What is with people?

[Tony2077]

I don't see how people changing their minds about a game as it gets close to release is effecting me in any way. Sure, it might be considered a little hypocritical, but they're just getting excited since the release is so close.
Also, perhaps the people excited about it are DIFFERENT to the people who complained about the DRM? I supposed to validate your opinion you tracked everyone who got angry about the DRM to see if they're not excited for it?

Gamers aren't a hivemind you know.

People who complained are not the same people who haven't.

If there isn't a very large cross-over between the people who have complained previously about online DRM (the vast majority of PC gamers) and the sheer amount of people who have bought Diablo 3, I'll eat my own fucking face.

why don't you relax and is it really that many who don't like it

A fairly large proportion of people don't like the idea of single-player being so massively tethered to something as unreliable as the internet, no. Your connection goes down? Fucked. Their servers go down? Fucked. Slow connection? Unnecessary lag, may as well be fucked. Want to play on a train journey? Fucked.

(And I always swear, chillax.)

Obviously the reaction was fiercer when Ubisoft announced it because they don't have any of PC gaming's "killer apps". Blizzard do, so people find it easier to ignore, although there was plenty of criticism initially.

I'm just wondering if its as many as some make it sound like.

 

[Woodsey]

I don't see how people changing their minds about a game as it gets close to release is effecting me in any way. Sure, it might be considered a little hypocritical, but they're just getting excited since the release is so close.
Also, perhaps the people excited about it are DIFFERENT to the people who complained about the DRM? I supposed to validate your opinion you tracked everyone who got angry about the DRM to see if they're not excited for it?

Gamers aren't a hivemind you know.

People who complained are not the same people who haven't.

If there isn't a very large cross-over between the people who have complained previously about online DRM (the vast majority of PC gamers) and the sheer amount of people who have bought Diablo 3, I'll eat my own fucking face.

(I'm sure we don't have to roll out the MW2 'boycott' screenshot to lay out the case for Gamers v Self-Control.)

But most people who didn't like DRM didn't say they were going to boycott it. The number of gamers who dislike DRM are many; the number who call for boycotts are few (comparatively speaking).

On the issue of MW2 boycotts and D3 boycotts, I believe the proper claim is that "gamers who declare boycotts are full of shit," not "gamers in general are hypocrites."

It's hypocritical to slam a company's business practices and then give them your money anyway, whether you signed and laminated an official declaration of boycott or not.

I'm just wondering if its as many as some make it sound like.

It's hardly a difficult thing to imagine people not liking it.

 

[Emiscary]

The people who claim it's the second coming are probably not the same people who are baying for blood following the ending's release. Don't pigeonhole people, and don't belittle a demographic you're a part of (gamers). Oh- changing your mind is not a holy crime. Just FYI.

 

[Blow_Pop]

But of course gamers are bigger hypocrites than anyone else right? Cuz blanket statements are always true right? Anyway, I bitched about the way Diablo 3 does it's DRM and I'm not gonna touch it. There are way too many restrictions on something I'd be buying that it would just mess up the experience. Sometimes I really wish I could find the programs that these companies use and put horrific DRM on them to show them how irritating it is.

I have to agree with this. Plus you know if I HAVE to play online to play a game I won't play it. And I don't mean just being logged into Steam/Blizzard/PSN/Live. I like single player games that do not require me to play with someone else. So I will stick with my SC/SC2/D1/D2 as far as my Blizzard games go. I will use it's network to talk to my friends whilst I play but not be required to play with them per se or anyone else.

As far as people changing their minds. It is not necessarily hypocritical to change your mind. It depends on the WHY. I change my mind constantly about things I like/don't like and things I agree/disagree with. A lot of the time for mind changing is simply because I wasn't fully informed on something and then got fully informed so my opinion changed due to information. Now, some of the people excited about it may have gotten all up in arms about the game but now that it's almost out are excited because maybe they just really want the game. I get pissy about some of the games I own. And got pissy about them before they came out. Just because you get up in arms about something to do with a game but still get the game doesn't mean anything other than you really want the game for whatever reason.

