Diablo III Speculation Thread: sys-reqs, release date, gameplay, etc.

So, seeing as how the game seems to be shaping up pretty well, and coming along, I wanted to start up a speculation thread:

System Requirements (my educated guess based on SC2's requirements and D3's gameplay videos, as well as Bizzard's record for requirements):

Windows XP/Windows Vista/Windows 7 (7 Recommended)
Core 2 Duo or Equivalent @ 1.5GHz (Core 2 Quad or i-Series Recommended)
256 MB PCIe NVIDIA® GeForce® 8600 SE or ATI Radeon® X2500 video card or better (1 GB MB NVIDIA GeForce 250 or ATI 4650 Recommended)
15 GB available HD space
1.5 GB RAM (2GB required for Windows Vista®/Windows® 7 users, 3 GB Recommended)
1024X720 minimum display resolution

I estimated both the Video RAM and system RAM usages would be high based on the fact that the textures in this game seem to be very high res. Particles and polygon counts seem relatively low (compared to many games today), meaning the best GPU's on the market shouldn't be needed. As always, a large amount of units require a lot of pathing, and we also know physics will be a large part of gameplay, so CPU requirements are a bit more demanding than SC2.

Hoping for a 2011 release, which Pardo says: "is the goal" (source: http://www.blizzplanet.com/blog/comments/2011-aias-rob-pardo-says-diablo-iii-goal-is-2011 ). Thoughts?

EDIT: In regards to the console port:

You do realize that Starcraft 1 was a console port also, right?

Blizzard is not going to cater to the console crowd above the PC base, that would be suicide for them. End of story. The Console version will be released later to make some extra cash from colsole nubs.

 

Blizzard has a high track record allowing for low system requirements for all of their games. It will take nice hardware to enable all the eye candy but no need to worry whether a low spec PC by today's standard can handle D3, it should.

 

Agreed. The minimum specs are quite low for the average Blizzard game.

 

Its now a console port. No longer. Excited .

 

What??????

 

Yup.

Blizzard Hiring for Diablo 3 Console Version?

 

Yeah, darn consoles shouldn't get it, it was one of the reasons to pick a PC over a console.

 

that's terrible. i don't like should-be pc exclusive titles going to consoles because then the UI gets clunky.

 

Wait... wait... its being PORTED to console... big difference.

Develop on PC then dumb down for console = OK.

Develop on console then copy/paste to PC = worthless game.

 

Thank you.

I'm still excited for this game, if you look at the gameplay videos it was obviously designed for a PC experience, I have no doubt Diablo 3 will be fun on consoles as well. I just have a strong feeling that Blizzard will be doing some serious redesigning for it to play well on consoles. That said, I hope Blizzard continues to target low and high end computers, as they've done in the past. If this game sells poorly on PC, then I fully expect Blizzard to become another Activision console developer... in a matter of years.

 

that isn't how it generally works. game developers like making ports easy to develop since they know it will be multi-platform. thus, they basically develop the UI to be more "tabbed" styled and easier to navigate with buttons rather than a mouse.

the consoles are much more streamlined with frameworks for some reason (XNA, for example), so people feel the need to keep everything as constant as they can to ensure development goes smooth.

as long as they keep both teams / projects relatively seperate, like how DICE intends to do for BF3, the game will have a standing chance at avoiding the "port curse".

EDIT: there is no reason why this game would sell poorly. Blizzard most likely anticipates a huge percentage of their WoW subcribers to quit WoW and merge to D3. that, in my opionion, is why Blizzard keeps pushing back the release date. they're milking what they can from WoW

 

I dont think they will release it this year.... this game has been in speculation for almost a decade already, dont get me wrong, I love the games(1 and 2), but all this speculation and not releasing the damn thing is making me sick...

 

I've got faith in Blizzard that IF a console version comes out, it wont be at the expense of a quality PC version. They're a good company and know what the fans want.

 

Yeah, so was Crysis 2.

