PC and console games should cost about the same amount. But to make a PC that compete with ps3/360 you will spedn alot more money then in a console.
I like how people say this but don't factor in their hd tvs that cost a bunch of money. That and the fact that a PC is infinitely more useful.
Then you add in the fact that consoles are many many many generations behind in technology.
The saying you get what you pay for never had a better place.
People don't factor the TV when comperering PC and consoles simple for the fact that usually you will buy the TV despite what you plan to spend in games. You will get a TV no matter if you have a console or a PC or both or none. You can also buy a cheaper TV if needed.
The need for tvs is over with sites like Hulu offering high quality streaming of your favorite shows. In fact I don't even pay for cable anymore because of this fact.
And yes, you can get a PC stronger then any consoles, but it's a waste of money in most cases. The majority of PC games don't use the PC tecnology because it's extremely expensive and most of people don't have one. This do not happen with consoles, since everyone has a good machine for a fair price and the companys can develop game that use this tec. Just remember bashiok's speech when he explained why D3 graphics are not that great. It's only a waste of money if you don't play games that take advantage of it.
The MAJORITY of PC only developers actually strive to have a good set of graphics. Everything else is just a console port in 99% of cases. Blizzard is a rare exception to this rule because they're more about catering to the casual gamer than the hardcore gamer.
As for consoles being a good machine, I'd have to laugh in your face for that one, the technology in the current consoles is waaaayyyyyyy behind.
As for Bashiok, like I said Blizzard is the rare exception to this rule.
And ofc PC are more useful. But i'm talking about gaming alone. Also consoles has numerous advantges, like hackfree multiplayer and around 15 decent releases per year.
Oh yeah, no one has figured out how to hack or mod their consoles *laugh* if you truly believe that then you have another thing coming.
Oh and talking about gaming alone on the console vs pc is like talking about using your HDTV for gaming alone. How many PC gamers do you know out there that use their PC strictly for gaming?
Answers in quote, this is my last post on the topic of console vs pc as that isn't what this thread is about.
As for the OP and poll I voted for 7 million+ because of the hardcore diablo fans and the fact that I'm sure a huge part of the WoW population will try out Diablo 3 for the sheer fact that it is made by Blizzard.
You can argue the merits of PC all you like, the numbers show console games are infinitely more popular right now. There is no PC game that has any hope of hitting 7 mil in 24hrs.
I'd say anywhere between 1.5 and 2 million is logical. THe fan base for such a genre is less than it used to be. Nearly no one I know knows about Diablo 2, and people generally dislike the idea of clicking to do everything, and would much rather walk around shooting an M 16 and killing crazy terrorists in a fucking FPS game.
The need for tvs is over with sites like Hulu offering high quality streaming of your favorite shows. In fact I don't even pay for cable anymore because of this fact.
Even through those sites are quite popular they don't represent not even 0.1% of the tv user population. "The need for tv is over" sounds like a joke when tvs market are a very profitable one. There are many reasons to buy a tv, the world population agrees with me, i don't really have to use any arguments.
The MAJORITY of PC only developers actually strive to have a good set of graphics. Everything else is just a console port in 99% of cases. Blizzard is a rare exception to this rule because they're more about catering to the casual gamer than the hardcore gamer.
As for consoles being a good machine, I'd have to laugh in your face for that one, the technology in the current consoles is waaaayyyyyyy behind.
As for Bashiok, like I said Blizzard is the rare exception to this rule.
The majority of PC only developers are very, very small companies. The same happen in consoles, but if you take the mean of general graphics in pc and in consoles, consoles have better quality. Just make a list of the 10 games with best graphics and see how many are console only and how many are pc only.
And yes, consoles are good machines for GAMING. Noone (or a meaningless outlayer) expend enough money to buy a very good PC just for gaming. It's too expansive and the amount of titles that use this tecnology are minimal (and usally has subpar quality, even with good graphics).
