Why are people freaking out over the "Always Online" aspect of Diablo 3?

[w00tage]

It's not DRM! It's there to ensure the game's market stays "honest". And since real money is being thrown around, real money that could come out of Blizz's own pockets, they REALLY want to keep it honest. People keep talking about the Always Online being DRM and how it's restrictive and whatnot, but for once I don't think it's about Piracy, it's about the CAH.

Erm, it IS DRM, and everything you've been saying has been to that effect; it's management over the digital property, whether that's a full game or items within the game. As to the reasons for its implementation, sure, CAH is the obvious thing to have necessitated that move, and if they allow otherwise complete offline characters without an always on connection then great - they would really need to be pushing that fact into mainstream knowledge to quash all the moaning.

Thing is, no matter how you look at it, ANY sort of always-online system for an ostensibly SINGLE PLAYER game is a betrayal and straight-up pisses me off - and unlike the penny arcade comic, I don't then buy it anyway, I look for alternatives. At the very least, there's always another game that actually understands the concept of 'single player' gaming.

Heres a fun fact... You will buy it, and every other person who is raging will buy it. The issue is small, it was a bigger issue for starcraft 2 because SC2 has professional tournaments and needs a LAN, D3 does not need a LAN, Latency isn't an issue. If it's an issue in terms of principle, then you should really htfu, and learn to be a good sheep like the rest of the masses.

Here is a fun fact. I will not if I have to be always online. Period.

As to why I care, it's very simple - it is not a feature that is intended to serve me in any way. I have no problem with it checking every so often for updates. I have no problem with letting it go online to buy DLC, or whatever.

I have a problem with having to have an active internet connection before I can play the game. That does not serve ME, the person who is paying for this product, in any way, shape or form, and I can very well see how it might impede my ability to use the product, for instance when I'm traveling.

I've recently used a train to go a 2 hour car trip because the train ticket equalled the cost of the gas I'd have used. Though it took longer, I wasn't in a hurry, and it was much nicer - big seats, other people to chat with, lounge car with a view of the passing countryside, snack car, laptop power, etc. But- no Internet.

There's also my sister's vacation house and that place has no Internet on purpose - she does not want work interruptions there. However, when we gather there, a lot of times we play games on Wii and our PCs to pass an hour or two in the evening.

So there's two places I might want to have access to the game, and won't. I'm not a stupid game addict that's "gotta have it *drool* " so I get to choose who gets my money, and this is one of the big things that makes it a "no" vote for me.

 

[Kinokohatake]

I don't have the extra cash right now for internet good enough to run a game whenever I want to play it. I don't have X Box live or the Play Station network. I was looking forward to buying this but I refuse to eat up my bandwidth to play a game by myself. I may buy it once my internet gets better but who knows.

 

[Moriarty]

Indeed there is lag, as is there with any other online game. Yet we all get on with it just fine. And if I ever do find myself without the internet at my house, I'll switch to Oblivion, Skyrim or whatever other single player games are available for me to play until internet is restored. Or, I may go outside, read a book, play some Warhammer should a friend be nearby, spend some time imagining I actually have a girlfriend. You get the jist.

*facepalm*

you don't see the consequences of this, do you? If you accept always on DRM on a single player game, other publishers are going to use it as well because it won't hurt their sales (see the news article about id software). More and more games are going to require an internet connection to play. Sure we have some more lenient drm methods on some games _now_ but if we simply bend over and accept industry practices that screw us over, there won't be anything left to play when your internet connection dies out in the future.

Could you please point out to me where/how 'trolling fanboy' is mentioned in there, let alone implied? Because I certainly didn't mean it in such a way.

okay, so "trolling fanboy" is totally different from psychically confused, immature and raging folk?

For as long as I can remember, I've been accepting license agreements before installing games. Even if these licenses don't exist, there are 101 ways a developer/publisher could maintain control over everyone's copy of the game. Pieces of code that can be activated to render the copy useless or unplayable. Take down all online servers or whatever. To be honest, with what could happen in mind, a license agreement seems okay to be honest.

But why do you accept that?

