Don't you people make enough fucking money? You're like one of the most successful companies in the industry. I'm glad I washed my hands of you. Blizzard, you're the worst damned thing for the industry. The love of money is the root of all evil, so you must be right up there with Satan's cat.rembrandtqeinstein said:
Diablo 3 no offline reasoning summarized by Penny Arcade
- Thread starter rembrandtqeinstein
- Start date
Recommended Videos
You do know that Blizzard isn't forcing you to spend anymore money after you buy your copy of the game right? I feel the need to remind you of that. In fact, Blizzard is even allowing a method through the auction house for YOU to make money and all they will take out of it is maybe $0.05 usd. Also, shame on you for calling Blizzard the worst company for trying to make money by selling their product. What company doesn't try to make money? Do you even realize that Blizzard needs money to make the games we enjoy? I must say, you sound like the only reason you hate Blizzard is because of jealousy and pride. Sins in and of themselves. Again, I will remind you that Blizzard is not forcing anyone to spend anymore money after they buy the game. Some people get a $300 allowance from their parents every week and want to spend extra money on a game to get a little ahead. Why shouldn't Blizzard allow people to spend more money if they want to? Because you would call them evil for taking money in exchange for their product?Inkidu said:
The AH doesnt stop the duped item/uber cheat item chars. What it stops is you getting it for free. With all of the people on the game the items bound to be in the AH. It just means you either grind yourself stupid for uber gear, which is fair enough, or you pay for it. It doesn't stop unabalancing, it just stops you getting it for free. Worst case scenario: Paying real cash for the privelage of mowing all in your path down. Am i the only one who sees being able to pay for power being a bit wrong in this game?
Except Diablo 3 is not WoW. It's not an MMORPG. It was never marketed as an MMORPG.Eric Staples said:
So...all you have here is a meaningless Strawman Argument.
No, I thought it was a little weird that Blizzard would allow you to do that. I don't know why they would let you do that, but it's there. I'm a little curious to know how much some of that loot is actually going to cost, and if it's more than I think is reasonable, I will probably go back and grind myself stupid.Versuvius said:
I really have no issue with this. SC 2 requires you to have internet in order to log in, so why wouldn't D3?
Starting to notice that I have no problems with what companies are doing while others do. Go figure.
Its fine, get over it.
Starting to notice that I have no problems with what companies are doing while others do. Go figure.
Its fine, get over it.
All the above are excellent, valid points (well most of them), with reasoned rationale and balance (now and again), but D3 is a rare case where all of the restrictions of the DRM, besides on a principle level, don't affect me.
Always-ways on DRM would normally be a deal breaker, but there's no single player, and I never wanted to play single-player, so as long as it saves my state, it won't matter to me, on a practical level, if there's DRM in the background, because if my nets down the games down. I won't use the auction house, and just play with friends, so that's that avoided. I don't want hundreds of characters, I'm not too concerned about not being able to call my character DickCheese McSlutdumpster, and I don't want to cheat. As for mods, while a bit of a sore point, I wouldn't use them in the first plays anyway.
So in conclusion, as soon as it hits a Steam sale or I see it for £20 somewhere, I'll buy and, likely, enjoy it.
Always-ways on DRM would normally be a deal breaker, but there's no single player, and I never wanted to play single-player, so as long as it saves my state, it won't matter to me, on a practical level, if there's DRM in the background, because if my nets down the games down. I won't use the auction house, and just play with friends, so that's that avoided. I don't want hundreds of characters, I'm not too concerned about not being able to call my character DickCheese McSlutdumpster, and I don't want to cheat. As for mods, while a bit of a sore point, I wouldn't use them in the first plays anyway.
So in conclusion, as soon as it hits a Steam sale or I see it for £20 somewhere, I'll buy and, likely, enjoy it.
That's like saying:EcksTeaSea said:
"They shit on your lawn last year so why wouldn't they do it this year? It's fine get over it."
Here's a hint, it wasn't fine when they did it with SC2 and it isn't fine now either.
Imagine a shoplifter getting caught and using "but I got away with it last week" as a defense!
Yep, it is their product. They made a choice, now I get to make one.migo said:
My personal choice is to not buy this game. I have based this choice on all the information that has been made available. It does not fit with my life or gaming expectations. Just because other people think I should be excited and rush out to buy a game, because their personal choice is to do so, does not make my personal choice less valid. Calling me childish, telling me I just want to pirate or hack the game, claiming I am part of some boycott or assuming the amount of money I have to spend on games is seriously not going to change my mind and possibly makes you look foolish. I am an adult, it is MY MONEY AND TIME and I feel this game warrants neither. I am fine with spending my time and money elsewhere.
It is kind of sad that so many people have so much time to berate others over how they choose to spend their money. I am sure, from just the posting here, there are plenty of people that are making the personal choice to buy the game, don't worry you won't be alone.
You're never alone there will always be gold farmers.
They are boring to chat with though.
