What is with people?

[Kyrinn]

I've been waiting for Diablo III for years.
Then I heard about it's DRM.

Then I didn't buy it.

I love not being the hypocrite for once.

Please be sarcasm, there are actually people that think like this so I can't tell.

Everyone seems to equate the DRM to online play, which is wrong. You just have to have some sort of connection to the internet in order to play (same as starcraft 2). "But what about people with bad internet?" Unless you have no internet this won't be a problem. You won't get lag playing single player.
EDIT: I should make it clear that I do not support the DRM, however I cannot take people seriously when they claim it to be that worst thing to happen to videogames.

Seriously, why are gamers such ridiculous hypocrites?

It is well and truly beyond me. The amount of people who are singing praises about Diablo 3 as if it's the second coming of Christ already is just stupid, considering when the retarded DRM was announced, everyone was baying for blood.

Please, make up your fucking mind.

Now, for the discussion value.

What's your take on the moronic nature of people who change their mind about things more often than a prostitute has sex?

The internet is not a hivemind, nor are vocal minorities a good indication of general consesus. Also, changing your mind does not make you a hypocrite nor is it moronic. I once thought school was a waste of time, now I believe my time there was valuable. Does that make me a hypocrite? Am I a moron because I have the capability to change my opinion on matters quickly when presented with new information rather than stubbornly deny everything?

 

[dyre]

snip

Let's make this incredibly simple for you (again).

Are you asserting a particular standard when you criticise Blizzard for implementing always-online DRM? Yes.

Are you then ignoring that standard you have imposed when you buy Diablo 3 which implements it? Yes.

Does this mean you are claiming to have certain principles when, in actuality, you're supporting others? Yes.

That's hypocrisy.

Can you accept that the answer to those three questions is a 'yes'? Because that is the definition of hypocrisy. Don't like it, find a different word. But that's the one we're talking about, and that's the answer. That's it.

Yes, it's also hypocritical of Company A to implement the practices of Company B which it had criticised only days earlier. No, that's not the only form of hypocrisy. If you insist on bringing it back to other parts of life, those are standards which are virtually impossible to meet. It's not hypocritical for a communist to shop at normal stores because it'd be near-impossible not to in a capitalist society. When it's something you can be perfectly in control of and can quite clearly opt out of (buying a game for yourself), then you're pretending to have standards which clearly you have no interest in adhering to.

So no, I wouldn't label someone a hypocrite for buying stuff they needed to live on when they had no real other choice, because it'd be particularly anal to do so, and hypocrisy in only the most technical and awkward sense. Fine, I can agree to that. But that's not what we're talking about.

I think at this point, you know the response I'd make to your post, and I know the response you'd make to my response of your post. Your application to the definition is different from mine (although the definitions themselves are similar), and it's probably going to stay that way.

I guess you can go on boycotting Diablo 3, and I can go on probably buying Diablo 3 at some point, depending on my mood and the price of D3 at the time.

 

[Woodsey]

snip

Let's make this incredibly simple for you (again).

Are you asserting a particular standard when you criticise Blizzard for implementing always-online DRM? Yes.

Are you then ignoring that standard you have imposed when you buy Diablo 3 which implements it? Yes.

Does this mean you are claiming to have certain principles when, in actuality, you're supporting others? Yes.

That's hypocrisy.

Can you accept that the answer to those three questions is a 'yes'? Because that is the definition of hypocrisy. Don't like it, find a different word. But that's the one we're talking about, and that's the answer. That's it.

Yes, it's also hypocritical of Company A to implement the practices of Company B which it had criticised only days earlier. No, that's not the only form of hypocrisy. If you insist on bringing it back to other parts of life, those are standards which are virtually impossible to meet. It's not hypocritical for a communist to shop at normal stores because it'd be near-impossible not to in a capitalist society. When it's something you can be perfectly in control of and can quite clearly opt out of (buying a game for yourself), then you're pretending to have standards which clearly you have no interest in adhering to.

So no, I wouldn't label someone a hypocrite for buying stuff they needed to live on when they had no real other choice, because it'd be particularly anal to do so, and hypocrisy in only the most technical and awkward sense. Fine, I can agree to that. But that's not what we're talking about.

I think at this point, you know the response I'd make to your post, and I know the response you'd make to my response of your post. Your application to the definition is different from mine (although the definitions themselves are similar), and it's probably going to stay that way.

I guess you can go on boycotting Diablo 3, and I can go on probably buying Diablo 3 at some point, depending on my mood and the price of D3 at the time.

I'm just not buying it. I'd rather drill a nail into my cock-eye than play anything loot-driven.

snip

You have to be connected constantly for every part of the game, including single-player. If you have a bad internet connection then that's a bad problem. (And actually, I'm pretty sure it stores certain stuff on the servers all the time, so that's going to be a big problem for countries like Canada and Australia who seem to still have data caps imposed by ISPs. That could have changed since I read it though.)

And yeah, people get pissy when paying customers are treated like pirates.

 

[Woodsey]

- merged the two posts, delete this chaps -

 

[Kyrinn]

snip

You have to be connected constantly for every part of the game, including single-player. If you have a bad internet connection then that's a bad problem.

And yeah, people get pissy when paying customers are treated like pirates.

I understand that you have to be connected constantly. However to play single player you do not need to be on a hosted server, which is why I said bad internet should not be a problem. Unless your internet connection is so bad that it is cutting out completely every 10 minutes then there should be no problem.

I also understand why blizzard implemented the always on DRM. It might not be convienient for everyone but it helps prevent those who would try to cheat, exploit, or hack the game from ruining other people's online experience. Why they couldn't include an offline mode as well that does not let you use the character online...I don't know

 

[Woodsey]

snip

You have to be connected constantly for every part of the game, including single-player. If you have a bad internet connection then that's a bad problem.

And yeah, people get pissy when paying customers are treated like pirates.

I understand that you have to be connected constantly. However to play single player you do not need to be on a hosted server, which is why I said bad internet should not be a problem. Unless your internet connection is so bad that it is cutting out completely every 10 minutes then there should be no problem.

I also understand why blizzard implemented the always on DRM. It might not be convienient for everyone but it helps prevent those who would try to cheat, exploit, or hack the game from ruining other people's online experience. Why they couldn't include an offline mode as well that does not let you use the character online...I don't know

Which rather begs the question of why you're OK with it. And a lot of people have internet connections like that. I think you'd be surprised.

Their servers will fuck up at times, your connection will fuck up at times. Mine does, and I'd say I have a fucking great connection. It's the single-player portion, and it's unacceptable that it's tied to always-online DRM; they're treating paying customers like thieves.

 

[Lunar Templar]

what ARE you talking about.

near as i can tell, the majority of people on this site want Torchlight 2, not Diablo 3.

also,

Gamers aren't a hivemind you know.

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

this.

now, kindly get over that not every one agrees with you :3

 

[Kyrinn]

Which rather begs the question of why you're OK with it. And a lot of people have internet connections like that. I think you'd be surprised.

Their servers will fuck up at times, your connection will fuck up at times. Mine does, and I'd say I have a fucking great connection. It's the single-player portion, and it's unacceptable that it's tied to always-online DRM; they're treating paying customers like thieves.

I am ok with it because it is an anti-cheating method I can see actually working. With always on DRM Blizzard will have an inalterable log of everything your character does (Just like they do for WoW). It's because of this that the real money auction house can exist (whether or not it should exist is a whole other can of worms I'd rather not open). Maybe 1 person out of 10 000 will manage to temporarily get around it and will eventually be banned. I don't see it as treating paying customers as thieves. I see it as a neccessary evil if people want to be able to use their single player characters online. The alternative being a multiplayer full of players who hacked themselves to max level with best in slot items.
The only thing about this that I am not ok with is the fact that there will be no offline mode like with StarCraft to allow people to play uninterrupted with friends.

As for the connection problems, it's going to happen to everyone at some point or another. Hopefully blizzard will understand this and make the connection timeout somewhat lenient. Anything I can say about that is just pure speculation though.

 

[Woodsey]

Which rather begs the question of why you're OK with it. And a lot of people have internet connections like that. I think you'd be surprised.

Their servers will fuck up at times, your connection will fuck up at times. Mine does, and I'd say I have a fucking great connection. It's the single-player portion, and it's unacceptable that it's tied to always-online DRM; they're treating paying customers like thieves.

I am ok with it because it is an anti-cheating method I can see actually working. With always on DRM Blizzard will have an un-editable log of everything your character does. It's because of this that the real money auction house can exist (whether or not it should exist is a whole other can of worms I'd rather not open). Maybe 1 person out of 10 000 will manage to temporarily get around it and will eventually be banned. I don't see it as treating paying customers as thieves. I see it as a neccessary evil, the alternative being multiplayer being full of players who hacked themselves to max level with best in slot items.
The only thing about this that I am not ok with is the fact that there will be no offline mode like with StarCraft to allow people to play uninterrupted with friends.

As for the connection problems, it's going to happen to everyone at some point or another. Hopefully blizzard will understand this and make the connection timeout somewhat lenient. Anything I can say about that is just pure speculation though.

But you've already said yourself you don't see why they don't just create a completely separate offline version too.

What's difficult about having:

Single-player offline
Single-player always-online (so you can transfer to MP)
Multi-player

You're saying no one at Blizzard's thought of that? Because you thought of it. I thought of it. Many, many other people have thought it. So of course Blizzard have. It's a DRM measure, and a particularly obnoxious one at that. THE most obnoxious one, in fact.

Even Ubisoft, the industry's biggest idiots, seem to have backed down from always-online DRM.

 

[Kyrinn]

But you've already said yourself you don't see why they don't just create a completely separate offline version too.

What's difficult about having:

Single-player offline
Single-player always-online (so you can transfer to MP)
Multi-player

You're saying no one at Blizzard's thought of that? Because you thought of it. I thought of it. Many, many other people have thought it. So of course Blizzard have. It's a DRM measure, and a particularly obnoxious one at that.

Even Ubisoft, the industry's biggest idiots, seem to have backed down from always-online DRM.

I don't know what is so difficult, and I never tried to imply that no one at blizzard has thought of such. What you've outlined seems like the most logical setup. The only explaination I can give to why it isn't that way is to point at Activition, say something about evil gaming companies and shrug.

Also, the Ubisoft DRM would have been completely unneccesary since there was no crossover from SP to MP and no trading with real money.

Why is the D3 the most obnoxious DRM ever? Because the issue could have been avoided through offline SP or becauare it simply exists in the first place?

 

[Woodsey]

But you've already said yourself you don't see why they don't just create a completely separate offline version too.

What's difficult about having:

Single-player offline
Single-player always-online (so you can transfer to MP)
Multi-player

You're saying no one at Blizzard's thought of that? Because you thought of it. I thought of it. Many, many other people have thought it. So of course Blizzard have. It's a DRM measure, and a particularly obnoxious one at that.

Even Ubisoft, the industry's biggest idiots, seem to have backed down from always-online DRM.

I don't know what is so difficult, and I never tried to imply that no one at blizzard has thought of such. What you've outlined seems like the most logical setup. The only explaination I can give to why it isn't that way is to point at Activition, say something about evil gaming companies and shrug.

Also, the Ubisoft DRM would have been completely unneccesary since there was no crossover from SP to MP and no trading with real money.

Why is the D3 the most obnoxious DRM ever? Because the issue could have been avoided through offline SP or becauare it simply exists in the first place?

Exactly, and we've just given a very simple reason as to why it's completely unnecessary for Diablo 3. (And Blizzard's a part of Activision Blizzard, who are a merger of Activision and Blizzard. I.e. they're one and the same.)

And because it's unnecessary, a problem which will impact upon paying customers in the most overt way any current form of DRM can whilst not affecting anyone who pirates the game.

 

[Powereaver]

Its human nature.. we change our mind 1 million times a minute... i swear im always going.. i like this.. no i like this! theres very few things that i have a solid concrete view on.. as for diablo 3 part.. i loved diablo 1 and 2 but 3 im still on the fence about so im thinking.

 

[Kyrinn]

Exactly, and we've just given a very simple reason as to why it's completely unnecessary for Diablo 3. (And Blizzard's a part of Activision Blizzard, who are a merger of Activision and Blizzard. I.e. they're one and the same.)

And because it's unnecessary, a problem which will impact upon paying customers in the most overt way any current form of DRM can whilst not affecting anyone who pirates the game.

I'm aware of the merger, just never accepted it.
Offline single play mode should just be called Pirate Mode.

 

[Arakasi]

I've been waiting for Diablo III for years.
Then I heard about it's DRM.

Then I didn't buy it.

I love not being the hypocrite for once.

Please be sarcasm, there are actually people that think like this so I can't tell.

Everyone seems to equate the DRM to online play, which is wrong. You just have to have some sort of connection to the internet in order to play (same as starcraft 2). "But what about people with bad internet?" Unless you have no internet this won't be a problem. You won't get lag playing single player.
EDIT: I should make it clear that I do not support the DRM, however I cannot take people seriously when they claim it to be that worst thing to happen to videogames.

I often take my laptop places where I cannot access the internet, when I do that I like to play games, DRM stops me from doing this, so fuck DRM, and fuck Diablo III.

When I buy something I want to be able to do as I wish with it. (Providing I'm not breaking a law)