Oh yeah, no one has figured out how to hack or mod their consoles *laugh* if you truly believe that then you have another thing coming.
Oh and talking about gaming alone on the console vs pc is like talking about using your HDTV for gaming alone. How many PC gamers do you know out there that use their PC strictly for gaming?
Console multiplayer are much secure then pc multiplayer, thats a fact. This basically happen because if you hacking in consoles may cost your whole machine, unlike pc were you don't suffer consequences in most cases. It's far more risky, and because of that, consoles multiplayers are almost hackfree.
No it's not. If ask someone to choose between a console OR a pc, ofc Pc is the best choice even if this PC don't run any games at all! Microsoft office (or variants) alone surpass consoles utility by FAR.
The question is that people usually choose to spend their cash in two different ways: get a subpar pc to run internet, some work softwares and get a console for gaming. Or spend all money in a high quality pc machine. And people usually choose the first choice (unless their use some heavy softwares for work). And people usually make the right choices when choosing goods to buy.
Even through those sites are quite popular they don't represent not even 0.1% of the tv user population. "The need for tv is over" sounds like a joke when tvs market are a very profitable one. There are many reasons to buy a tv, the world population agrees with me, i don't really have to use any arguments.
A survey by the nonprofit Conference Board released Tuesday showed that nearly a quarter of households in the U.S. now view television programs online. That's up from 20% last year. The Proof That number is only going up each year, so you're wrong on that point. I myself have gotten rid of my cable service because the need for it is over with sites like Hulu popping up.
The majority of PC only developers are very, very small companies. The same happen in consoles, but if you take the mean of general graphics in pc and in consoles, consoles have better quality. Just make a list of the 10 games with best graphics and see how many are console only and how many are pc only. You're not getting it, even the BEST of the BEST on the console is still 3 years behind what is coming out NOW on the PC.
And yes, consoles are good machines for GAMING. Noone (or a meaningless outlayer) expend enough money to buy a very good PC just for gaming. It's too expansive and the amount of titles that use this tecnology are minimal (and usally has subpar quality, even with good graphics). Good gaming PCs costing $2,000+ dollars are over, you can get a good gaming pc for 600-700 dollars now a days. My latest rig if I were to add up everything costs around 700 dollars and I ran Metro 2033 on max settings at 1600x1200 with x8 AA. Add the fact that it is useful for more than just gaming is just a cherry on top of the icecream.
As for the amount of titles that use the technology that's a false claim. Sure, if you're going to count blizzard titles only you can say that, but that's just flat out wrong.
Console multiplayer are much secure then pc multiplayer, thats a fact. This basically happen because if you hacking in consoles may cost your whole machine, unlike pc were you don't suffer consequences in most cases. It's far more risky, and because of that, consoles multiplayers are almost hackfree.
That's a fact that is in fact your opinion. The amount of modders popping up on consoles is crazy. From lag switches to people using modded controllers to fire faster than they should be able to, you're crazy if you think that the PC has more hackers. Oh and the PC also has a wonderful thing called banning people who hack from your server if you manage to find a hacker. The vast majority of hacks are easily discernible, so if you do see them you just ban people, can't say the same for the consoles. Sure, you can send in reports, but Microsoft more than likely throws out most reports due to it being whiny teenage boys crying because they got beat in a video game. I've never heard of a console getting their "machine taken away" over modding, they might get their live or PSN account banned, but you can easily just make another account.
No it's not. If ask someone to choose between a console OR a pc, ofc Pc is the best choice even if this PC don't run any games at all! Microsoft office (or variants) alone surpass consoles utility by FAR.
The question is that people usually choose to spend their cash in two different ways: get a subpar pc to run internet, some work softwares and get a console for gaming. Or spend all money in a high quality pc machine. And people usually choose the first choice (unless their use some heavy softwares for work). And people usually make the right choices when choosing goods to buy. Spend 300-400 dollars on a subpar computer and another 200 on a console to run games. Or you could just spend an extra 100-200 dollars to get a decent computer that can run 99% of games and be ahead of the game. Just because people don't know better when it comes to buying and building PCs doesn't change the fact that a computer is all around better than consoles. Remember, the vast majority of the people in the world used to think the Sun went around the Earth and that the Earth was flat, that doesn't mean they're right.