Actually no, it does not. Offline single players has no affect whatsoever on closed bnet. If I want to spell out my name in stones of jordan in 6 inch letters on offline single players how does that hurt closed bnet? How does anything I do in offline single players or offline multiplayer lan affect that? Blizzard wants to stop offering open bnet, so be it.Eric Staples said:
I have an analogy that goes something like this:
Imagine a popular restaurant has food many people like, and it offers eat in service, take out, and delivery. The restaurant owner opens a second restaurant that is even bigger, has a better chef, a better location etc. But the catch is that the second restaurant doesn't offer delivery or take out. When asked the reasoning the owner gives is that "well if people take their food home they might not eat it with the correct fork, or they might let it get cold, or they might not eat the salad first, and then the meat which isn't the right way to eat 'my' food." But in reality everyone knows the reason is that if the customer doesn't eat in, then the owner doesn't have a another chance to sell him even more food. The waiter can't recommend an expensive wine, the dessert cart can't be driven by repeatedly making the customer want more. So the owner is willing to throw away all the take out and delivery customers because serving them doesn't maximize his profit. And some potential customers are turned off by that kind of cynical calculating decision making.
Now I'm not disputing Blizzards right to do whatever they want with their game so lets nip those dumb arguments in the bud. And I'm not claiming to speak for anyone else. But as for me if there isn't any offline play, I'm not buying it, and if there isn't any multiplayer LAN options I'm not buying it.
I didn't buy SC2 for that reason, and I'm not buying this. I guess Blizzard has just evolved beyond me and my expectations for what a good game product is.
I honestly hope Blizzard knows DRM doesn't work. Game pirates are smart people, they'll find ways to bypass it. The only thing Blizzard is doing is isolating their own customers who don't have constant internet connections. As for the pirating community, I bet they'll find a way to rid the game of the DRM within a week of release.
You've actually missed the entire point. You've missed it so thoroughly and completely that I'm worried. I've no problem with them making a game, selling that game, and making money for selling that game. My problem is (if you think they're just going to take five cents you're naive, try 10 to 15 percent charitably) that they are being extremely prejudice against people who don't have stable or hard-line internet. They're saying, "Screw you if you can't be online for single player." I wouldn't actually be so mad if it were just some woefully stupid DRM, but it's to make sure a real. money auction house stays balanced why because a regulated economy make the most money. They're not happy with people buying a game, they can only sell you a game once. Why should they care about the guy who just wants to play the single player game and will probably never go online? Because he only payed and will only pay sixty bucks. They want more money. They're not even farming peoples' time for monthly fees (WoW). They want to make sure they get a real-world cut for fake items. They're not even real. They have no value outside the game. They can't even use some token or something.Eric Staples said:
They just want money. I'll bet everything in Diablo 3 is made so it gets people to pay more into it than they'll ever get out of it. That's greed. I have a problem with greed, not profit.
My favorites in threads like this are people who genuinely think that customers have no right not to buy a product.
People. Do you ever think about your postings before you write them?
You see, this is capitalism. Companies make products, which have various traits. We, the customers, then decide if the traits meet our needs, and if they do and the pricing is fair, buy them.
"Able to be played offline" is a required trait for any game I buy, and that goes for many people. If games do not offer this, I do not buy it, as simple as that. Companies do not deserve my money just for existing, they need to make a product that I want in the first place.
It's very simple. If you have any idea how our entire society works, you should be able to understand it. Why don't you? No, you thinking a game is "damn fine" does not mean other people have to buy it, sorry.
It's just as ms_sunlight said. Companies have the right to make whatever they want, and I have a right to not buy their nonsense. To be honest, I rather support actually good indy games, anyway.
People. Do you ever think about your postings before you write them?
You see, this is capitalism. Companies make products, which have various traits. We, the customers, then decide if the traits meet our needs, and if they do and the pricing is fair, buy them.
"Able to be played offline" is a required trait for any game I buy, and that goes for many people. If games do not offer this, I do not buy it, as simple as that. Companies do not deserve my money just for existing, they need to make a product that I want in the first place.
It's very simple. If you have any idea how our entire society works, you should be able to understand it. Why don't you? No, you thinking a game is "damn fine" does not mean other people have to buy it, sorry.
It's just as ms_sunlight said. Companies have the right to make whatever they want, and I have a right to not buy their nonsense. To be honest, I rather support actually good indy games, anyway.
Well that was obvious from the beginning. That's why I'm not buying the game. When I buy something, I don't want developers and publishers to limit my experience. I want to buy the single player game and play it alone. And I want to be able to mod it if I feel like modding it. And I don't want to be limited by their EULA which isn't even legal. Seriously, EULA isn't legal. Most of the time it goes beyond legal business practices. And who in god's name gave them the right to present EULA as something that cannot be broken? You are not legally obligated to do anything EULA says! You are obligated to do what the law says!
A company wants to make money by taking steps to prevent people from cheating?
THE NERVE.
This thread is dripping with so much entitlement that it makes me sick to my stomach. Hacking items into a game with a multiplayer community is not even remotely the same thing as modding. Comparing the two is absolutely fucking ridiculous and you should feel terrible if you've done so.
THE NERVE.
This thread is dripping with so much entitlement that it makes me sick to my stomach. Hacking items into a game with a multiplayer community is not even remotely the same thing as modding. Comparing the two is absolutely fucking ridiculous and you should feel terrible if you've done so.
So no one can enjoy the single-player--one, uno, solitary, no one else to harm-- game without a stable internet connection because Blizzard knows that we're all just evil little imps ready to totally destroy their game. Yes, Blizzard, lets punish people for what they might do. You're such a progressive and relevant company. As long as Blizzard comes on a product I'm not buying it.Jaime_Wolf said:
