This is gonna be fuuuuun.
Starting note: It's not a deal-breaker for you. Go you. I'm happy for you, really.
Ranorak said:
Most of our phones, tables and laptops are connected to the internet.
Internet capable does not mean connected to the internet. Oh wow, my tablet has wifi. Now, that means absolutely nothing most of the time. And my internet service is provided by Comcast, one of the WORST companies (not ISPs, but companies) in the nation.
We criticize Nintendo for it's shitty on-line support, with friend-codes and whatnot.
I can chat with my friend on my xbox while I'm playing Skyrim and he's busy playing Halo.
Mmmmm...False dichotomy.
Panning Nintendo for neutered, overly complicated and still ineffective online system has nothing to do with mandatory online systems. I mean, news flash: You can chat with friends on XBox 360 without mandatory online. Skyrim won't kick you back to the title screen if your connection or router burps.
We also criticized the music industry for not adapting to on-line distribution, fast enough.
News papers are becoming a media of old, because we get our news on-line.
But we aren't required to be online to listen to our music. We're not required to be online to get our news.
Yet, why is it a problem when a game like Diablo 3, requires you to be on-line all the time?
Diablo 3 is build to be more then just a single player. Yes, you can play solo, you can finish the game without ever playing with someone else. But, like Battlefield games, it's strength and replay value are in multiplayer.
What's so wrong with wanting to play offline? Hell, I want to be able to play games if my internet goes out.
The always on-line feature is not just DRM. I'm not denying that is serves as DRM, but it's not JUST there as DRM, such as Assassins Creed (A true single player game, by the way).
But it IS DRM, and that's the problem.
Just because it's not ONLY DRM doesn't change anything. Anything at all, really.
Diablo 2 was plagues with hacks, dubbing of items and a worthless economy due to gold buying.
Always On-line tries to reduce this. Will it work 100%, of course not. But it won't fail either.
The same effect can be handled by discrete offline and online accounts. Other games have successfully done this. Nobody's complaining about Dungeon Defenders having online and offline modes, except for the failure to explain that achievements can only be earned online.
But I don't see why people are so mad about this.
Well, yes. If you ignore or dismiss offhand all issues people have, it's easy not to understand the problem. You could do that from anything from a hangnail to genocide.
If you are just going to play Diablo 3 for it's single player, you might have a reason to complain, but then again, this game was clearly not made for just single player.
But there is a single player experience in it.
If you have an unstable internet connection, I get your frustration, but the internet is the future, and I'm really sorry if your government doesn't support stable 24/7 connections, but the rest of us shouldn't have to suffer for it.
How are you suffering for it?
The internet may be the future, but it is not the present. Not completely, anyway. The infrastructure cannot support everything, and that's why we still have physical media.
Additionally, since dialup is still the biggest userbase in the US (One of the largest markets), why would you want to restrict who enjoys it?
Maybe it's because I play on-line a lot, and see it as nothing new. But when my internet drops out, I just play something else for a moment.
And you're okay with losing your data.
And yes, I am aware of the log in problems due to the release, but those problems were both expected, and they will be gone tomorrow.
didn't they promise the same with AssCreed, and it took a couple weeks to get it running right?
I've played dozens of Xbox titles that have had online problems from the get-go, and it means no multiplayer, which is annoying enough at launch. But if it means no single player at launch, how is this okay?