I know I said that was my last post on the topic of console vs pc, but I figured I'd have to prove you wrong on some points. Also, stating your OPINION as FACT is just childish. Unless you have some proof to throw behind your opinion then it remains just that, an opinion.
PC vs Console is something else...
Diablo 3 is underestimated in its new fanbase.
All I keep reading are things like "My friends have never heard of or played Diablo 2."
If you are aware that "your friends" havent played Diablo 2, let alone own it, Im guessing YOU made them aware of D3. Otherwise how would you have known they dont have D2???
Besides the entire Diablo 2 Fanbase, the WoW fanbase and other countries being fully aware of D3's presence, many of you deny that anyone around you knows about D3.
That Will change, Commercials, advertisement, magazines, websites, gaming communities and a whole bunch of other
orchestrations will make the general populous and even the World FULLY aware of Diablo 3's upcoming release.
I have enjoyed gaming on FPS myself, and I have friends all around the world through these games, and to say that FPS will overpower 3D games like D3 SC2 is ludicrous.
My gaming friends whom live in Australia, Canada, Europe, Germany, Japan and Korea....are very aware of SC2 and D3.
All of them play FPS and we all are going to buy D3 and SC2, because its the spawn of Blizzard Entertainment!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
<--Click the Egg!
Or else!!! ̿ ̿̿’̿’\̵͇̿̿\з==(•̪●)==ε/̵͇̿̿/’̿’̿ ̿ ̿̿
A survey by the nonprofit Conference Board released Tuesday showed that nearly a quarter of households in the U.S. now view television programs online. That's up from 20% last year. The Proof That number is only going up each year, so you're wrong on that point. I myself have gotten rid of my cable service because the need for it is over with sites like Hulu popping up.
This number are the number of people who watch the sites AND TVs. The number of households that watch via web ONLY are about 800.000. http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100413/0915408997.shtml
The number tends to increase, but still it's a very small %. Also, only cable industry are begnniing to feel a SMALL damage. The tv industry are completly safe. Saying that tv are useless and internet will replace it is science fiction. It's the same dicussion with ebooks vs. real books and i'm done with it u.u
Good gaming PCs costing $2,000+ dollars are over, you can get a good gaming pc for 600-700 dollars now a days. My latest rig if I were to add up everything costs around 700 dollars and I ran Metro 2033 on max settings at 1600x1200 with x8 AA. Add the fact that it is useful for more than just gaming is just a cherry on top of the icecream.
As for the amount of titles that use the technology that's a false claim. Sure, if you're going to count blizzard titles only you can say that, but that's just flat out wrong.
And a console cost less then HALF rofl. With 700 dolars you can grab a console, get a computer with enough functions to do wheneter you want (except if you work with heavy softwares) and be enjoy higher quality games.
Again, take your time and research the 10 games with better graphix and compare how many are Pc only and how many are PS3 or 360 only.
That's a fact that is in fact your opinion. The amount of modders popping up on consoles is crazy. From lag switches to people using modded controllers to fire faster than they should be able to, you're crazy if you think that the PC has more hackers. Oh and the PC also has a wonderful thing called banning people who hack from your server if you manage to find a hacker. The vast majority of hacks are easily discernible, so if you do see them you just ban people, can't say the same for the consoles. Sure, you can send in reports, but Microsoft more than likely throws out most reports due to it being whiny teenage boys crying because they got beat in a video game. I've never heard of a console getting their "machine taken away" over modding, they might get their live or PSN account banned, but you can easily just make another account.
No, the chip from your console is banned from PSN/Live and you have to buy another console. It's like in PCs when your serial are banned and you have to buy another game, except for the fact that consoles cost 4 times more.
