 

What I find astounding is that the company (and some game journalists) don't seem to get it. "Why are these players not lining up in our brand new barn to have our new milking machine strapped to their nipples?? They're making noice and give us the finger?? What the hell is wrong with these players" 

This youtube content creator uploaded a very good video showing the reaction of Mark Kern on what he calls "The Diablo Immortal fiasco". 

On 11/6/2018 at 7:23 AM, JTippetts said:

the former fans of the company's previous work are supposed to just be super duper happy about it and not express any of their sadness or anger for a bygone age?

There's nothing to be unhappy about here. Given a choice between (a) Diablo Immortal being announced, or (b) no game being announced at Blizzcon, how is (b) preferable to (a)?

9 minutes ago, swiftcoder said:

There's nothing to be unhappy about here. Given a choice between (a) Diablo Immortal being announced, or (b) no game being announced at Blizzcon, how is (b) preferable to (a)?

Because it kills the memory of what was.

I'd prefer no game. Or at least badge it as something else and not Diablo. Either way, can't see myself playing it. Mobile gaming has never been my thing. I've tried, just don't like it.

7 hours ago, swiftcoder said:

There's nothing to be unhappy about here. Given a choice between (a) Diablo Immortal being announced, or (b) no game being announced at Blizzcon, how is (b) preferable to (a)?

It's like getting a crap sandwich instead of the tasty hot pastrami on rye you wanted, then being told you're wrong (and an entitled jerk) to be unhappy about it. It's stuff in between two slices of bread, isn't it? What's there to be unhappy about?

12 hours ago, DividedByZero said:

I'd prefer no game. Or at least badge it as something else and not Diablo

Wait. Hang on. Who died and made you the arbiter of what constitutes a Diablo game?

Plenty of people do want Diablo on mobile. Personally, I can't figure out why Diablo wasn't their first mobile title - the Diablo gameplay and loot reward cycle is perfect for a mobile game.

5 hours ago, JTippetts said:

It's like getting a crap sandwich instead of the tasty hot pastrami on rye you wanted

The hot pastrami on rye (I'm presuming you mean a PC-based D4 in this analogy) was never even on the menu in the first place.

Any chance you'd be willing to attempt to pronounce those words??  

The only thing I don't really like about them doing this is their "What? Don't you have phones?" kinda line... I feel bad for the announcer because he must have p'ed somebody off and they were like "K. You can announce immortal! HA!" kinda deal. Its a shame because I'd play a Diablo 4 or something but I'm just not a Mobile Gamer... I mean I don't go out much so if I'm playing a Game I'm either at my Computer or my TV. I ain't guna sit in the corner of a room with my phone in my hand unless.... nope not even then. 

I hope Diablo Immortal goes well for them though but I also hope they pay attention to this 'fiasco' and reverse decisions so either way really... 

14 hours ago, DividedByZero said:

Because it kills the memory of what was.

How? Last I looked, Blizzard was still selling Diablo 2 and 3.

Just now, Oberon_Command said:

How? Last I looked, Blizzard was still selling Diablo 2 and 3.

Not to mention actively remastering a pretty good chunk of their back-catalogue.

17 minutes ago, CyberFlash said:

but I also hope they pay attention to this 'fiasco' and reverse decisions

I'm really not sure I understand what decision folks want to see reversed. The decision to build a mobile diablo at all? The decision to announce a mobile game at their own conference? Or the decision to not have a finished Diablo 4 ready RIGHT NOW?

2 minutes ago, swiftcoder said:

I'm really not sure I understand what decision folks want to see reversed

I personally would want the decision to go mobile reversed but that's just like my preference and opinion. I think some folks would desire a mix of each of the things you said. I mean I dunno at the conference one though really.. Where else would you announce it? So I suppose there's no reason be mad on that one so it'd just be the Mobile Diablo and no D4 ones. 

2 hours ago, Oberon_Command said:

How? Last I looked, Blizzard was still selling Diablo 2 and 3.

That's great. I don't see your point.

4 hours ago, swiftcoder said:

Wait. Hang on. Who died and made you the arbiter of what constitutes a Diablo game?

The hot pastrami on rye (I'm presuming you mean a PC-based D4 in this analogy) was never even on the menu in the first place.

No one died and made me anything. Did you not read my post? It started with "I'd prefer", which makes it an opinion which I thought was allowed in these parts.

But a few facts;

• Diablo (1, 2, & 3) was designed for PC, Mac, and Console.
• Diablo (1, 2, & 3) was never released on Android and iOS.

Now look at Diablo Immortal;

• Diablo Immortal is designed for Android and iOS.
• Diablo Immortal will never be released for PC, Mac, or Console.

It is a different product designed for a different user base.