If I buy music online, I can use it whenever I wish, on whatever device I wish.
If I buy a movie, I can put it in any blueray/dvd player without having to log in to my pixar account to view it. Why do you accept those roadblocks in the gaming industry?

 

[Timedraven 117]

DISCLAIMER: I'm sure there's been a bunch of similar threads, no need to tell me that. This one is mine. If it bothers you that someone made another one, just ignore it.

This has been bugging me for the past week - everywhere I turn, people are bitching about the Always Online announcement for D3. It's in the Forums I visit, it's in the Webcomics I follow, it's in the articles I read. Everyone is whining about it like it's this huge problem.

It isn't the problem.

It's the symptom of the actual problem.

In fact, there is no way for D3 to NOT be Always Online. And the reason for that it the actual problem - The Cash Auction House

I'm sure most of you can put the pieces together by now, but in case you're not getting it, I'll elaborate. Any form of offline play means the game data is relatively easy to tamper with. The only way to avoid this is to store character data on the server and keep in constant contact with the client. This becomes actually important when you consider the Cash Auction House (CAH from now on). This is a place where items will be bought and sold for real money. Real as in you'll be able to sell that Infinity+1 Sword you found and then get the money to your bank account (before someone quotes me the Escapist article where it says cashing out won't be possible - that article was wrong).

So imagine if you could go offline, use a cheat program to give yourself a bunch of such items and then put them up for sale. You could literally copy/paste money. Sure, it would crash the market and all that, but that would just end up screwing the game up even more. D2's history was riddled with item duping scandals and similar crap. The only way to prevent it is to keep a tight leash on the character data, and the only way to do that is to require Always Online.

It's not DRM! It's there to ensure the game's market stays "honest". And since real money is being thrown around, real money that could come out of Blizz's own pockets, they REALLY want to keep it honest. People keep talking about the Always Online being DRM and how it's restrictive and whatnot, but for once I don't think it's about Piracy, it's about the CAH.

The only way Blizz could give you an offline mode is if they let your make a separate offline character which could never go online and not letting your online characters ever be played offline. I belive I heard something to that extent was being implemented.

So in short, stop whining about Always Online. It's pointless. If you want to ***** about something, ***** about the CAH, since it's the reason for the Always Online crap.

P.S. And this is before we even get started on the crap I belive the CAH will do to the game's economy, especially as far as "normal" players are concerned.

EDIT: I belive people have been missing a single line in my post, or I haven'+t been clear enough. Yes, they could do an offline mode with characters that are offline only and I BELIVE THEY ARE, at least I remember reading something to that extent.

EDIT 2: Diablo 3 WILL have an OFFLINE MODE

http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=27387874231&sid=3000 (scroll down to the blue post)

Seriously people, chill...

internet goes out fuck you cant play and lost my progress.

thats basically what is the problum or what people think is the problum anything could go horribly wrong like a server crash or internet problum

 

[5mj7R7yf4Dwr3gdZyyu9PeGNwYjlNrjzuh3iTXQG]

I'm actually a lot like Krahulik to be perfectly honest. Quite frankly, I don't really have the time to be concerned with other people's inability to enjoy a luxury...

I'm not going to parse out what is considered a luxury or not, or rather what you consider a luxury or not, Elamdri, since a luxury, like porn or fair use, is subjective. And I'm sure that because something is regarded by someone (or even generally) as not a necessity does not mean consumers should retain fewer rights (and the companies retain more) when it comes to transactions of it.

But your apathy is acceptable so long as you will not gripe to the rest of us when the copyright nazis come for you (or, say, arbitrarily shut off services on which you depend), because ultimately, they will come for you.

You are right, it is the state of the market to disallow returns or exchanges, to inhibit (if not prohibit) secondary-market transactions, to dismiss technical issues unless they are commonplace and costing sales, essentially all the things that allow Microsoft to arbitrarily switch off boxes without explanation or review. It's also made great movements towards ostracizing much of the fringe gaming community (such as left-handers like myself). I suspect it is fortunate for you that you are so mainstream, but it means you will probably be contentedly entertained by shovelware.

