Atlus (or SEGA? as they own Atlus) most likely did approach Nintendo and was turned down. It happens. It's widely known that companies shop their games out to the big three all the time for either funding, advertisement, and/or release on their hardware.
@RedDevils
The original yes (which I friggin love) but sadly the PC version doesn't have multiplayer :(. But, Insomniac owns the IP, so future games (if there are going to be any) will be console exclusive to PlayStation.
@Angyobangyo
That's most likely what's going to happen. Paid for cosmetics and a battle pass. It works for Fortnite so why not copy it? Also, they're going to have to pay for server upkeep somehow seeing as how this iteration is more MMO-like and similar to Immortal than any previous games.
Being an opened world game without a linear path doesn't necessarily make a game better. But who knows. This game might still have a great singular, narrative path with the story, but everything just screams Blizzard wanted a Diablo MMO and decided to do the SquareEnix thing and call it Diablo IV.
@darkrider
Because companies feed on those who have no self control.
Being a free to play game doesn't excuse companies from predatory practices.
@TheGreatGazoo30
But there's nothing stopping them from implementing such monetization in Diablo IV later on. Diablo Immortal made back it's budget in less than 24 hours. That just showed them that there are other ways to make money quickly and lots of it. Remember, this isn't the Blizzard of old. It's the Blizzard owned by Activision (owned by Microsoft but apparently Microsoft won't get involved with how Activision runs things) so making as much money as fast as...
Pretty much.
It's the ill-informed people. It's not that hard to go looking on the internet for the correct information.
Correct. Sony has film and joint TV rights (Marvel and Sony can make their own Spidey related tv shows). They also get a certain percentage of toy sales based on whatever Spider-Man related stuff they make. Again, the Spider-Man games are exclusive because that was the deal Marvel made with Sony. They approached Sony to make a Marvel game using any IP. Insomniac chose Spider-Man. Still confounds me as to why people still think that Sony owns the rights to Spider-Man when they never actually d...
I played this for a bit and it just made me want to reinstall Diablo 3 instead. From the few hours I've played, it's basically a mobile, money grubbing version of Diablo 3 with a new story.
Played it since yesterday on mobile and an hour on PC and the whole time was thinking, "Why am I playing this when I can just play the better version Diablo 3?" Game has some ok QOL features but that's about it.
To be honest, most mobiles games are.
Yeah. Really dumb. Could've given him some other form of traversal like jet boots or something. They exist in the DC Universe and would fit the character better than some mystical power.
Are they running off of the system or is it streamed. If they're streamed then I kinda understand but it it's running off of the system then it's very disappointing.
If I remember, Bryan Intihar said they had the choice to make a game using any Marvel IP and they chose Spider-Man.
Why does a few of his animations look like shittier copy/paste versions of Insomniac Game's Spider-Man?
Salty article cuz Sakurai decided to put in THE most demanded character.
With how they're treating Marvel's Avengers right now, nope. Not gonna happen.
This. It all boils down to how and where they can make the ports the fastest, easiest, and cheapest ways possible. Porting to the Switch would take a ton of work they don't have the time for.