You have my sword.Andy Chalk said:
It all depends on what assets are being stored server side versus client side. To make an offline mode they need to make sure that all those assets are on the disk and that the client knows how to look for them there. They also have to code the mechanic to choose a mode. Maybe not a huge undertaking but still man-hours spent.TheDooD said:
There isn't any possible way that you could have more greatly missed the point. I'm glad the solution is just to fix the internet issue though, because players getting better internet connections will make all possible problems go away. Blizzard's servers will never go down and lock out every single playing customer from playing. ISPs will never have any problems providing constant service to all their customers with 0% downtime. Oh wait. EVERY problem with this kind of DRM still exists even if people get better internet connections. And yes, these kinds of problems are there and people just have to deal with them for multiplayer, because with no connection or no servers, you can't meet up with other people to play. But for single player, these problems are completely unacceptable. To not realize this and say "just get a better internet connection and it'll be fine lol" is to completely miss the point of everyone's problem with it.Tumedus said:
Still missing the point. MMOs are multiplayer games (multiplayer is in the title for crying out loud). These are issues you accept when playing any multiplayer game. But they have no place in a single player game. If a game is single player only, it should never require a constant internet connection. If a game has both, then single player should still be accessible even if MP goes down for whatever reason. The only time you should be locked out of a game due to internet issues is if it's multiplayer only. Anything else is unjustifiable regardless of how many references you make to Twitter or cell phone apps.Tumedus said:
Didnt I say entitlements seeking?Traun said:
I'd say you were right except that when I can't run a game on my computer because my graphics card is inadequite, that's understandable. But you know what? Most developers realize that not everybody has the same equipment, and they usually program a way to change the settings so that the game might run better on your computer. Requiring an internet connection for a single-player game, however, is just ridiculous. Despite the fact that they've been trying to spin it as an additional feature, they have yet to actually state what any of the pro's of this method are. It's unnecessary and comes off as a ham-handed attempt at DRM.Tumedus said:
I'd disagree with you on this point, too. I don't feel like I've had anything taken away. In fact, I still own TWO copies of Diablo II that I can install and play on my laptop whenever I feel like. The point is that I can't do that with Diablo III. And god forbid that they take down the check-in servers a couple years from now without providing a patch.Tumedus said:
This is all moot. Like I said before, if they just took single-player offline, not only would they get all of those purchases, but they would get more. Because more people, who do not have internet, would buy the game. It's pretty simple, really.Tumedus said:
Yes, online gaming has, indeed, existed for a good long while now, and people that play games- or play certain modes in games- have readily accepted having to be connected to a server to play them, these 'certain games and modes' being those that could not exist otherwise. On the other hand, gamers are still just as reluctant to tie themselves to a server for certain games and modes, these being 'everything else, ever.'Bob Bridenbecker said:
You know those people letting your company know they all hate your asinine, ignorant butchering of a formerly-promising title and your smug, condescending efforts to belittle their backwards notions of 'convenience' and 'privacy' and 'ownership?' The one that necessitated this futile, even counterproductive excuse for PR damage-control?Bob Bridenbecker said:
