Blizzard Surprised by Reaction to Online-Only Diablo 3
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Blizzard is coming across as more and more detached from their playerbase this past year or two.
They will likely pirate it anyway. Not everyone has the extremely rare fortune of having 24/7/365 internet access. I live in an area with very high-tech infrastructure (urban Sweden), with about as stable a connection as you can get as an end-consumer (100Mbit cable), but there are still (albeit rare) hourly interruptions, me having to reset the router or wi-fi signalling loss when I'm wireless.Wabblefish said:
By their very nature, these events are unpredictable and can happen at any time; my experience is that it does happen occasionally when I'm gaming. I have lost "unsaved" progress in multiplayer games (ie xp, upgrades earned), so it is not improbable that it would happen in D3.
A standalone single player game should not have an online requirement, since Blizzard (in this case) hardly has control or even that much influence over the global infrastructure of the internet and the location or connectivity of their users.
My inner defeatist speaks, and he fears that any petitioning, any whining, any workarounds, any ANYTHING will either fall on deaf ears or be exterminated with extreme prejudice once Blizzard sees the sales numbers. Didn't they mention that they want to bring WoW's userbase to D3? It's very likely that they're being oh-so-strategic in the sales front by having them be the cushion for any kind of loss coming from the Diablo base.
That, and there's DNF's sales to think about. It's mostly a shit game, but it still sold like hotcakes.
Also, who wants to bet that Blizzard's going to jihad the fuck out of any potential D3 modding communities and follow it up with the shutdowns of the Diablo 1 and Diablo 2 modding communities just so they can prove that they're BIG BOSS MAN and are not to be fucked with? Maybe they might even be brazen enough to steal Runic Games away from Perfect World and reduce them to gamedev equivalents of sex slaves. Stretching it, yeah, but you never know.
That, and there's DNF's sales to think about. It's mostly a shit game, but it still sold like hotcakes.
Also, who wants to bet that Blizzard's going to jihad the fuck out of any potential D3 modding communities and follow it up with the shutdowns of the Diablo 1 and Diablo 2 modding communities just so they can prove that they're BIG BOSS MAN and are not to be fucked with? Maybe they might even be brazen enough to steal Runic Games away from Perfect World and reduce them to gamedev equivalents of sex slaves. Stretching it, yeah, but you never know.
So by forcing internet-requirment and making the game way more easy than the previous installments you were hoping for positive feedback?
Robert Bridenbecker, KNOW your consumers!
Robert Bridenbecker, KNOW your consumers!
he is not winning me over with that attitude
in normal cases i wouldn't care about this since it doesn't hurt me while i have my connection
but diablo seems to be a game you would want to play in a time when you can't have internet
also lying in your consumer's faces is not good marketing
in normal cases i wouldn't care about this since it doesn't hurt me while i have my connection
but diablo seems to be a game you would want to play in a time when you can't have internet
also lying in your consumer's faces is not good marketing
I would think Blizzard did not devolp Diablo 3 as an MMO. Blizzard developed Diablo 3 the same way they did with 2 (or so we thought). Awesome single player experience with an awesome plot. And then to top it all off, they give us a multiplayer co-op mode that ensured the game would live on for years to come. Not so with D3. We must be online forever to be able to play it. Are you enjoying Single Player and get your internet cuttof? You get the boot. And if your internet doesn't come one again (for whatever reason), then you really should go play other games (as suggested by one of the devs). They have all the right to do this of course but erm... yeah, not with my (and many others) support.EvilScoop said:
Easy my friend, lets wait until the game is out and then we will judge if the love is dead or not.Deamonian said:
First the auction house using real money and now this DRM for online only play makes me think they are trying real hard to control gold farmers. But history has shown that the more control you put on something the worst it gets for the majority. Prohibition comes to mind as well as gun control laws. Only the Law breakers will prosper because they wont follow the constricting rules. If I were a gold seller I would find some way to play offline and cheat to build a HUGE pile of stuff to sell then sell it and make moonies.
These idiots in charge of Diablo 3 development need to have their heads held underwater until the bubbles stop and then probably a good few minutes after that just to be sure. They are fucking ruining this game on almost every single level. Between real money transactions, no mods, and the always online requirement my interest in Diablo 3 went from super high to simply not giving a fuck. This game is looking to be a fucking perfect example of everything that's wrong with gaming. Fuck you ActiBlizzard, may you all catch the most painful type of ass cancer a vengeful and angry god can muster.
LOLOLOLOLAshoten said:
U see the kind of scrubnabs Blizz has to babysit these days?
You do understand that real money AH is just trading?Dexter111 said:
And that it doesn't create new items of power, just redistributes them?
Because if u do, then you would see that minus $100 taken from the player base and given to this "barely played the game" guy leaves player base without $100 worth of items - vulnerable to your 100+ hours character to rule over them
Game company surprised by Internet reaction to feature X. What? How is Blizzard surprised by any reaction from the fanbase about anything, anymore?
That being said, in this case, they've taken a feature away from their customers (offline play) and added a controversial new one (cash transactions), so there are going to be strong opinions. I am literally never without an internet connection except when I'm purposefully without one so as to do entirely offline things, and I think Blizzard is pretty confident that a huge chunk of their playerbase fits somewhere in that mold. I can understand how that might frustrate some people, and I think some form of offline mode a la Steam would've been a much better compromise.
I think the no offline mode is tied pretty directly to wanting to keep the auction house as secure as possible, as well as for DRM (no matter what they say about it not being about DRM). Still, it's not like you can use the AH while offline, and if there's concern about the integrity of game files, then there's got to be a way of verifying them when people do reconnect.
D1 and D2 were imminently playable single player, offline games that also had online support, and to change that is to change the nature of the game. I don't mind the changes, but I can definitely see where it might impact others.
That being said, in this case, they've taken a feature away from their customers (offline play) and added a controversial new one (cash transactions), so there are going to be strong opinions. I am literally never without an internet connection except when I'm purposefully without one so as to do entirely offline things, and I think Blizzard is pretty confident that a huge chunk of their playerbase fits somewhere in that mold. I can understand how that might frustrate some people, and I think some form of offline mode a la Steam would've been a much better compromise.
I think the no offline mode is tied pretty directly to wanting to keep the auction house as secure as possible, as well as for DRM (no matter what they say about it not being about DRM). Still, it's not like you can use the AH while offline, and if there's concern about the integrity of game files, then there's got to be a way of verifying them when people do reconnect.
D1 and D2 were imminently playable single player, offline games that also had online support, and to change that is to change the nature of the game. I don't mind the changes, but I can definitely see where it might impact others.
He was surprised? And these are the kinda experts that are trusted with AAA titles? I don't expect everyone to be an expert on anything, but there should've been *someone* inside Blizzard whose job it is to keep in touch with the general consumer base enough to predict this thing from a mile away.
I don't really know what they're trying to get from this technology either. Security protocols (if this is mainly undercover copy protection) have always been breached pretty quickly in the past, and with Blizzard's reputation I'm sure there will be plenty of interested cracking groups. It's not like this kinda system has never been cracked before, eh, right, UbiSoft?
If this is only about the AH, lemme tell you one thing: Money makes the thing only more attractive. As in, exponentially attractive. I'm pretty sure people will find a way to trick the system and make money off of it if it's possible. Nothing ever stopped people from selling gold either and even if they monitor large AH transactions, they won't get transactions onscreen that are a) scattered across multiple accounts* or b) done on an external platform, then traded over in Diablo, if such a feature outside the AH exists (and it should, obviously).
And in the end, all we get is displeased honest consumers that have to go through all the rules and procedures while pirates can bypass everything and enjoy themselves. And Blizzard just has to know this is the kind of motivation a lot of people need to join the pirates themselves, this is some seriously basic knowledge; so apparently their system is actually an attempt to create more pirates?
Blowin' my mind across the street and back.
*The TF economy is already full of people with multiple idle accounts that make money off metal and hats. Unusuals go for hundreds of dollars after all. If Blizzard's itemstore is anywhere near as lucrative, they will eventually stumble across their own DrunkenF00l.
I don't really know what they're trying to get from this technology either. Security protocols (if this is mainly undercover copy protection) have always been breached pretty quickly in the past, and with Blizzard's reputation I'm sure there will be plenty of interested cracking groups. It's not like this kinda system has never been cracked before, eh, right, UbiSoft?
If this is only about the AH, lemme tell you one thing: Money makes the thing only more attractive. As in, exponentially attractive. I'm pretty sure people will find a way to trick the system and make money off of it if it's possible. Nothing ever stopped people from selling gold either and even if they monitor large AH transactions, they won't get transactions onscreen that are a) scattered across multiple accounts* or b) done on an external platform, then traded over in Diablo, if such a feature outside the AH exists (and it should, obviously).
And in the end, all we get is displeased honest consumers that have to go through all the rules and procedures while pirates can bypass everything and enjoy themselves. And Blizzard just has to know this is the kind of motivation a lot of people need to join the pirates themselves, this is some seriously basic knowledge; so apparently their system is actually an attempt to create more pirates?
Blowin' my mind across the street and back.
*The TF economy is already full of people with multiple idle accounts that make money off metal and hats. Unusuals go for hundreds of dollars after all. If Blizzard's itemstore is anywhere near as lucrative, they will eventually stumble across their own DrunkenF00l.
Well.... he is fairly stupid or just so busy counting money he forgot gamers have opinions and won't just nod blindly like his CEO board.
A work around here would be, have a character you save to your computer, allowing always offline play and then have a character thats saved to the servers for those who dont mind the always online thing, then they can play single or multiplay to their hearts content. Those who wish to play alone or on LAN can too, no drama.
Its not rocket science. And i dare say it wont make a damn bit of difference to me really but i still wont be getting it as a result. This is not the way i want gaming to go, steam already annoys the hell out of me without more of this crap.
A work around here would be, have a character you save to your computer, allowing always offline play and then have a character thats saved to the servers for those who dont mind the always online thing, then they can play single or multiplay to their hearts content. Those who wish to play alone or on LAN can too, no drama.
Its not rocket science. And i dare say it wont make a damn bit of difference to me really but i still wont be getting it as a result. This is not the way i want gaming to go, steam already annoys the hell out of me without more of this crap.
Huh, one more reason not to play Diablo 3. Honestly, ever since WoW I've just not been interested in Blizzard. They completely jumped on the online deal. And what kind of argumentation is that about Battle.net? Battle.net used to be optional and I liked it that way.
*sigh* And the number of seeders and leechers on the SKIDROW crack just quadrupled.... No one learns... pirates will pirate, and with enough goading, paying consumers will pirate. How is this aiding your business model?