Really, i'm quite active in some PS3 game's community (specially MTS4 and demon soul's) and i never heard of any serious hack problem in those games.
Spend 300-400 dollars on a subpar computer and another 200 on a console to run games. Or you could just spend an extra 100-200 dollars to get a decent computer that can run 99% of games and be ahead of the game. Just because people don't know better when it comes to buying and building PCs doesn't change the fact that a computer is all around better than consoles. Remember, the vast majority of the people in the world used to think the Sun went around the Earth and that the Earth was flat, that doesn't mean they're right.
Again, the problem is not the machine, but what you intend to play. You will spend 100~200 dolars to play what ?
The number of PC only titles are minimal and the whole PC industry are moving to consoles. Even Blizz, the greatest PC only has showed several times intentions to move to console platforms.
And PS3 are known for it's ridicolously good cost/benefict. The cost benefict are so high that in early years sony were loosing money for every ps3 sold (in other words, the cost of production and development of a ps3 were lower then it's market price, wich means people were getting PS3 for "free").
Ok, this is a ultimate off-topic and i'm afraid someone will warn us lol.
PS3 for Free? lol I paid a hardy $654 for my PS3 when it came out.
And mind you the cost of production for Sony is Minimal because they own their own production lines.
All the parts and pieces that make up the PS3 become inexpensive when you buy them in Mass quantities.
Sony didnt lose money on the PS3.
No business in the World especially Sony, will ever produce something that will make them lose money.
Sony made more money than you can imagine on PS3's
It's just like Ford and the Pinto with exploding gas tanks and exploding tires.
Ford figured the lawsuits for this defect in the gas tank of the pinto would be less than it would cost to Fix the problem.
Every major company will always go the route that makes them the most money, at our sacrifice.
Sony is no exception.
Same for Microsoft, and IBM (PC).
Fact is that its impossible to measure if the Console world or the PC world is larger than the other.
Think about this, Everyone who owns a console, already owns a PC.
That should be the end of it.
Back on Topic please. "How many Copies of D3 will sell within the first 24 hours of release."
Im still sticking with 5-7 Million.
I hope Blizzard does some serious advertising for D3 and SC2.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
<--Click the Egg!
Or else!!! ̿ ̿̿’̿’\̵͇̿̿\з==(•̪●)==ε/̵͇̿̿/’̿’̿ ̿ ̿̿
PS3 for Free? lol I paid a hardy $654 for my PS3 when it came out.
And mind you the cost of production for Sony is Minimal because they own their own production lines.
All the parts and pieces that make up the PS3 become inexpensive when you buy them in Mass quantities.
Sony didnt lose money on the PS3.
No business in the World especially Sony, will ever produce something that will make them lose money.
Sony made more money than you can imagine on PS3's
It's just like Ford and the Pinto with exploding gas tanks and exploding tires.
Ford figured the lawsuits for this defect in the gas tank of the pinto would be less than it would cost to Fix the problem.
Every major company will always go the route that makes them the most money, at our sacrifice.
Sony is no exception.
Same for Microsoft, and IBM (PC).
Fact is that its impossible to measure if the Console world or the PC world is larger than the other.
Think about this, Everyone who owns a console, already owns a PC.
That should be the end of it.
Back on Topic please. "How many Copies of D3 will sell within the first 24 hours of release."
Im still sticking with 5-7 Million.
I hope Blizzard does some serious advertising for D3 and SC2.
Who's telling Sony was doing charity when selling PS3's ? I said in early years of PS3 producion. It's not charity it's agressive market strategy that involves the difference between fixed (develpment cost) and variable cost in the prodution cost function. If i would explain that i would go into the ultimate off topic of the year so...
It's basically because in the early yera of PS3 production Sony did not passed the development cost markup into the product, so customers get the consoler for a lower price and sony was loosing money. However, when the console stars to sell the fixed cost is diluted among the high quantity of consoles selled, turning out a nonprofitable in a profitable business.
And just because they use their own line doesn't mean it's not costly. They still pay all the incomes, the only difference is that in this case theres no extraeconomical profit evolved.
WoW and SC2 will have advertisements in there for D3 anyways when it comes time, so I can't see anyone who plays a blizzard game not know of D3. And when D3 was announced, the whole WoW server I played on went bonkers over it, it was what everyone was talking about. I can only see people who stick to console gaming not knowing of D3's presense
What about all the wow subscribers who will learn of D3 through word of mouth in game for from things like wow launcher, or wow.com. Blizz will surely advertise through every avenue avalible. I reckon alot of those wow players will be looking for a break, change of pace you know. I think its going to do really well.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
When or if I get to Lut Gholein, Im going to find the largest bowl of Narlant weed and smoke til all earthly sense has left my body. -Gheed
What about all the wow subscribers who will learn of D3 through word of mouth in game for from things like wow launcher, or wow.com. Blizz will surely advertise through every avenue avalible. I reckon alot of those wow players will be looking for a break, change of pace you know. I think its going to do really well.
Thats the same for SC2, and still, that doesn't mean people will get in the first 24h.
SC2 release will give us a pretty good idea on how well D3 can sell (keep in mind, SC2 is a much bigger title than D3)
Get real, folks, the diablo you all knew is dead, a few years ago i said right here in this forum that D3 had a pretty good chance of being blizzard first bust (i was flamed to death ofc), and what you know, its not even beta and its already looking that way.
Starcraft bigger than Diablo?
I fail to see how one is better than the other.
They are a different type of gameplay.
Starcraft is really big with the asians.
While Diablo is big (or was) with the US.
Can you elaborate for me why you think Starcraft is a bigger title?
Starcraft is the standards for online competition and for every other RTS after it, even today the game is still played online in a competitive manner with several leagues and ranking systems. Being big with asians already means its bigger than the US (asians = numbers) but the game is still played in the US, in Europe, everywhere.
I'm not saying its better (im not a huge fan of SC myself), but the game is bigger, it did a lot more to the gaming industry than diablo did, and it's a much more anticipated title, which is part of the reason Blizzard is making 3 separate games of it.
Get real, folks, the diablo you all knew is dead, a few years ago i said right here in this forum that D3 had a pretty good chance of being blizzard first bust (i was flamed to death ofc), and what you know, its not even beta and its already looking that way.
I wouldn't be surprised if this sold more than StarCraft 2 (which is expected to sell 5 million in its first year) because it's a more widespread genre and a lot of people will see this as an offline dark WoW RPG which will make people flock to it.
Well, altogether D3 should sell Millions and Millions of copies as time goes buy.
But within the first 24 hours? we will see.
I wonder how hackers are going to try and cheat in the unmodifiable D3.
If they find a way, there will no doubt be many many bans, which means more D3 copies sold.
When will those cheaters ever give up. :tongue:
Cheers :turned:
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
<--Click the Egg!
Or else!!! ̿ ̿̿’̿’\̵͇̿̿\з==(•̪●)==ε/̵͇̿̿/’̿’̿ ̿ ̿̿
IMO, Diablo is not as popular as WoW mainly because the game is so much older that WoW, even though warcraft has been around just as long. There were only 2 diablo games made, and its been long enough for people to forget about those games to more popular titles now such as WoW. When D3 hits shelves, there are going to be alot of people curious about it, but will prob wait a little bit before actually trying it out...
So with that, I believe it will not sell as well in the first 24, but it will be very steady there after of people hearing about it from friends and internet, then going out and buying it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Answers in quote, this is my last post on the topic of console vs pc as that isn't what this thread is about.
As for the OP and poll I voted for 7 million+ because of the hardcore diablo fans and the fact that I'm sure a huge part of the WoW population will try out Diablo 3 for the sheer fact that it is made by Blizzard.