Press Start

 

The game hasn't even been announced yet!

 

Blizzard has never really let me down and I've been playing their games since WC2/D2. I have faith that the PC version will be fine

Remember, Blizzard focuses on quality and the "it's going to be ready when it's ready" method of approach. Unlike EA where they'll ship out broken games and then hire 1 part time employee to patch it months later.

 

yeah, in another 12-14 years when they release SC3 and Diablo 4.

 

I think this game like others have said will play nice with high and low pc, I personally hope they ditch XP support though, some people just need to be forced to upgrade and this would be a good reason to.

I will say though that we have seen blizzard build several games and not release them, SC Ghost, SC2 was built on W3 engine originally. So I think this game may keep getting the push back to vapor ware, they have alot coming out and this would only distract players from that. Like alot of people said this would take away from their money machine WoW, that game gets 15 bucks a month plus the sale amount of game purchase. Were as D3 will be a one time purchase, not generating a revenue flow for them. They also have the other mmo on deck being worked on.

 

GUYS: You do realize that Starcraft 1 was a console port also, right?

Blizzard is not going to cater to the console crowd above the PC base, that would be suicide for them. End of story. The Console version will be released later to make some extra cash from colsole nubs.

 

Ha! I remember playing that on my N64, it was actually pretty decent for being an rts on the console.

 

No, Crysis 2 was made for consoles, and we've known that from the start. There was never a point in it's development where it was intended as a PC exclusive.

I swear, this childish sense of superiority and entitlement is the one thing I can't stand about PC gamers. You can't judge a game before it's out, no matter what the case is. And you're assuming that a game which we all know for certain started as a PC exclusive was scrapped midway and then shifted to consoles, which is just stupid.

 

but its been "under development" for as long as forever...

 

I've been playing video games for as long as I can remember. I think I was 3 years old, or less, when my uncle bought me a SNES. But without a doubt, D2 was the reason why I consider myself a gamer today. Blizzard is one of the few developers whom I trust to provide a quality product. I couldn't care less if D3 gets released on consoles, or even handhelds, I'll play it on my PC as it is meant to be enjoyed, knowing full well that the PC version will not "dumbed" down.

The defense rest.

 

To be honest, it doesn't really matter if a game was a console port.
What matters is if the port has been done PROPERLY.
Examples of poor ports include: Star Trek: Legacy and SW: TFU1&2 (these are by FAR one of the worst possible ports) just to name a few.

One of the best console ports done was in my opinion: Darksiders.

A console game can look and feel amazing if done properly. Most bad console ports are due to severe lack of optimizations for example which result in extremely high hardware demands (which to be honest are ridiculous since my laptop alone beats console grade hardware).
I think this is mostly because the developers either don't care about PC gamers, and/or I wouldn't be surprised if they do it intentionally (badly optimize the games) in order to force us to buy new laptops/computers so we could play the games 'properly' (then again, this is capitalist based society we're talking about, so this kind of scheming is not above them).

 

Yep I agree with you. The only two game developers that I can trust for their game quality are VALVe and Blizzard.

 

I disagree. Talented (and even untalented) developers can make way more money on the console platform; hence the entire reason we see them flocking to the platform. Blizzard isn't a privately owned company so the only "loyalty" it has is to earn it's investors money.

Blizzard is a game developer, and the consoles are where a majority of the gamers are at. I think Blizzard will be quite successful on that platform.

 

It doesn't matter which platform it was "intended" to be developed on/for. The fact is, consoles are limited to no more than 256mb of RAM and 5 year old graphics; every design choice will be made with this constraint in mind. If you can't recognize the gaming advantages of a PC over a 5 year old console I'm sure many people here will help point out the massive advantages.

Go ahead and toss insults about "PC elitism" and I'll go ahead and toss out complaints of naivety. I'm basing things off facts (PC's are significantly more powerful and capable) and the past 2 years where every multi-platform title = PC Screwed.

