Always On-line is Not a Deal-Breaker for Me.

Recommended Videos

loa

New member
Jan 28, 2012
1,716
0
0
I don't know what to tell to someone who can't grasp the concept of "some server somewhere down means you can't even play singleplayer of the game you paid for that actually has a singleplayer component anymore = bad".
Does the prospect of games with an artificial expiration date (because those servers WILL be shut down some day) really sound that appealing?
Are you really that enarmored with the concept of big companies living their wet dream of still controlling their product even after you bought it?

This is the future? Well fuck the future then.
 

Tony2077

New member
Dec 19, 2007
2,984
0
0
Hammeroj said:
tony2077 said:
Hammeroj said:
tony2077 said:
its an inconvenience but acting like its the end of the world is a bit much
People are acting like it's an inconvenience, and like it's not a necessary one. Stop with the hyperbole.
maybe they should relax then
I don't know if it's because you're taking offense to this or something, but people aren't throwing shit around, bashing people's skulls in, looting stores and all that. They're voicing their concerns over a fucking online forum.

If this, according to you, is an overreaction, there is no way of complaining that wouldn't be an overreaction.

And no, they shouldn't stop whining about this. Because if people weren't constantly doing it, Blizzard would have zero (as opposed to close to zero) to fix any of the problems with their games. "Relaxing" doesn't solve problems.
neither does complaining. talk to them don't vent on a forum where nothing will change. besides it a video game not being able to play it all the time isn't a bad thing unless you can't play it at all but take it up with your isp or them don't vent on this forum
 
Sep 24, 2008
2,461
0
0
March 2010, New York state. There was a giant storm here. Trees were put down all over the place. One right outside my complex. Because of my great complex having it's own generator, I wasn't one of the literal millions without power.

But because some of those trees hit communication lines, I was without internet. I couldn't watch tv, so I figured 'whatever', I'd play some video games on my pc.

All my video games are from steam. That was the first time I found out that to actually play games on steam, I had to connect online first.

I sat there for 3 days without anything to do.

I went online the second I could to find a fix for it. I played games before when my connection was out. Come to find out that steam was just a giant DRM and I was ignorant to it. I couldn't understand it, Steam KNOWS I bought the game because I did it through them. Why am I punished for mother nature? When it checked once that I legitimately bought my game through them? Why can I not have constant access to them no matter what?

There are a few other experiences that I had with mother nature preventing my access. Or Cablevision going down to update something. To say 'There's no reason that a consumer shouldn't have access to the internet' is a smoke screen. Because these things have happened to everyone of these developers and they know it will happen again. Frequency is not important. But when you pay for a product, you deserve the product. Not the product on a leash by the company.
 

AdamRhodes

New member
Oct 4, 2010
84
0
0
tony2077 said:
In all likelihood, he is on the Blizzard forums complaining there too. This is an issue that needs publicity and the only way to do that is to go around and bring it to peoples' attention. I don't care about Diablo, and I don't go on Blizzard forums, so if people weren't here complaining, I'd have no idea that there was even an issue.
 

Shavon513

New member
Apr 5, 2010
155
0
0
It's not a problem for me personally, but people shouldn't be excluded from playing a game just because they don't have internet access, or don't want to be connected all of the time.
 
Apr 28, 2008
14,634
0
0
Draech said:
Irridium said:
What happens when the company supporting the servers for the always-online DRM does under?

What'll happen to the game? The most likely scenario, is that everyone's shit out of luck.

Just remember, last year THQ was doing pretty well. Look at 'em now. It is a very strong possibility that that could be any company.

Also, this [http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=1680] is a good read.
again

is this any different than other games that focuses on an online component?

Are you protesting the same thing when someone you know plays an MMO or League of Legends?

All your complaints right there can be applied to Valve and Steam. Do you just trust them and not Blizzard?
MMO's don't have single-player components that require you to be online. League of Legends, and most games like it, are free. So the only risk of trying those is that you might waste a few hours of your time.

And no, I don't trust Valve or Steam as much as Blizzard. It's why I always try to avoid buying games that use Steam. It's also why I'm excited that GoG is putting more recent games up for sale on their site. I've stopped buying from Steam and am now just waiting for the games go up on GoG so I can buy them DRM-free.
 

StrixMaxima

New member
Sep 8, 2008
298
0
0
Few games sucked life out of me more than Diablo 2. Perhaps Morrowind, perhaps Civilization. I played it a LOT. I purposefully played unwieldy build to make the game harder on Hell difficulty. I gladly purchased it and its expansion. Blizzard got my money, I got the product I wanted, everyone's happy, life goes on.

With Diablo 3, it's the polar opposite. The AH practices and always-online policy completely destroyed any desire I had to play this. I have an excellent computer, and a stable cable Internet. But that's besides the point. Blizzard wants to teach me how to play single-player games. Blizzard wants to educate me that money Auctions are acceptable. Blizzard wants to control how I play the game, when I play the game, and where I play the game. Again, in a debonair manner, telling me that this is 'the future'.

Well, good for those who don't care about this. I do. I mailed them a lengthy explanation on why I would not buy their games anymore, and I will NOT purchase it. I even told friends not to give Diablo 3 as a gift for me.

My values and beliefs are much more important than a game. And, ever since I've played in the Beta events for Guild Wars 2, Diablo 3 is just a faded memory for me.
 

w00tage

New member
Feb 8, 2010
556
0
0
You need to consider one little point - who does "always online singleplayer" benefit? Is it me, the gamer who is playing a single player game? No, it potentially introduces response-time problems, Internet usage charges, and denies me the use of the paid-for product if I don't have Internet handy (we had a momentary outage yesterday due to a really heavy tstorm, fyi. Would that have required me to load an earlier save??).

So the game producer is forcing this unnecessary faux "system requirement" for their own benefit, but they don't explain what they're getting from it - it's just "be our b*tch or don't play our game". (I am in the "I am nobody's b*tch" category, btw, but funny thing, that means my vote against their technology will never be counted or reported to senior management.)

In short, they set themselves up for a South Park-style call of "Shenanigans!" and I think they totally deserve it.
 

Tony2077

New member
Dec 19, 2007
2,984
0
0
loa said:
tony2077 said:
Hammeroj said:
Relaxing" doesn't solve problems.
neither does complaining.
You sure you know what "complaining" means?
Cause I don't think it means what you think it means.
maybe maybe not but the rest still stands
AdamRhodes said:
tony2077 said:
In all likelihood, he is on the Blizzard forums complaining there too. This is an issue that needs publicity and the only way to do that is to go around and bring it to peoples' attention. I don't care about Diablo, and I don't go on Blizzard forums, so if people weren't here complaining, I'd have no idea that there was even an issue.
but will you take up the torch becuase you now know about it.
 

w00tage

New member
Feb 8, 2010
556
0
0
ObsidianJones said:
March 2010, New York state. There was a giant storm here. Trees were put down all over the place. One right outside my complex. Because of my great complex having it's own generator, I wasn't one of the literal millions without power.

But because some of those trees hit communication lines, I was without internet. I couldn't watch tv, so I figured 'whatever', I'd play some video games on my pc.

All my video games are from steam. That was the first time I found out that to actually play games on steam, I had to connect online first.

I sat there for 3 days without anything to do.

I went online the second I could to find a fix for it. I played games before when my connection was out. Come to find out that steam was just a giant DRM and I was ignorant to it. I couldn't understand it, Steam KNOWS I bought the game because I did it through them. Why am I punished for mother nature? When it checked once that I legitimately bought my game through them? Why can I not have constant access to them no matter what?

There are a few other experiences that I had with mother nature preventing my access. Or Cablevision going down to update something. To say 'There's no reason that a consumer shouldn't have access to the internet' is a smoke screen. Because these things have happened to everyone of these developers and they know it will happen again. Frequency is not important. But when you pay for a product, you deserve the product. Not the product on a leash by the company.
/agree completely, but I just wanted to point out you can manually set Steam to "offline" mode. It's possible it won't work (Valve's web programming works like early Microsoft web technology, meaning not well nor very often), but at least there's a button to push.
 

AdamRhodes

New member
Oct 4, 2010
84
0
0
Draech said:
Hammeroj said:
I already made my point clear, but when the best you can do is going "you are just a D3 apologist! You argument is invalid!" Then you are wasted effort.

Fact: Paying for Tf2 in 2007 you bought a game that could only be enjoyed online.
Fact: Paying for D3 in 2012 you bought a game that could only be enjoyed online.
Fact: In 2009 TF2 got bots proving that the game could be enjoyed offline by adding a much smaller feature than what you are asking D3 to do.

If you didn't complain in 2007 you have no right to complain now unless you have a blatant double standard.
You can't really compare a game like TF2 to D3. TF2 was meant to be played with other people. D3, as mentioned several times in this thread, is about a single player experience as well as an online community. D3 can be played either as multi-player or single-player while TF2 was designed with only multi-player in mind. A game like TF2 isn't as enjoyable alone as a game like D3.
 

AdamRhodes

New member
Oct 4, 2010
84
0
0
tony2077 said:
AdamRhodes said:
tony2077 said:
In all likelihood, he is on the Blizzard forums complaining there too. This is an issue that needs publicity and the only way to do that is to go around and bring it to peoples' attention. I don't care about Diablo, and I don't go on Blizzard forums, so if people weren't here complaining, I'd have no idea that there was even an issue.
but will you take up the torch becuase you now know about it.
At the least, I'm definitely not buying Diablo 3. Some of my friends enjoyed the beta and, while I never got my hands on Diablo 2, I was actually looking forward to seeing how this RMAH is implemented after seeing the Extra Credits episode.
 

AdamRhodes

New member
Oct 4, 2010
84
0
0
Draech said:
AdamRhodes said:
Im sorry no deal.

I never played Unreal Tournament against anything bots. That doesn't change it was meant to be played multiplayer.
D3 is meant to have an online component. Werther it being trade or group play. That you can play 90% of the content in WoW by yourself doesn't change that the game were designed to make you play with others.

On a personal opinion here. I dont think D3 is as enjoyable alone as it is with others others. If your personal opinion counts as a fact, then so does mine.
I meant that D3 could be enjoyed alone as well as online, but that a game like TF2 is boring if only fighting against bots. But you're right, that's my opinion.

But from what I've read on this thread, people just want to play alone even if they are unable to connect to the internet. That's the real issue. If online-only DRM becomes a "feature" for every game, that becomes impossible. Maybe I just want to relax and kill some whatever-the-Diablo-enemies on a long train ride where I can't get service.