Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst
1
2
  1. #21
    The Unstoppable Force Orange Joe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    001100010010011110100001101101110011
    Posts
    21,570
    Quote Originally Posted by i3ackero View Post
    I'm just looking for reasons. So far the one with old gen limitations is the best from engineering perspective, but account organization is also very possible and reasonable, you can't disagree.
    occams razor. most likely few people used it so it's not worth making it.
    I have a fan. Seems he was permabanned.
    Yo, don't mind my "street talk"

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by bloodwulf View Post
    O i dont doubt that people used the feature, though id be willing to go out on a limb and say it was largely 2 people co-op sessions (play with spouse\child etc) than 4 people sessions. But OP is just someone who wants to find a thing to shout at for sure.
    Since the advent if the internet age(2000) I can't tell you the last time I have a group of friends over to play a game. It's all been done online since then, hell, even before then. When I was in HS, late 80s early 90s, that would have been the last time I did 4 player couch co-op. Held and went to plenty of LAN parties, but that not couch co-op.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Orange Joe View Post
    occams razor. most likely few people used it so it's not worth making it.
    No this is Blizzard, there has to be some convoluted nefarious reason.

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by Unholyground View Post
    It's because it's releasing on prev gen systems and the last generation systems aren't powerful enough to do 4 players split and they're not gonna spend the money to make separate versions since they very likely have cross progression/crossplay between all the versions.
    Since it sounds like you haven't played... Diablo multiplayer isn't splitscreen.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Orange Joe View Post
    occams razor. most likely few people used it so it's not worth making it.
    People with software backgrounds know that once you build the multi-login endpoint and associated framework, it doesn't matter if you have 2, 3, 4 or more people. It's just instances of the same code.

    Much more likely to be processing power related. They can't keep 4k / 60 FPS with 4 characters on the screen + input processing.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Eosia View Post
    Exactly. People seem to forget just how much data Blizzard actually collects. They have their own in-house data analysis department. They can tell you what you wrote in WoW's guild chat at least six months prior as we saw demonstrated to hilarious effect in the original Customer Service forum back in the day. They know what people are doing, what content is getting the eyeballs, what features are being used, etc.

    They cannot justify adding in features just to have them that no one is really using. Especially if it is going to cost a lot of money (both in time and actual money) to develop it. Especially since they'd have to do it twice for each generation of console they support since XBox and PlayStation have different implementations.

    And it is not like World of WarCraft where they can develop something that makes the feature more accessible like LFR did for raids in WoW.
    Adding Players 3 and 4 are trivial development cost after adding Player 2. Almost all code is reused. It is very unlikely to be based on anticipated adoption rates.

    Given the console focus on 4K and FPS benchmarks these days, it is very very likely to be a performance measure.
    Snarky: Adjective - Any language that contains quips or comments containing sarcastic or satirical witticisms intended as blunt irony. Usually delivered in a manner that is somewhat abrupt and out of context and intended to stun and amuse.

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by bullseyed View Post
    Since it sounds like you haven't played... Diablo multiplayer isn't splitscreen.
    Ya I know but last gen systems would not have the power to do more than 2 anyways but 4 player split would be a nightmare to see on screen. It is a well know fact that consoles hold back developers.
    Super Mario Maker 2: Maker ID 8B7-CTF-NMG

    - The subscription for WoW will be added to Gamepass Ultimate at no additional cost, mark my words.

  5. #25
    Immortal jackofwind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Victoria, BC
    Posts
    7,701
    4 players on one screen, splitscreen or not, would be heinous and impossible to see anything for all the space given over to each individual UI.

    It's not Gauntlet Legends where all you have is a player model on the screen and a tiny health UI in the corner.
    Originally Posted by Blizzard Entertainment
    Because fuck you, that's why.

  6. #26
    That sounds like good news to me, focus on making it a good PC title, rather that catering to really niche console gimmicks.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tennisace View Post
    You will eventually realize nobody takes you seriously.
    Quote Originally Posted by derpkitteh View Post
    i am no weeb. i am just a connoisseur of fine waifus.
    Quote Originally Posted by Elim Garak View Post
    And lootboxes are awesome

  7. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by i3ackero View Post
    It will be done for 2 players. What additional work would it be for adding 3rd and 4th option. Copy-paste UI on two other corners of the screen? Especially while almost all even indie games on consoles have it featured. I would say more of a balance would be an issue, but still same may be done on online party.



    Not such very as you think. When D3 was first released on consoles, one of its most appreciated features was local coop, which was often stated as being super fun and one of factors why this port has received such much popularity as the rest was just a gameplay feeling compared to PC version.

    I just can't imagine scenario when cost/profit ratio is so low in this case. Some people will buy this game only for this feature, even if it's a minor thing. The profit would still
    If you don't think it's much work, then develop it yourself if you are so smart.

    What a stupid complaint to post about. It's not a widely used feature. I don't know anyone that uses local Co op for a diablo game. Bring ur laptop or console with u, connect to a display and all 4 of you can play in the same room if it's so important to you.

    BTW, im not at all disappointed. They need to focus on more important things than 4 player local Co op. I'm glad they aren't putting effort in a useless feature no one but a handful of people can fit in a mini van would even use

    Give me a freaking break op.
    Last edited by Unseen Guest; 2022-07-20 at 08:30 PM.
    "Uh huh. So destroying southshore is meh, but camp cow is so important that you have to destroy a port city?" - Sunlily

  8. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by jackofwind View Post
    4 players on one screen, splitscreen or not, would be heinous and impossible to see anything for all the space given over to each individual UI.