4 hours ago, swiftcoder said:

Plenty of people do want Diablo on mobile.

Which person was that?

Keep it friendly please folks!

17 hours ago, DividedByZero said:

That's great. I don't see your point.

I asked a simple question. How does Blizzard releasing a mobile game kill the memory of what Diablo "was"? The games that created those memories are still around, are still being sold, and it's not like Blizzard can somehow reach into your mind and remove your memories of PC Diablo. I flat-out don't see that what you're saying logically follows.

Frankly, all I see is whining that you (plural) aren't the complete center of Blizzard's attention with regards to one of their major franchises - JTippetts even admitted such - and consequently you are all coming across like a child whining that their younger sibling got a new toy for Christmas. Is that really how you want to be seen? I had faith that folks here more mature than the gaming "hoi polloi", though that faith is being tested right now.

To be fair, as a kid. If my younger sibling got a toy for Christmas and I got nothing that'd be kinda saddening ? What kind of child wouldn't be sad about getting nothing for Christmas O.o 

38 minutes ago, CyberFlash said:

To be fair, as a kid. If my younger sibling got a toy for Christmas and I got nothing that'd be kinda saddening ? What kind of child wouldn't be sad about getting nothing for Christmas

Alright, incomplete analogy. Regardless, it's still looking a lot like pointless whining to me and it's still coming across as childish to me. Perhaps you could engage with the actual point rather than nitpicking my bad analogies. HOW does adding a new game to the franchise destroy the memory of it?

Haha but you've got a valid point so I can't take that on ;). I mean there's nothing we can do about this. I'm simply not guna play mobile games and will continue to play d3 whenever and hopefully they'll keep up the seasons init. 

I feel like perhaps someone feels like creating a mobile variant is ruining the memory because it never felt like it'd go to mobile for that person or something. I dunno though, I'm sure if immortal does well they'll probably update it or make another but surely they'll also do a pc/console thing later since that's high demand so it'd be like younger siblings birthday is December 20th so you've just gotta wait a little bit more for your present at Christmas or something.

I think in the end it all comes down to the false assumption that AAAs are somehow committed to providing a quality product to their customers. They're not, they are committed to making money, we expect that providing a decent product is part of that process but that's been proven false (fo76 why oh why :trollface:). Their success isn't measured in the quality of their products or satisfaction of their audience, but in the quantity of money they make. It's simple as that.

Now I'm not saying that producing a good game isn't part of that equation, but things like appealing to a broader audience might be a lot more important. Especially with the popularization of game development I think niche games are going to be supplied by small and indie studios, the big companies are going to produce games that cater to the widest audience as possible, what means a pretty low common denominator in terms of game mechanics and incredible visuals.

I think it's an irreversible tendency that the big franchises are distancing themselves from their past in favor of lower entry barriers for the players. Fallout these days is very different from the isometric versions, and it diverges from them with each iteration. If you want a classic Fallout experience these days, indies got you covered with say Wasteland 2 or other 'spiritual successors'. The same clearly happened to some extent to Diablo, and will only *intensify* in the future in my opinion. I personally lost interest in Diablo 3 when they went for a WoW art style to be honest. What a shallow dude I am :trollface:.

@JTippetts I miss the :trollface: so much :sad:.

On 11/11/2018 at 8:50 AM, CyberFlash said:

I mean there's nothing we can do about this. I'm simply not guna play mobile games and will continue to play d3 whenever and hopefully they'll keep up the seasons init.

I started playing Diablo 2 again, it's a lot more fun then D3 honestly.  Hell, Wolcen beta is more fun then D3.  If you've played one season of D3 you've played all 16.  At least PoE adds massive amounts of new content each league.  Heck it should say something when D2 has quite a few more players then D3 does.

But the main problem?  People keep supporting these companies.  If they went broke doing stuff we didn't like they would change.  But instead players enable them.  I swear Diablo Immortal is being rated G to draw in younger kids to get them addicted to paying for cosmetics.  Look at Fallout 76, the same mail person uniform from Fallout 4 you got for free is like $10 in 76.  And people are buying it!  You already paid $30-60 (LOL!) for the game, and you want to pay more for something that was free in a previous game?  They didn't change anything according to someone who looked at the asset files on the PC for the uniform either...

@CrazyCdn I think the problem is we're all far from the typical 'mainstream' games audience these days. I personally enjoyed the 3D Fallouts, New Vegas being the best by far, but they're distancing from the original games so much that it doesn't really feel like a Fallout game anymore, at that point they lose me, but if for each old times fan they lose they sell 10 more copies to new players because of the more accessible 'call of duty' mechanics and less contradictory story predicaments that's a win for them... who am I to tell them they're wrong simply because I personally didn't like the new iterations or the overall direction the franchise is taking.

I really feel your pain. But as you said people are buying it. Bethesda wants to sell games and they're making the games the most people will buy. That's an irreversible tendency in my opinion, and the old fans will have to content themselves with these indie alternatives I guess... unless they decide to split the franchises into separate 'lite' and 'hardcore' versions, what has been done in the past, I don't know if successfully. What will determine that is whether there is money to be made from games that are more similar to the old school ones. Maybe a production like that won't be profitable for a large studio to begin with.

Diablo was: dark, dark, dark. Diablo 2 was: dark, dark. Diablo 3 was dark. Immortal? I would bet that it's in a carebear rainbow. 

diablo has moved so far from its roots, the memory is far away now. Why shouldn't people outcry about it? The talent and passion left and the remainder chased the LCD. Rather than being true to concept and innovative they instead took the shortest path to a fatter bank account. 

Diablo? In name only, I would bet - and that should upset a fan - it's not crying as much as it is giving the finger, and it's what they deserve. 

Its not like the fans are even talking to real diablo developers anymore, they're long gone. 

Betrayed, yes, and they should just get a different IP, though I doubt that'll happen. 

Crying? Justified - and more like a bunch of wiggling fingers - flocks of fu's. 

9 minutes ago, h8CplusplusGuru said:

they instead took the shortest path to a fatter bank account

The real question here is why you would expect a company like that to not take that path. While the current model of casual/accessible (some say 'dumb') games full of IAPs and shady stuff works we can only expect companies to go that route. Unfortunately these days you can't really expect these large companies to have any respect or consideration for their customers.

Well the thing Is will d5 be a VR fps? When will fans get some respect and not have companies mutilating IPs for no reason other than to have other games get an established name?

3 hours ago, AlanGameDev said:

I think the problem is we're all far from the typical 'mainstream' games audience these days. I personally enjoyed the 3D Fallouts, New Vegas being the best by far, but they're distancing from the original games so much that it doesn't really feel like a Fallout game anymore, at that point they lose me, but if for each old times fan they lose they sell 10 more copies to new players because of the more accessible 'call of duty' mechanics and less contradictory story predicaments that's a win for them... who am I to tell them they're wrong simply because I personally didn't like the new iterations or the overall direction the franchise is taking.

Oh I don't care if they change the franchise, I enjoyed FO4, not as much as New Vegas but Bethesda didn't make NV anyway.  And I don't think Bethesda made a game fans want.  They're now offering refunds for PC purchases of FO76 and less then 10 days after release put the game on sale for 33% off or more.  Talk about a slap to the face for those that paid full price.  Why I never buy beta/alpha access from AAA studios nor should anyone else.  Indies I don't mind as the cost is normally a lot less.  Then again I do not buy many AAA games these days sticking more to indies (Rimworld is amazing if you like that sort of game).

@CrazyCdn personally I'm also more into indie titles these days. I haven't played Rimworld because I don't really like micro management games, but it's certainly a game that we'll never see a AAA rolling out. Indie titles still have that 'hit and miss' feel though. Early access could be better, and many games are flawed technically. Steam also has a ton of asset flips these days, most are taken down, but that's a disservice to the serious indie developers. For example a game like this which has assets clearly ripped without permission from Driver San Francisco, the developers didn't even remove the license plate text:

and that's one of their promotional screenshots, they are so sure that Steam is terrible and flawed that they simply didn't care. And games like that are the vast majority of Steam games I find these days.
As an indie developer I'm disgusted by that, and profoundly disappointed on Steam for allowing that kind of outrageous product to reach their virtual shelves.

Cheap asset flips are also very common these days, or not even flips, just projects straight out of the Unity Asset store, just built and published on Steam. It's not only unfair competition, but it tarnishes the image of the whole indie community. At least on Steam "Indie" is now synonym of terrible quality asset flips, at least that's what you get when you browse the "Indie" tag, most games are simply pathetic.

The strange part is that you get much higher quality in itch.io which is a much more 'open' store, so one can only assume that as long as Steam is making money they couldn't care less.

I hope some day indies will have a decent store to sell their products. A store that at least forbids blatant asset flips or games with illegally ripped copyright content. Maybe it's going to be itch.io, maybe GOG is a decent alternative, maybe the Humble guys... I don't know. But it's sad that Steam is the most important store for indies and yet they have absolutely no respect for indies whatsoever... and for the customers too because if you're selling these pathetic products it's pretty clear you don't care.

(Ignore any links in this post; they are from gamedev's affiliate system)

Slightly on a tangent - what are your guys' takes on the sheer flood of Games Workshop licensed PC games lately?  Are they true to the brand or are they licensing the IP for games nobody wants?

Personally I've had a ton of fun with Vermintide 2, and Dawn of War 2 was OK.