 

Ho boy, guys stay on the darn topic please, before things get out of hand.

Diablo III will be aimed at the PC community, with possible side development into consoles. That's more or less it. Blizzard loyalists (a LOT of people) will buy it, mainly because Battle.net 2.0 only being available to purchased copies, and that D3 will only be fun via coop just like D2. This means they won't suffer a financial blow due to piracy as much as other RPGs / Hack'n'slashes which focus more on SP/LAN-play.

From what I've seen (I check D3 official forum and major fansites daily), beta will either start before Blizzcon '11, or be announced at the convention and start after. The game acts are all done, all that's remaining are contents (items/lore/stats), balancing & tweaking(skills/items/etc), optimization, and polishing. All of those will take up quite some time but should be done in months if they work efficiently. Besides, the bulk of balancing will be through beta. Also optimization and polishing can be developed DURING beta period too.

 

Thus far, information on 3/4 classes has been released and most of the game mechanics and eyecandy have been revealed. I reckon maxing out the game at native resolution won't require a SLI/Crossfire solution but a minimum 460m or equivalent. CPU shouldn't matter too much, the last iteration did not ask for too much CPU power at the time relative to the spectrum of available hardware at the time.

 

I'd like to point out that the difference between a console port and a PC port is more than hardware.

Scope and intended audience...

Console-designed games are made for console gamers.... the average console gamer of course is not even the lowest-common-denominator in the type of posters we usually have around here. Let's face it... The people the consoles market to are ADHD tweens and pre-teenagers.

Its all marketing and about making money. The result are games like bulletstorm with zero real content and lots of vulgarity and explosions and less wit, story, and content.

Yes, there are crossovers... and indeed Diablo 3 may very well be one of them... but a game designed for PCs and PC users' market (geek/intellectuals) will likely make a better game overall on a PC.

A reminder that D3 is a relatively mindless hack/slash with heart/soul and story behind it. The original D2 despite its simple concept is STILL a better game than most of the console games out to date! (most are forgettable after the first few minutes and few are still fun after a few hours... I STILL pull out D2 from time to time!)

Understand that if Blizzard caves to the console marketing level, it will be a VERY sad day for all gamers.

 

Consoles appeal to more then just CoD players, heres a few games that are superb, Uncharted, Metroid primes, Metal Gear Solid, Gran Turismo, Heavy Rain, Theres more then just mind numbing FPS titles being released on consoles. Being a HARDCORE gamer myself, I find having both platforms a staple, exclusives keep me coming to consoles, and when possible, I get the odd PC exclusive or superior version. Be a gamer to love games, not to be a hater of hardware.

 

Please re-read the post.

I was not making a blanket statement about all console gamers.

Nor is there anything wrong with making a good game for a lesser piece of hardware. (D2 runs on considerably less than even the Xbox brings to the table)

The console is not the issue... its who the general market aims the games at. The market is about numbers and sales... and what will make the most money. There are more ADHD tweens than geeks/intellectuals who game and those people will have consoles. (cheap and easy and require very little to no knowledge)

Developing for PC first means the game starts as a winner and can be nerfed with suitable easy-wins, win notifications, controller accuracy aids/changes, and thus make it suitable for the console crowd. (the higher-end of which will turn these off)

Developing for console first means the game will more than likely never have the content to be even considered a PC game.

Unified development CAN work, it just depends on if the developer chooses the cheat way (ship a straight port) or the right way (start with the baseline and fill in the details)

A reminder, I am arguing that D3 can and should be a fine game despite being developed alongside a console version.
I also own a console. (PS3)

 

I think D3 console version would be sweet but computer would be better to play id assume, and things would just work better with updates and everything

 

*cough* Dragon Age 2 by BIOWARE *cough*

 

I'm going to guess D3 will be released in December of 2011 earliest...

 

There's too much bashing and unnecessary comments being thrown around in this thread, it is now closed.

Feel free to create a new thread on the same topic, but keep it on-topic.