 

[Tony2077]

I don't see how people changing their minds about a game as it gets close to release is effecting me in any way. Sure, it might be considered a little hypocritical, but they're just getting excited since the release is so close.
Also, perhaps the people excited about it are DIFFERENT to the people who complained about the DRM? I supposed to validate your opinion you tracked everyone who got angry about the DRM to see if they're not excited for it?

Gamers aren't a hivemind you know.

People who complained are not the same people who haven't.

If there isn't a very large cross-over between the people who have complained previously about online DRM (the vast majority of PC gamers) and the sheer amount of people who have bought Diablo 3, I'll eat my own fucking face.

(I'm sure we don't have to roll out the MW2 'boycott' screenshot to lay out the case for Gamers v Self-Control.)

But most people who didn't like DRM didn't say they were going to boycott it. The number of gamers who dislike DRM are many; the number who call for boycotts are few (comparatively speaking).

On the issue of MW2 boycotts and D3 boycotts, I believe the proper claim is that "gamers who declare boycotts are full of shit," not "gamers in general are hypocrites."

It's hypocritical to slam a company's business practices and then give them your money anyway, whether you signed and laminated an official declaration of boycott or not.

I'm just wondering if its as many as some make it sound like.

It's hardly a difficult thing to imagine people not liking it.

i know I'm just curious if its as many as some would like to think it is

 

[dyre]

It's hypocritical to slam a company's business practices and then give them your money anyway, whether you signed and laminated an official declaration of boycott or not.

Uh, no it's not. Really, it's only hypocritical to slam the company's business practices, then repeat those same business practices yourself.

If I refused to buy a product from any company I considered to have bad practices of some kind, I wouldn't be able to buy things at all. Your food, your medicine, your gasoline, etc, is all sold to you by shitty companies with shitty business practices.

 

[Woodsey]

It's hypocritical to slam a company's business practices and then give them your money anyway, whether you signed and laminated an official declaration of boycott or not.

Uh, no it's not. Really, it's only hypocritical to slam the company's business practices, then repeat those same business practices yourself.

If I refused to buy a product from any company I considered to have bad practices of some kind, I wouldn't be able to buy things at all. Your food, your medicine, your gasoline, etc, is all sold to you by shitty companies with shitty business practices.

And so the truth did finally dawn upon him, and it was magnificent...

Everyone's a hypocrite. Suck it up.

 

[nu1mlock]

I have to agree with this. Plus you know if I HAVE to play online to play a game I won't play it. And I don't mean just being logged into Steam/Blizzard/PSN/Live. I like single player games that do not require me to play with someone else. So I will stick with my SC/SC2/D1/D2 as far as my Blizzard games go. I will use it's network to talk to my friends whilst I play but not be required to play with them per se or anyone else.

I might have interpreted you wrong, but you're not forced to play Diablo 3 with anyone, even though you have to be logged into their service. Just like you don't have to play with anyone on Starcraft 2 (which you say you own) but still have to be logged in to play.

 

[dyre]

It's hypocritical to slam a company's business practices and then give them your money anyway, whether you signed and laminated an official declaration of boycott or not.

Uh, no it's not. Really, it's only hypocritical to slam the company's business practices, then repeat those same business practices yourself.

If I refused to buy a product from any company I considered to have bad practices of some kind, I wouldn't be able to buy things at all. Your food, your medicine, your gasoline, etc, is all sold to you by shitty companies with shitty business practices.

And so the truth did finally dawn upon him, and it was magnificent...

Everyone's a hypocrite. Suck it up.

I'm not sure what you're trying to get at...if everyone's a hypocrite, why bother singling out gamers for, if we used your definition of hypocrisy, is an extraordinarily small amount of hypocrisy compared to people who buy from BP, or put their money in Bank of America. It's like yelling at a guy for punching a baby in a roomful of people who are shooting babies...

In fact, if everyone is a hypocrite, then you are a hypocrite. Since you seem to dislike hypocrisy, why are you engaging in the act by pointing out the perceived hypocrisy of others?

 

[kortin]

I see the reasoning behind it. You can make money off the game now, it makes sense. I don't exactly support the always online thing, but it makes perfect sense.

 

[Vault101]

I can do without Diablo 3....but the fact its going to do really well irks me..a little

 

[Blow_Pop]

I have to agree with this. Plus you know if I HAVE to play online to play a game I won't play it. And I don't mean just being logged into Steam/Blizzard/PSN/Live. I like single player games that do not require me to play with someone else. So I will stick with my SC/SC2/D1/D2 as far as my Blizzard games go. I will use it's network to talk to my friends whilst I play but not be required to play with them per se or anyone else.

I might have interpreted you wrong, but you're not forced to play Diablo 3 with anyone, even though you have to be logged into their service. Just like you don't have to play with anyone on Starcraft 2 (which you say you own) but still have to be logged in to play.

Aye, I do own it and that is the one feature about it I despise. I was a bit unspecific. I don't like having to be online just to play. I like being offline when playing. Unless I'm in the rare mood to be social.

 

[nu1mlock]

Aye, I do own it and that is the one feature about it I despise. I was a bit unspecific. I don't like having to be online just to play. I like being offline when playing. Unless I'm in the rare mood to be social.

But what if you put yourself as "offline" (or invisible or whatever it's called, didn't check)? Then you can play alone without being social. You still have to be logged in though, but you don't have to even talk to anyone.

 

[ThePenguinKnight]

I'm fairly stubborn, alright fine, I'm incredibly stubborn so I don't change my opinions often. And being the stubborn bastard that I am I can't really relate to someone whose opinion changes often, so I don't try to judge. My guess is that they enjoy the game so much after getting their hands on it that they forgive the shortcomings they raved on about previously, I've done it a few times.

 

[evilneko]

I donno what you're talking about.

I haven't had a positive opinion about D3 since I found out it had the always online DRM. I don't like games that require an active internet connection to play because when my internet goes down--as it often does, fuck you very much Time Warner Cable--I often turn to games for entertainment. A game that doesn't work at all under those conditions is of little value to me.

In fact, if you want to say I've changed my mind about it, it's from cautiously optimistic to definitely avoiding it. I saw screenshots and some videos before hearing about the online crap, and had a glimmer of hope that D3 would bring back the dark and scary atmosphere of Classic Diablo.

 

[distortedreality]

We're slowly going the way of having forums without the ability to post opinions.

Mark my words.

 

[Blow_Pop]

Aye, I do own it and that is the one feature about it I despise. I was a bit unspecific. I don't like having to be online just to play. I like being offline when playing. Unless I'm in the rare mood to be social.

But what if you put yourself as "offline" (or invisible or whatever it's called, didn't check)? Then you can play alone without being social. You still have to be logged in though, but you don't have to even talk to anyone.

Until my internet goes out.

 

[Woodsey]

It's hypocritical to slam a company's business practices and then give them your money anyway, whether you signed and laminated an official declaration of boycott or not.

Uh, no it's not. Really, it's only hypocritical to slam the company's business practices, then repeat those same business practices yourself.

If I refused to buy a product from any company I considered to have bad practices of some kind, I wouldn't be able to buy things at all. Your food, your medicine, your gasoline, etc, is all sold to you by shitty companies with shitty business practices.

And so the truth did finally dawn upon him, and it was magnificent...

Everyone's a hypocrite. Suck it up.

I'm not sure what you're trying to get at...if everyone's a hypocrite, why bother singling out gamers for, if we used your definition of hypocrisy, is an extraordinarily small amount of hypocrisy compared to people who buy from BP, or put their money in Bank of America. It's like yelling at a guy for punching a baby in a roomful of people who are shooting babies...

In fact, if everyone is a hypocrite, then you are a hypocrite. Since you seem to dislike hypocrisy, why are you engaging in the act by pointing out the perceived hypocrisy of others?

My point is that those things are hypocritical, you seem to think they're not. The difference between someone buying food from somewhere they disagree with the business practices of and this is that the food argument is leaning towards an inescapable fact of life, with everyone needing food. There are degrees of hypocrisy. So yes, everyone is a hypocrite, no, I don't paint everyone with the same brush because of it.

What we're talking about here is a 'luxury item' which people in no way need, have derided the company's business practices on, and then proceeded to buy the game anyway.

If you slam their business practices and then give them your money, you're endorsing their business practices. That's hypocritical. (And please don't make me show you a dictionary definition, I don't want every argument I have on here to have to end with that.)

'In fact, if everyone is a hypocrite, then you are a hypocrite.'

Do I applaud now, or is there an encore?