Rise and rise again, until lambs become lions
Even through those sites are quite popular they don't represent not even 0.1% of the tv user population. "The need for tv is over" sounds like a joke when tvs market are a very profitable one. There are many reasons to buy a tv, the world population agrees with me, i don't really have to use any arguments.
The majority of PC only developers are very, very small companies. The same happen in consoles, but if you take the mean of general graphics in pc and in consoles, consoles have better quality. Just make a list of the 10 games with best graphics and see how many are console only and how many are pc only.
And yes, consoles are good machines for GAMING. Noone (or a meaningless outlayer) expend enough money to buy a very good PC just for gaming. It's too expansive and the amount of titles that use this tecnology are minimal (and usally has subpar quality, even with good graphics).
Console multiplayer are much secure then pc multiplayer, thats a fact. This basically happen because if you hacking in consoles may cost your whole machine, unlike pc were you don't suffer consequences in most cases. It's far more risky, and because of that, consoles multiplayers are almost hackfree.
No it's not. If ask someone to choose between a console OR a pc, ofc Pc is the best choice even if this PC don't run any games at all! Microsoft office (or variants) alone surpass consoles utility by FAR.
The question is that people usually choose to spend their cash in two different ways: get a subpar pc to run internet, some work softwares and get a console for gaming. Or spend all money in a high quality pc machine. And people usually choose the first choice (unless their use some heavy softwares for work). And people usually make the right choices when choosing goods to buy.
I know I said that was my last post on the topic of console vs pc, but I figured I'd have to prove you wrong on some points. Also, stating your OPINION as FACT is just childish. Unless you have some proof to throw behind your opinion then it remains just that, an opinion.
PC vs Console is something else...
Diablo 3 is underestimated in its new fanbase.
All I keep reading are things like "My friends have never heard of or played Diablo 2."
If you are aware that "your friends" havent played Diablo 2, let alone own it, Im guessing YOU made them aware of D3. Otherwise how would you have known they dont have D2???
Besides the entire Diablo 2 Fanbase, the WoW fanbase and other countries being fully aware of D3's presence, many of you deny that anyone around you knows about D3.
That Will change, Commercials, advertisement, magazines, websites, gaming communities and a whole bunch of other
orchestrations will make the general populous and even the World FULLY aware of Diablo 3's upcoming release.
I have enjoyed gaming on FPS myself, and I have friends all around the world through these games, and to say that FPS will overpower 3D games like D3 SC2 is ludicrous.
My gaming friends whom live in Australia, Canada, Europe, Germany, Japan and Korea....are very aware of SC2 and D3.
All of them play FPS and we all are going to buy D3 and SC2, because its the spawn of Blizzard Entertainment!
Or else!!! ̿ ̿̿’̿’\̵͇̿̿\з==(•̪●)==ε/̵͇̿̿/’̿’̿ ̿ ̿̿
This number are the number of people who watch the sites AND TVs. The number of households that watch via web ONLY are about 800.000. http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100413/0915408997.shtml
The number tends to increase, but still it's a very small %. Also, only cable industry are begnniing to feel a SMALL damage. The tv industry are completly safe. Saying that tv are useless and internet will replace it is science fiction. It's the same dicussion with ebooks vs. real books and i'm done with it u.u
And a console cost less then HALF rofl. With 700 dolars you can grab a console, get a computer with enough functions to do wheneter you want (except if you work with heavy softwares) and be enjoy higher quality games.
Again, take your time and research the 10 games with better graphix and compare how many are Pc only and how many are PS3 or 360 only.
No, the chip from your console is banned from PSN/Live and you have to buy another console. It's like in PCs when your serial are banned and you have to buy another game, except for the fact that consoles cost 4 times more.
Really, i'm quite active in some PS3 game's community (specially MTS4 and demon soul's) and i never heard of any serious hack problem in those games.
Again, the problem is not the machine, but what you intend to play. You will spend 100~200 dolars to play what ?
The number of PC only titles are minimal and the whole PC industry are moving to consoles. Even Blizz, the greatest PC only has showed several times intentions to move to console platforms.
And PS3 are known for it's ridicolously good cost/benefict. The cost benefict are so high that in early years sony were loosing money for every ps3 sold (in other words, the cost of production and development of a ps3 were lower then it's market price, wich means people were getting PS3 for "free").
Ok, this is a ultimate off-topic and i'm afraid someone will warn us lol.
And mind you the cost of production for Sony is Minimal because they own their own production lines.
All the parts and pieces that make up the PS3 become inexpensive when you buy them in Mass quantities.
Sony didnt lose money on the PS3.
No business in the World especially Sony, will ever produce something that will make them lose money.
Sony made more money than you can imagine on PS3's
It's just like Ford and the Pinto with exploding gas tanks and exploding tires.
Ford figured the lawsuits for this defect in the gas tank of the pinto would be less than it would cost to Fix the problem.
Every major company will always go the route that makes them the most money, at our sacrifice.
Sony is no exception.
Same for Microsoft, and IBM (PC).
Fact is that its impossible to measure if the Console world or the PC world is larger than the other.
Think about this, Everyone who owns a console, already owns a PC.
That should be the end of it.
Back on Topic please.
"How many Copies of D3 will sell within the first 24 hours of release."
Im still sticking with 5-7 Million.
I hope Blizzard does some serious advertising for D3 and SC2.
Or else!!! ̿ ̿̿’̿’\̵͇̿̿\з==(•̪●)==ε/̵͇̿̿/’̿’̿ ̿ ̿̿
Who's telling Sony was doing charity when selling PS3's ? I said in early years of PS3 producion. It's not charity it's agressive market strategy that involves the difference between fixed (develpment cost) and variable cost in the prodution cost function. If i would explain that i would go into the ultimate off topic of the year so...
It's basically because in the early yera of PS3 production Sony did not passed the development cost markup into the product, so customers get the consoler for a lower price and sony was loosing money. However, when the console stars to sell the fixed cost is diluted among the high quantity of consoles selled, turning out a nonprofitable in a profitable business.
And just because they use their own line doesn't mean it's not costly. They still pay all the incomes, the only difference is that in this case theres no extraeconomical profit evolved.
Good show!
Or else!!! ̿ ̿̿’̿’\̵͇̿̿\з==(•̪●)==ε/̵͇̿̿/’̿’̿ ̿ ̿̿
♣Strength and Honor♣
Thats the same for SC2, and still, that doesn't mean people will get in the first 24h.
SC2 release will give us a pretty good idea on how well D3 can sell (keep in mind, SC2 is a much bigger title than D3)
I fail to see how one is better than the other.
They are a different type of gameplay.
Starcraft is really big with the asians.
While Diablo is big (or was) with the US.
Can you elaborate for me why you think Starcraft is a bigger title?
Or else!!! ̿ ̿̿’̿’\̵͇̿̿\з==(•̪●)==ε/̵͇̿̿/’̿’̿ ̿ ̿̿
Starcraft is the standards for online competition and for every other RTS after it, even today the game is still played online in a competitive manner with several leagues and ranking systems. Being big with asians already means its bigger than the US (asians = numbers) but the game is still played in the US, in Europe, everywhere.
I'm not saying its better (im not a huge fan of SC myself), but the game is bigger, it did a lot more to the gaming industry than diablo did, and it's a much more anticipated title, which is part of the reason Blizzard is making 3 separate games of it.
But within the first 24 hours? we will see.
I wonder how hackers are going to try and cheat in the unmodifiable D3.
If they find a way, there will no doubt be many many bans, which means more D3 copies sold.
When will those cheaters ever give up. :tongue:
Cheers :turned:
Or else!!! ̿ ̿̿’̿’\̵͇̿̿\з==(•̪●)==ε/̵͇̿̿/’̿’̿ ̿ ̿̿
So with that, I believe it will not sell as well in the first 24, but it will be very steady there after of people hearing about it from friends and internet, then going out and buying it.