    It's not Gauntlet Legends where all you have is a player model on the screen and a tiny health UI in the corner.
    Diablo III had no problem with that. Why Diablo IV would have this problem? Especially while there is similar amount of UI information required.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Unseen Guest View Post
    If you don't think it's much work, then develop it yourself if you are so smart.
    It's like Blizzard would decide that they will create Mythic+ for 3 players now instead of 5, because 2 additional players brings to much effort for them from engineering perspective. Or like adding 15 raid size impossible and too costly for them because of tech (not balance). Nobody would believe in that argument.

  9. #29
    Immortal jackofwind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Victoria, BC
    Posts
    7,701
    Quote Originally Posted by i3ackero View Post
    Diablo III had no problem with that.
    Says you.

    I think it looked shitty and cluttered, masked too much of what was going on, and was niche to the point of being unnecessary to support.

    Sorry to burst your bubble but 4p couch co-op just isn't that popular.
    Originally Posted by Blizzard Entertainment
    Because fuck you, that's why.

  10. #30
    The “reveal” is not a reveal it is a lack of paying attention. They have never once alluded to more than 2player couch co-op. All the press releases only spoke about 2 players and how you can BOTH change talents on the same screen in two seperate talent windows…..this isn’t news it’s getting outraged because you never listened in the first place

  11. #31

  12. #32
    Scarab Lord Greevir's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Tamriel
    Posts
    4,341
    Blizzard is simply doing their part to help protect your health. The coronavirus is making a comeback and Blizzard doesn't want a number of people in close proximity to each other. Blizzard should be praised for this move.

  13. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by bullseyed View Post
    Adding Players 3 and 4 are trivial development cost after adding Player 2. Almost all code is reused. It is very unlikely to be based on anticipated adoption rates.
    And your source of expertise is...

  14. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by i3ackero View Post
    It will be done for 2 players. What additional work would it be for adding 3rd and 4th option. Copy-paste UI on two other corners of the screen? Especially while almost all even indie games on consoles have it featured. I would say more of a balance would be an issue, but still same may be done on online party.



    Not such very as you think. When D3 was first released on consoles, one of its most appreciated features was local coop, which was often stated as being super fun and one of factors why this port has received such much popularity as the rest was just a gameplay feeling compared to PC version.

    I just can't imagine scenario when cost/profit ratio is so low in this case. Some people will buy this game only for this feature, even if it's a minor thing. The profit would still
    So, the thing about rendering a world is that, what you see on your screen tends to be the only things being rendered. With 2-player split-screen, you're rendering it twice, and sometimes rendering different areas of the world. With 4 players, you're rendering it four times, and sometimes four different areas of the world.

    Naturally, this significantly increases the rendering requirements. No, this is not as simple as copy-pasting UI. I'm not at all sure why you would even suggest that, other that having zero knowledge of programming or game design.

    Diablo 4 is set to be a large, open world game with relatively modern graphics. No, it's not going to be a simple matter to implement 4-player split screen, even when they might already have 2-player.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Eosia View Post
    And your source of expertise is...
    It's simple object-oriented design. The first player is the first player. The second player is where the multiplayer systems come in. Once you've set it up for two players, the third and fourth players just need to account for the increased screen space requirements, but they will be functionally identical to the second player, as far as game objects go. You're essentially reusing the same pre-fab game objects for the second player, just with different default positioning and screen scaling changes.

    Adding additional players is simple enough once you've set up a second player, but the computational requirements are not as simple and are likely why they aren't doing it. Either that, or the feature for Diablo 3 consoles wasn't as popular as some would like to think.
    Grand Crusader Belloc <-- 6608 Endless Tank Proving Grounds score! (
    Dragonslayer Kooqu

  15. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by Eosia View Post
    And your source of expertise is...
    20 years of software development as an enterprise architect.
    Snarky: Adjective - Any language that contains quips or comments containing sarcastic or satirical witticisms intended as blunt irony. Usually delivered in a manner that is somewhat abrupt and out of context and intended to stun and amuse.

  16. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by bullseyed View Post
    20 years of software development as an enterprise architect.
    Of which 0 was with Blizzard

  17. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by Eosia View Post
    Of which 0 was with Blizzard
    Is is really required to understand that? Blizzard hires plenty of new people for their projects anyway. The most important thing is to being experienced on business or software/server architecture. Decisions like these aren't based on "how much time you have worked in Blizzard".

  18. #38
    Mechagnome
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Rhode Island
    Posts
    510
    I'd Actually just be surprised and grateful that/if 2 player couch co op is even a thing. As someone that just wants to sit back on the couch and play games with friends, good local co op titles are a real pain in the ass to find and we revert to 90's beat-em-ups more than we should have to

  19. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by i3ackero View Post
    Is is really required to understand that? Blizzard hires plenty of new people for their projects anyway. The most important thing is to being experienced on business or software/server architecture. Decisions like these aren't based on "how much time you have worked in Blizzard".
    Because you'd have to look at the code to actually understand what it's doing. Do you know how many people claimed that changing the Backpack size from 16 to a higher number was just "Change the 16 to X!". It ended up not being as difficult as Blizzard once thought, but it was not that easy either.

    Not to mention you have any limitations put on by Sony and Microsoft the deal with either at the hardware or software levels.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •