Blizzard Surprised by Reaction to Online-Only Diablo 3

[jamesworkshop]

"single player" is clouding peoples minds it's like people are telling blizard that they know more about what kind of game blizzard is making than blizzard themselves do

No, single player means single player, but you seem to think it does not. You are trying to cloud peoples minds by trying to redefine what single player means. They claim single player, so people who want single player games mean they do not want to be forced to be around other players if they do not wish to be. Also.... would it kill ya to use some punctuation? I know it's killing me. =]

people are saying single player when what they mean to say is soloing, something possible in most mmos' singler player and soloing is not the same thing

diablo 3 is online only, but can be played solo, that is not single player like an assassins creed game is

 

[Traun]

That's all fine and dandy, but people do not want to be forced to participate in these things. If you choose to, you can be part of that a great many ways, most of which do not mean being connected to their servers all the time.

You will have to make a hero from scratch for online play, Blizzard want to remove the hassle for that. They force you to make one.

What I did for StarCraft 2 was buy the game, then download a crack that did not necessitate me being online. It worked quite well. I bought their game, and then I was never bothered by their online BS. They don't like this, but I don't really care.

By buying the product you are encouraging this behavior from companies.

 

[Neonit]

...surprised that people dont like restrictions? please.... now you are just being silly....

Whenever its a good idea or not.... that is a debate that i dont want to take. but expecting people to embrace RESTRICTIONS with open arms is plain stupid.....

 

[jamesworkshop]

Le Big Snip.

Okay lets put this into perspective because apparently you either are playing devil's advocate, simply try to counter-argue without any point or somehow you dont get the reason people are pissed at this.

You can do comparisons between Games of the same Franchise to hell and back as much as you like, it doesnt change fundamental Facts. For example, MMOs are essentially Multiplayer Only Games who evolved out of said Multiplayer Games. They created Games which the Players essentially were made into Content. A MMO is a failure by any definition of no one plays it, as said Players are the content of that type of Game.

Diablo 1 and 2 by themselves share a few pointers with some MMO's, hardly suprising given where MMOs came from, or to put it into a weird example, the Chicken and the Egg Question. However Diablo 1 and 2 were never MMOs or even straight Multiplayer Titles. They were Singleplayer Games who had a very good Multiplayer component. A Component does NOT equal a Requirement. A MMO has the online Requirement as it otherwise is UNABLE to function in its intended form. Diablo so far is however not required for that to be present. It could be played on your own, just your character against the spawns of Hell. Multiplayer was optional, it was not forced, you did not have to consider it if you didnt want that. Now both Games in that Series have followed this. May i remind you Diablo 2 came out 10 Years or so ago, give or take, a Time where Dial-up was already beginning to phase out of common use. That doesnt mean it doesnt exist anymore, it certainly does. So do Internet Providers which use a Limit on how much you can use per Month. If the Limit is reached, your provider cancels your internet for the rest of the month.

Now lets consider this. You either have a really bad/slow Internet Connection. Or you live in a Area that is somewhat prone to sudden, short Internet Failures. Or perhaps you have a very strict Limit on your Connection. Those are not just a few handful of People that have this. Do they need to be told they are somehow worth less because you, and by extension, the Gaming Industry feel that being online all the time 24/7 is now the "normal thing"? No they dont. Neither do they have to play online FOR ANY REASON other than that they want to.

Diablo as a Series is about you against the forces of hell. Both Titles so far have offered a very good Singleplayer Campaign with the optional Multiplayer so you could go slap Diablo or Baal around with a Friend, or a couple of Friends even. Diablo 3 now makes it a requirement to be online even though you may just want to play offline, on your own. So lets face it, this isnt Blizzard just moving forward with the Industry, its the Industry making Decisions that we SHOULD want because THEY want them. Its purely a DRM, a Control Factor. Nothing else.

So stop comparing Diablo 3 or any of the Others to some other MMO simply because you are out of any real valid argument beyond listing similarities that are painfully evident because MMOs evolved out of Multiplayer Games to begin with. In short, People are pissed because they are told what to do, not given a Option or Choice. They dont get asked if they want to play online, they have to play online, even if they prefer playing on their own.

I have given counter points to about 6 different people

They dont get asked if they want to play online, they have to play online

yes just like every other online only game, which diablo 3 is, as blizzard have said before the product has been released

if two games that can only be played with an active internet connection and both are unplayable if connection issues occur, one simply cannot be said to be more inconvieneced by that fact than the other.

bringing up diablo 1 and 2 is just doing that old gamer trope of "they changed it"

I know why online connections might be a problem for some people, but this is not a trick, no one has been duped, getting angry about a product not made for you is silly.
tons of products don't meet my desires thats why i buy something else or not at all, the indusrty can make it's own desicions and is continuing to do so

 

[jamesworkshop]

no but you missed the fundimental point the clinging on to the term "single player" is why people are having difficulty with this idea it's simply not true to say that "diablo 3 is a single player game"

when blizzard is next to explicitly telling people it's NOT a single player game

Can you play the game on your own, without other people having to join you in the game? If not, then okay, it's not a singleplayer game. If the answer to that is no, however, then Diablo 3 is just as much a singleplayer game as any other singleplayer game with a nice side helping of co-op or whatever thgat yhou may care to mention.

other people don't have to join your guildwars party and that is still an mmo, invites only PvE

guildwars if you want to solo you can solo

diablo 3 is you want to solo you can solo

 

[SoulSalmon]

"Yay, ANOTHER game with 'single player' that I can't play when my net goes down! Just what I always fucking wanted -.-"

^ that was my reaction to the news, and thats why I don't like it.
Since then I also thought about the LOOOOOOOOOONG term effect of when the server is no longer running, theres not going to be any "I'ma go back and play that old game I used to love" because you won't be able to >.>

 

[acosn]

Not surprised at all.

1: This shouldn't surprise you after SC2 w/ B.net 2.0.

2: This is the 2010's, not the 1990's. Internet accessibility and connectivity has come a long way. It's only natural that they make a game on the assumption that you have a stable internet connection.

3: Yes, this sucks, but Blizzard isn't seeing any real impact on their bottom line, so they're not about to stop doing it.

 

[Nurb]

Yeah, though this is a bit of a dick move, its not really that big of a deal Trying secure a revenue of income from customers and minimize piracy is something I can understand.

Blizzard aren't stupid, they don't do shit for no reason and despite playing dumb they know that they will sell, and sell well.

It will be pirated and cracked to allow people who download illegally to play without a net connection on day one. This does nothing to stop piracy

This isn't about "fighting piracy", it's a shameless money-grab so they get a cut of 5-10 dollar auction house sales in a game people pay full price for.

Once again, paying customers are getting the worst end of the deal, and "loyal fan" just means "sucker" to the execs as they nickle and dime more money out of someone.

"And, at the end of the day, how many people are going to want to do that?"

A lot of people you jackass! Wouldn't it be amazing if the creators of games would listen to the people talking like right here in forums? What about if they would listen so much they would completely redesign a playable race in their game just to make their consumers happy? That would not be Blizzard ... It would, on the other hand, be ANet. Funny how the founders worked at Bliz and decided to jump ship.

This is the corporate age of gaming. Ever since around 2003-04, most games are no longer created and controled by people who love gaming. People who enjoyed playing video games and made them didn't do shit like DLC to soak customers for more money between expansion packs. Day-one DLC and online leashes are things guys in suits come up with to appease stockholders

Yeah, I din't claim it would stop piracy, but it will sure as hell slow it down, just a bit.

And it IS a cash grab, everything by most company is designed for them to make money from you, how the fuck is it a bad, or indeed surprising thing if they are. Blizzard are a company, not your friends.

There's a difference between selling a product and gouging people and you know it. Paying full price for a game, paying fees for auction houses and forcing online-only for single player games is sticking it to customers and they're pissed about it.

If a paying customer has a worse gaming experience than a pirate rather than the same or better when playing the game on their computer, then something's wrong. Prates being able to play when their connection is down means their experience is better than a paying customer who is forced out of their game when the cable company takes the lines down for a few hours.

 

[Dyme]

Blizzard isn't stupid.
If they give Starcraft LAN, people are gonna steal it, because they are economic.
If they give Diablo offline play, people are gonna steal it. Why would a sane person spend money on something they can have for free? And why would a sane person make a game to sell it and then let everyone steal it?

However, I can't help but to think that it is going to be cracked and stolen anyways.
Which kinda makes my argument redundant.

I don't really like this restriction, but I don't care too much either, my internet works just fine. And Blizzard games will be bought anyways. Because they are always the best of their genre.

 

[A-D.]

Le Big Snip.

Okay lets put this into perspective because apparently you either are playing devil's advocate, simply try to counter-argue without any point or somehow you dont get the reason people are pissed at this.

You can do comparisons between Games of the same Franchise to hell and back as much as you like, it doesnt change fundamental Facts. For example, MMOs are essentially Multiplayer Only Games who evolved out of said Multiplayer Games. They created Games which the Players essentially were made into Content. A MMO is a failure by any definition of no one plays it, as said Players are the content of that type of Game.

Diablo 1 and 2 by themselves share a few pointers with some MMO's, hardly suprising given where MMOs came from, or to put it into a weird example, the Chicken and the Egg Question. However Diablo 1 and 2 were never MMOs or even straight Multiplayer Titles. They were Singleplayer Games who had a very good Multiplayer component. A Component does NOT equal a Requirement. A MMO has the online Requirement as it otherwise is UNABLE to function in its intended form. Diablo so far is however not required for that to be present. It could be played on your own, just your character against the spawns of Hell. Multiplayer was optional, it was not forced, you did not have to consider it if you didnt want that. Now both Games in that Series have followed this. May i remind you Diablo 2 came out 10 Years or so ago, give or take, a Time where Dial-up was already beginning to phase out of common use. That doesnt mean it doesnt exist anymore, it certainly does. So do Internet Providers which use a Limit on how much you can use per Month. If the Limit is reached, your provider cancels your internet for the rest of the month.

Now lets consider this. You either have a really bad/slow Internet Connection. Or you live in a Area that is somewhat prone to sudden, short Internet Failures. Or perhaps you have a very strict Limit on your Connection. Those are not just a few handful of People that have this. Do they need to be told they are somehow worth less because you, and by extension, the Gaming Industry feel that being online all the time 24/7 is now the "normal thing"? No they dont. Neither do they have to play online FOR ANY REASON other than that they want to.

Diablo as a Series is about you against the forces of hell. Both Titles so far have offered a very good Singleplayer Campaign with the optional Multiplayer so you could go slap Diablo or Baal around with a Friend, or a couple of Friends even. Diablo 3 now makes it a requirement to be online even though you may just want to play offline, on your own. So lets face it, this isnt Blizzard just moving forward with the Industry, its the Industry making Decisions that we SHOULD want because THEY want them. Its purely a DRM, a Control Factor. Nothing else.

So stop comparing Diablo 3 or any of the Others to some other MMO simply because you are out of any real valid argument beyond listing similarities that are painfully evident because MMOs evolved out of Multiplayer Games to begin with. In short, People are pissed because they are told what to do, not given a Option or Choice. They dont get asked if they want to play online, they have to play online, even if they prefer playing on their own.

I have given counter points to about 6 different people

They dont get asked if they want to play online, they have to play online

yes just like every other online only game, which diablo 3 is, as blizzard have said before the product has been released

if two games that can only be played with an active internet connection and both are unplayable if connection issues occur, one simply cannot be said to be more inconvieneced by that fact than the other.

bringing up diablo 1 and 2 is just doing that old gamer trope of "they changed it"

I know why online connections might be a problem for some people, but this is not a trick, no one has been duped, getting angry about a product not made for you is silly.
tons of products don't meet my desires thats why i buy something else or not at all, the indusrty can make it's own desicions and is continuing to do so

The ironic Part is that your Answer is much more confusing than it should be given what you are trying to argue. As such i simply consider your Points as simply a Devil's Advocate thing as you simply argue for the opposing side to any discussion because you can or want to.

Your argument as to "if people dont like it, dont play it" is especially redundant in that you are arguing against them doing just that because they dont like it, yet you claim that its the best possible Option for "everyone", even though as we can clearly see, it isnt, which you even pointed out just now. So you arguing against Fans being pissed off, defending a Company that doesnt need it, makes really no sense in the context as..clearly you are not even having a discussion. You are simply reusing the same bullet points you have been doing before, which is painfully evident by you posting the same list earlier in two seperate posts.

Point is, Fans are pissed, those Fans wont be buying it. Whats the necessity to argue or discuss that they are pissed simply because some other Game does that same Thing. Especially when you might realize that they have never claimed to be playing the same Games you are comparing D3 to.

 

[mike1921]

it really is just the nature of how things are going, the nature of the industry.

This is correct but it's also the reason he's wrong. It is definitely where the industry is GOING, and that's due to the increased prominence of the internet of decent quality but that doesn't mean that everyone has it at all times yet. If we lived in a world where everyone had good internet I would see no reason to have a problem with this.

It's not about DRM, it'd be about cheating the Auction House system they're going to be using, what would be the point of the AH being flooded with duplicated items from a single player file, this would also be the same reason for mods I assume.

Now if the asswipe vice president of online technology admitted this is why, because it'd flood the real money auction house with fake items potentially, I'd be fine with it. But don't respond "why are you taking away online single player" with "oh my god you actually wanted that? Why would anyone want that? what? people without constant internet connections? What the fuck does that even mean? I work with tech not fossils"

It's not about DRM, it'd be about cheating the Auction House system they're going to be using, what would be the point of the AH being flooded with duplicated items from a single player file, this would also be the same reason for mods I assume.

That explains how single player characters made their way into Closed Battle.Net in Diablo 2!!!

explanation - no, they didn't.

Was there an ingame money incentive to do it with D2? I understand caution about that, if they're fucking honest about it.

 

[Nurb]

Blizzard isn't stupid.
If they give Starcraft LAN, people are gonna steal it, because they are economic.
If they give Diablo offline play, people are gonna steal it. Why would a sane person spend money on something they can have for free? And why would a sane person make a game to sell it and then let everyone steal it?

However, I can't help but to think that it is going to be cracked and stolen anyways.
Which kinda makes my argument redundant.

No, they took away dedicated servers so they can force people to buy the sequel to continue online play by shutting down the company servers, ending online play for fans of the original game with no way to do it otherwise.

It's about control and forcing purchases, not about piracy.

 

[EvilScoop]

Diablo 3 is different from Diablo 1 and 2







I don't like things that are different.

 

[Weaver]

What if I want to have everyone over to play D3? We used to have LAN D2 raids all the time. Yes we could connect to the internet to do that, but once we tried it with League of Legends and the router practically exploded. We were all getting like 900 pings and the game was unplayable.

 

[Deamonian]

Allright, for a long time D3 has been among my most anticipated games. I've been frothing around the mouth for the thought of once more spamming minions to fight the forces of hell, but...
All this stuff, the Actionhouse, the DRM, it's just killing it for me. I know I'm just preaching to the choir, but I'm seriously starting to doubt if I will buy this game now. Hell, if I buy it, it probably will be when the price drops.

I really get saddened when a company like Blizzard, that I've respected for a verry long time, take a turn straight for the crapper just like some others (Ubisoft, anyone?). There's a reason I stopped buying Ubisoft games. So, I'll just have to hope that Bethesda doesn't follow this trend, and I'll hope Skyrim will fulfill all my RPG needs this winter.

I loved you once Diablo, but I now feel that my love isn't answered.

 

[Nesco Nomen]

What exactly do we gain? Nothing. (Seriously, can anyone tell me a thing the player gains by having an always on connection?)

All-penetrating eye of Blizzard's Warden makes the life of a cheater very very stressful.

For all practical purposes, you can be certain that the guy standing next to you in dungeon or in Arena didn't hax his way up.

 

[DogOnDrugs]

Does anyone know exactly what these benefits of have an always on connection are? I can really think of any.

Actually, in the first place the "Always-On" connection is so that you can play your Battle.net characters in singleplayer while they can make sure that you don't use a trainer to cheat your way to better gear in singleplayer, which you could then use on battle.net. This all comes together to the point that they felt, that it was too much of an issue, that you couldn't play the same character in battle.net and singleplayer with the progress carrying over.

 

[Dyme]

All this stuff, the Actionhouse, the DRM, it's just killing it for me. I know I'm just preaching to the choir, but I'm seriously starting to doubt if I will buy this game now. Hell, if I buy it, it probably will be when the price drops.

Well you will only have one of those. If you play "Offline" (Singleplayer) there will be no Auctionhouse, if you play online... you have to be online anyways!
And I am pretty confident Diablo 3 gameplay will be great. And that's what matters most.

 

[jamesworkshop]

Le Big Snip.

Okay lets put this into perspective because apparently you either are playing devil's advocate, simply try to counter-argue without any point or somehow you dont get the reason people are pissed at this.

You can do comparisons between Games of the same Franchise to hell and back as much as you like, it doesnt change fundamental Facts. For example, MMOs are essentially Multiplayer Only Games who evolved out of said Multiplayer Games. They created Games which the Players essentially were made into Content. A MMO is a failure by any definition of no one plays it, as said Players are the content of that type of Game.

Diablo 1 and 2 by themselves share a few pointers with some MMO's, hardly suprising given where MMOs came from, or to put it into a weird example, the Chicken and the Egg Question. However Diablo 1 and 2 were never MMOs or even straight Multiplayer Titles. They were Singleplayer Games who had a very good Multiplayer component. A Component does NOT equal a Requirement. A MMO has the online Requirement as it otherwise is UNABLE to function in its intended form. Diablo so far is however not required for that to be present. It could be played on your own, just your character against the spawns of Hell. Multiplayer was optional, it was not forced, you did not have to consider it if you didnt want that. Now both Games in that Series have followed this. May i remind you Diablo 2 came out 10 Years or so ago, give or take, a Time where Dial-up was already beginning to phase out of common use. That doesnt mean it doesnt exist anymore, it certainly does. So do Internet Providers which use a Limit on how much you can use per Month. If the Limit is reached, your provider cancels your internet for the rest of the month.

Now lets consider this. You either have a really bad/slow Internet Connection. Or you live in a Area that is somewhat prone to sudden, short Internet Failures. Or perhaps you have a very strict Limit on your Connection. Those are not just a few handful of People that have this. Do they need to be told they are somehow worth less because you, and by extension, the Gaming Industry feel that being online all the time 24/7 is now the "normal thing"? No they dont. Neither do they have to play online FOR ANY REASON other than that they want to.

Diablo as a Series is about you against the forces of hell. Both Titles so far have offered a very good Singleplayer Campaign with the optional Multiplayer so you could go slap Diablo or Baal around with a Friend, or a couple of Friends even. Diablo 3 now makes it a requirement to be online even though you may just want to play offline, on your own. So lets face it, this isnt Blizzard just moving forward with the Industry, its the Industry making Decisions that we SHOULD want because THEY want them. Its purely a DRM, a Control Factor. Nothing else.

So stop comparing Diablo 3 or any of the Others to some other MMO simply because you are out of any real valid argument beyond listing similarities that are painfully evident because MMOs evolved out of Multiplayer Games to begin with. In short, People are pissed because they are told what to do, not given a Option or Choice. They dont get asked if they want to play online, they have to play online, even if they prefer playing on their own.

I have given counter points to about 6 different people

They dont get asked if they want to play online, they have to play online

yes just like every other online only game, which diablo 3 is, as blizzard have said before the product has been released

if two games that can only be played with an active internet connection and both are unplayable if connection issues occur, one simply cannot be said to be more inconvieneced by that fact than the other.

bringing up diablo 1 and 2 is just doing that old gamer trope of "they changed it"

I know why online connections might be a problem for some people, but this is not a trick, no one has been duped, getting angry about a product not made for you is silly.
tons of products don't meet my desires thats why i buy something else or not at all, the indusrty can make it's own desicions and is continuing to do so

The ironic Part is that your Answer is much more confusing than it should be given what you are trying to argue. As such i simply consider your Points as simply a Devil's Advocate thing as you simply argue for the opposing side to any discussion because you can or want to.

Your argument as to "if people dont like it, dont play it" is especially redundant in that you are arguing against them doing just that because they dont like it, yet you claim that its the best possible Option for "everyone", even though as we can clearly see, it isnt, which you even pointed out just now. So you arguing against Fans being pissed off, defending a Company that doesnt need it, makes really no sense in the context as..clearly you are not even having a discussion. You are simply reusing the same bullet points you have been doing before, which is painfully evident by you posting the same list earlier in two seperate posts.

Point is, Fans are pissed, those Fans wont be buying it. Whats the necessity to argue or discuss that they are pissed simply because some other Game does that same Thing. Especially when you might realize that they have never claimed to be playing the same Games you are comparing D3 to.

I did not in fact say it was best for everyone, I have told no one to buy something they don't like, don't want or can't use.

"if people dont like it, dont play it" is only half of the story when in addition it is accompanied by whinges.


As for reusing the points made in other posts, I simply have no issue with that, and see no need to discontinue that practice.

 

[Blow_Pop]

Personally as someone who will get Diablo 3 regardless I still would like to have an offline mode. I don't want to be forced to play online. I currently own no games that I HAVE to be online for to play. I have games that are optional to play online.