You may trust Blizzard knows better than you what is good for you, but some of us have had the experiences of getting screwed over by game publishers and resellers. In my case, it is by direct inaction of EA that drove me to learn about the torrent community, for want of a replacement for a cracked disc of a game I legitimately purchased. They accused me of being a pirate, and but for my purchased license, they made me into one.

And some of us know that activation-based DRM will ultimately be used as a device for which it was unintended, that is to say, to turn a license purchase into a temporary rental. We know this because plenty of music listeners have suffered from this very usage.

Here's the rub: You know in advance the features of Diablo 3. No offline mode, Cash AH, no mods. If you don't like that, don't buy the game.

As enthusiasts, you and I know this because we read the news on it. I know to look at the game requirements before making a purchase, but the majority of Blizzard's and Activision's customer base do not. I suspect that many are going to be surprised, since it is policy to bury requirements such as persistent online connection in the fine print. They certainly aren't going to announce it in bold print on the front of the box, and many are going to get screwed by taking offline play for granted with no obvious warning, and then being unable to return the game to their reseller. And yes, once they shell out sixty bucks, in fact, they are entitled to play the game. Assuredly, you would expect the game to work on your system without any clear forewarning that it might not, yes?

But you're not the first person I've encountered who chooses to simply not care about the fellow community members, taking for granted, of course, that the same community will be there when they fall, themselves.

But we all get pounced by Hunters sooner or later.

238U.

 

[EasySt17]

Because...and this may be shocking...from time to time...I like to play games when I am not...and usually in this instance...cannot connect to the internet...and if I pay money for a game I expect to be able to play it when I want...

No big deal though...I just won't buy Diablo III... I've already given up on Blizzard games being good...despite being an early supporter...

 

[Elamdri]

I'm actually a lot like Krahulik to be perfectly honest. Quite frankly, I don't really have the time to be concerned with other people's inability to enjoy a luxury...

I'm not going to parse out what is considered a luxury or not, or rather what you consider a luxury or not, Elamdri, since a luxury, like porn or fair use, is subjective. And I'm sure that because something is regarded by someone (or even generally) as not a necessity does not mean consumers should retain fewer rights (and the companies retain more) when it comes to transactions of it.

Quite simply a luxury is something that is not necessary to sustain life but rather improves the quality of life. A shelter is a necessity, owning a home is a luxury. Transport is a necessity, owning a car is a luxury. Food is a necessity, fine cuisine is a luxury. We live in a world where things like televisions, internet, video games, movies, music and all these other great things are not rights which we hold absolute.

As far as regulations go, what is the interest in protecting the fairness of a transaction between the owners of a luxury and the customers? It's not as though if we are unable to fairly purchase these things then we are apt to die; our lives simply become less enjoyable. In a free market society, we have freedom of contract, we may choose whether or not to purchase luxuries. If we feel the transaction is not fair, then we have the freedom to opt out.

But your apathy is acceptable so long as you will not gripe to the rest of us when the copyright nazis come for you (or, say, arbitrarily shut off services on which you depend), because ultimately, they will come for you.

As an American, I reserve my God given right to be a hypocrite when and where it suits me

You are right, it is the state of the market to disallow returns or exchanges, to inhibit (if not prohibit) secondary-market transactions, to dismiss technical issues unless they are commonplace and costing sales, essentially all the things that allow Microsoft to arbitrarily switch off boxes without explanation or review. It's also made great movements towards ostracizing much of the fringe gaming community (such as left-handers like myself). I suspect it is fortunate for you that you are so mainstream, but it means you will probably be contentedly entertained by shovelware.

Please don't misunderstand me, what I put forth is cold, unforgiving Social Darwinism as applied to a capitalist system. I recognize that it is NOT FAIR to say to a group of people that they are so small that their problems are not worth addressing. What I am trying to get at however is that the market does not care about you and your problems. It cares about making the most money the most efficiently. Whatever moral judgement you make about this system, that is the way it currently operates.

Here's the rub: You know in advance the features of Diablo 3. No offline mode, Cash AH, no mods. If you don't like that, don't buy the game.

As enthusiasts, you and I know this because we read the news on it. I know to look at the game requirements before making a purchase, but the majority of Blizzard's and Activision's customer base do not. I suspect that many are going to be surprised, since it is policy to bury requirements such as persistent online connection in the fine print. They certainly aren't going to announce it in bold print on the front of the box, and many are going to get screwed by taking offline play for granted with no obvious warning, and then being unable to return the game to their reseller. And yes, once they shell out sixty bucks, in fact, they are entitled to play the game. Assuredly, you would expect the game to work on your system without any clear forewarning that it might not, yes?

Caveat Emptor. Let the buyer beware. When I make an important or expensive purchase, I do a fair amount of research. I read reviews, I look at specifications if they exist. I look at dimensions and weight. I do this because it is my duty as a buyer to be informed. The only duty that a seller has is to not fraudulently mislead me. As long as the information is made available to me and no trickery or deception is used, the seller is pretty much in the clear. If you look at the box for Starcraft 2, it says on the front, back, and sides of the box "Internet connection required. Player is responsible for all applicable internet fees. Battle.net registration required." If you look at the bottom of the box, there is a list of minimum and recommended system requirements. On the top of the box, it says that use of the product is subject to the terms of an EULA that can be found on the Starcraft 2 Website.

Ultimately, if grandma chooses to buy billy a copy of Diablo 3 for Christmas, not knowing that Billy's Dial-Up internet will not let him play it, while it's certainly unfortunate, it's the consumer's fault for not being educated, not the manufacturer's fault for selling a product not everyone can use.

But you're not the first person I've encountered who chooses to simply not care about the fellow community members, taking for granted, of course, that the same community will be there when they fall, themselves.

But we all get pounced by Hunters sooner or later.

238U.

"First they came for the left-handed,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't left-handed.

Then they came for dial-up,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't on dial-up.

Then they came for the spotty connect,
and I didn't speak out because connection wasn't spotty.

Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me."

Certainly a beautiful sentiment. However, my feelings are that the hunters have already pounced. The way I see it, we have already lost. My view is to learn to accept things the way they are now rather than rail against a future that is already here.

 

[aescuder]

I thought the Penny-Arcade summary was pretty on point about this topic.

^Pretty much the exact image I have in my mind.

Honestly what PC gamer still have a crappy internet service these days. If my wi-fi craps out which it rarely does, then there's your neighbors wi-fi, or a school, or a starbucks/cafe, or any-f***ing-where (free wifi is literally everywhere). And who would want to be playing D3 on a plane?

If you don't have good internet access then the problem isn't Blizzard excluding you from their target demographic (or whatever similar nonsense), the problem is that you yourself is excluded from the entire world, and you live under a rock...that has no internet access....

People who have bad internet connections -
People who experience bad weather
People who travel alot
People too poor to afford constant internet
People who live in remote areas
People getting internet from BT (screw you so much BT)

Also, I should have the right to play the game *I* bought and own without having to (illegally) hack into my neighbours internet connection or slog down to Starbucks (and please suggest how I carry my desktop down there, I can't work out the logistics)

Edit: Whoopsies, forgot the big one, stupid me:
Some people just have shitty internet! I for one can't play Team Fortress 2 at my home because the internet tends to blip every few minutes.

If people have the money to buy diablo 3 AND a Desktop/Laptop powerful enough to run diablo 3, I don't understand why they can't afford a proper internet provider. I don't think there are a lot of destitute people, or even people whose primary concern is to fish for food or crop the fields, that are gamers. If you travel then there are always mobile broadband USB "internet sticks", or like I said free wi-fi is everywhere (even in a hicktown like Ohio, where I live).

Anyway, I'm sure you'll still be able to play the single player even with a shotty internet service (much like SC2). If you were planning to play multiplayer then (duh) you absolutely need a better internet service, which pretty much goes for every multiplayer game out there not just blizzard games. You're internet can't be that bad...I mean you're here discussing this right now...on the internet...

Honestly it's 2011 people, and internet access is a bit of a necessity these days while gaming is still a luxury. If you don't have internet access then I'm surprised that you can do research for school or even get a job these days (where online application is pretty much commonplace)...getting a $60 game is the least of your problems.

I don't think you really understand how internet connections work :/ Being able to post online and having a stable connection don't go automatically hand in hand. People don't only buy computers for gaming, and almost any desktop or laptop that you would also use for work could run it, the system requirements are exceptionally low. So buying a computer "powerful enough" isn't a thing, because basically any computer bought in the last 6 years could already run it.

Wifi is never reliable, at least I have yet to see a reliable wifi. Even private, dedicated wireless drops. The thing is, if this DRM is anything like some Activision games, then people with a shitty internet won't be able to play because the second the internet drops the game closes. Having internet is almost a necessity these days, but not everyone is as lucky as you to have a stable one.

I don't mean to call you spoiled or anything but it sounds like you're taking a lot of this for granted when tons of people have almost no control of their connection's stability. I mean, you don't seriously think saying "it's 2011 people" is a valid response to people whose connection drops during bad weather, whose house is over twenty years old with bad wiring, who for no discernible reason get spotty internet no matter how much they pay, etc.

Literally while typing this my internet dropped for a second and I had to reload the page, which doesn't really hurt using a browser but would drop the game. In order to fix this problem I would have to buy a new house somewhere else and move.

Umm, I'm not sure YOU understand how the internet works.

I'm not spoiled I'm just one in a billion gamers who has a working router. What spoiled is is the sense of entitlement fans have over a game that hasn't even been released yet. If always-online-play is a deal breaker then cast your vote by not buying the game. (more fun for the rest of us) It's much less exhausting then arguing with blokes on the internet which is prolly doubly hard for you because your connection is unreliable.

Like I said gaming is a bit of a luxury, and blizzard is the top-shelf of this luxury and they can do anything they damm well please with their games. I NEVER got to play WOW because of the monthly subscriptions, and I sure as hell didn't feel like it was their civic duty to provide a cheaper alternative or provide an offline WOW...if you don't have a functioning house then maybe you should save money on fixing it up rather than blowing cash on a video game.

SC2 was fine even when you had to log-in battle.net every time. And I'm going out on a limb here even before the game comes out (which I assume is ok because people have been taking potshots at it all day like they own a copy of the damn thing already), this game is going to be great and wildly successful, even if 10% of the target demographic has a less then stellar internet connection (a generous guess).

 

[aescuder]

And what about those of us who don't own our own home or don't still live with our parents? I flat share and the internet connection and router belong to the other guy, so I just have to go with what we have, 40gb monthly cap and all.

Then getting an online game that cost $60 is probably a bad decision. That money should probably go towards a new router or a new internet provider..or towards an offline game.

 

[Twilight_guy]

It's going to have an offline mode? Doesn't that make it identical to D2 then? Well I guess people will have to suck up their bile and move back to acid spitting on some other group (ubisoft ho!).

 

[AdumbroDeus]

I thought the Penny-Arcade summary was pretty on point about this topic.

^Pretty much the exact image I have in my mind.

Mine too. This will affect 0% of all clear thinking adults. The kids (and yes, they can be adults too, but the fact they are raging means they lose adult status) that are raging simply saw a sensitive topic involved, saw Blizzards name and engaged vitriol spurtation (that is now officially a word).

Always online, even for DRM purposes = utterly unaffected, I already use Steam...

Cash Auction House = don't like it, don't use it.

What a childish way to view your opposition in any discussion.

Thank you for ignoring very real issues in terms of internet infrastructure in the united states.


Also, you realize steam doesn't require you to be online right?

 

[Something Amyss]

Why don't they just have a single-player that's actually separate from the online store and won't let you cross your character over?

Less money to milk....Somehow?

I don't know. Seems reasonable.

 

[AdumbroDeus]

1. I'm sorry, but people have a right to complain when a game they are looking for makes decisions that they dislike for substantial reasons. Not only does this point out to the company that they will lose sales over it, it has a secondary effect of increasing the amount of people who are aware that the fine print of the game includes "consistent internet connection required". In a capitalist system, word of mouth is important to maintaining consumer knowledge and much of it is passed down via either rants or exclamations of how amazing it is.


2. Some of us are concerned about the long term cultural value of these games. How many episodes of doctor who have been lost forever due to improper preservation? How many holiwood movies turned to dust never to be reclaimed because they weren't monetarily sound to reclaim, and they didn't survive long enough to pass into the public domain? If a game is good, it deserves better then that.

 

[Hobonicus]

Umm, I'm not sure YOU understand how the internet works.

Wow... okay. Really?

I'm not spoiled I'm just one in a billion gamers who has a working router. What spoiled is is the sense of entitlement fans have over a game that hasn't even been released yet. If always-online-play is a deal breaker then cast your vote by not buying the game. (more fun for the rest of us) It's much less exhausting then arguing with blokes on the internet which is prolly doubly hard for you because your connection is unreliable.

You really jumped on that "spoiled" thing. I specifically said I'm not trying to call you spoiled because I was at the time suggesting that you're taking something for granted, and you still clearly are. I'm sorry if saying "I'm not trying to call you spoiled" triggered something that made you think I was straight up calling you spoiled as my argument.

Always online is a deal breaker for people because it literally breaks their ability to play the game, it's not a moral thing. And why would it be more fun for the rest of you if us simple peasants with poor connections couldn't play offline? People complaining about this aren't random haters, just people who want to play Diablo 3 alone. Are you seriously looking at people in a worse situation than you and automatically labeling them as someone who would ruin your time simply because they're allowed to have fun alone? Like people with connection problems are bad people by default?

Our issue is with Blizzard only, but for some reason you have an issue with us. Should I apologize to you for having a poor connection and almost ruining your fun because my technical problem with Blizzard clearly means I'm an asshole out to screw up your game that I would never be a part of anyway?

Like I said gaming is a bit of a luxury, and blizzard is the top-shelf of this luxury and they can do anything they damm well please with their games. I NEVER got to play WOW because of the monthly subscriptions, and I sure as hell didn't feel like it was their civic duty to provide a cheaper alternative or provide an offline WOW...if you don't have a functioning house then maybe you should save money on fixing it up rather than blowing cash on a video game.

Too many people these days pull out the entitlement card, as if criticism of multi million dollar companies is taboo because it's "their product". You honestly expect people to just sit down and accept an unnecessary restriction? I could enjoy some Diablo 3, but they decided to tack on an arbitrary always online so now I can't, and you're telling me I should just accept the terms set by big business? You hate freedom.

Nobody is saying it's Blizzard's civic duty, they're saying they won't be able to play because of an unnecessary restriction and that bothers them for some reason. Also, I should be saving up to fix my house instead of buying a $60 game? Fix my house? You know, I never thought of it that way but man you're right, it's just that easy to call up the house fixers who charge little more than a video game and rewire my entire house and neighborhood and climate because I should bend over backwards and spend thousands that I don't have as well as petition my city and the local mages to spend thousands because Blizzard (who, as we know, is doing me a selfless service by existing and this is really all my fault for sucking at life) decided I can't play without a stable connection. You have no idea how the adult world works, all of your comments have been frustratingly black and white.

SC2 was fine even when you had to log-in battle.net every time. And I'm going out on a limb here even before the game comes out (which I assume is ok because people have been taking potshots at it all day like they own a copy of the damn thing already), this game is going to be great and wildly successful, even if 10% of the target demographic has a less then stellar internet connection (a generous guess).

Yeah I assume the game is going to be great also (which is okay because assumptions based on evidence are a perfectly natural phenomenon that we all do daily and don't need to be constantly acknowledged as a concept), and some people won't be able to experience it because even the single player portion is always online. If DRM could be racist, always online would be the Grand Wizard.

 

[little.09]

because if im net is down or when i get capped i wont be able to play the game i paid for

 

[Shamanic Rhythm]

I added this in another edit to my original post, but I'll post it here as well:

There will be an offline mode in D3. Source?

http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=27387874231&sid=3000 (scroll down to the blue post)

Not only that, but it's old news. This whole "controversy" is just silly. You'll have an offline mode. If you want a character to participate in any sort of multiplayer, you'll have to make an "Always Online" character to prevent exploits which would compromise the Cash Auction House.

But I suppose rage is always preffered on the internet. As opposed to, you know, using Google for 30 seconds, which is how long it took me to dig up that post.

Seriously people, chill out already...

Too bad you didn't take another 5 seconds to read the date of the post. They've since confirmed that there will be no offline.

 

[Ed130 The Vanguard]

1) Some people (like myself and pretty much the rest of New Zealand) do not have access to good quality, high speed internet.

2) The internet isn't free.

3) What will happen if the data servers stop operating e.g. Ubisoft's server overload or the PSN hack?
Will I get booted back to the lobby? Will my progress be saved?

REcaptcha: active petyChos

 

[black_knight1337]

Once again another thread about Diablo 3 that gets completely over run by people who quite honestly musn't be able to read. seriousl guys blizzard has anounced that there is going to be offline mode so that people can play single player on the move. it is effectively going to be much like the way in which diablo 2 was. if you dont have a internet connetion you play single player, if there is an internet connection you also have the option of playing multiplayer. there is only one thing that pisses me off with diablo 3, although it isnt going to affect me to much, is the fact that there isnt going to be lan. when someone can tell me exactly what is wrong with having blizzard encourage us to join the community and play multiplayer, or the new art style, or the rmah then i will listen but so far not a single person has given me a good reason as to why everyone continuously bags diablo 3 and blizzard.(if u have a good argument then please pm it to me coz i would love to hear a good reason behind this)

 

[aescuder]

Umm, I'm not sure YOU understand how the internet works.

Wow... okay. Really?

I'm not spoiled I'm just one in a billion gamers who has a working router. What spoiled is is the sense of entitlement fans have over a game that hasn't even been released yet. If always-online-play is a deal breaker then cast your vote by not buying the game. (more fun for the rest of us) It's much less exhausting then arguing with blokes on the internet which is prolly doubly hard for you because your connection is unreliable.

You really jumped on that "spoiled" thing. I specifically said I'm not trying to call you spoiled because I was at the time suggesting that you're taking something for granted, and you still clearly are. I'm sorry if saying "I'm not trying to call you spoiled" triggered something that made you think I was straight up calling you spoiled as my argument.

Always online is a deal breaker for people because it literally breaks their ability to play the game, it's not a moral thing. And why would it be more fun for the rest of you if us simple peasants with poor connections couldn't play offline? People complaining about this aren't random haters, just people who want to play Diablo 3 alone. Are you seriously looking at people in a worse situation than you and automatically labeling them as someone who would ruin your time simply because they're allowed to have fun alone? Like people with connection problems are bad people by default?

Our issue is with Blizzard only, but for some reason you have an issue with us. Should I apologize to you for having a poor connection and almost ruining your fun because my technical problem with Blizzard clearly means I'm an asshole out to screw up your game that I would never be a part of anyway?

Like I said gaming is a bit of a luxury, and blizzard is the top-shelf of this luxury and they can do anything they damm well please with their games. I NEVER got to play WOW because of the monthly subscriptions, and I sure as hell didn't feel like it was their civic duty to provide a cheaper alternative or provide an offline WOW...if you don't have a functioning house then maybe you should save money on fixing it up rather than blowing cash on a video game.

Too many people these days pull out the entitlement card, as if criticism of multi million dollar companies is taboo because it's "their product". You honestly expect people to just sit down and accept an unnecessary restriction? I could enjoy some Diablo 3, but they decided to tack on an arbitrary always online so now I can't, and you're telling me I should just accept the terms set by big business? You hate freedom.

Nobody is saying it's Blizzard's civic duty, they're saying they won't be able to play because of an unnecessary restriction and that bothers them for some reason. Also, I should be saving up to fix my house instead of buying a $60 game? Fix my house? You know, I never thought of it that way but man you're right, it's just that easy to call up the house fixers who charge little more than a video game and rewire my entire house and neighborhood and climate because I should bend over backwards and spend thousands that I don't have as well as petition my city and the local mages to spend thousands because Blizzard (who, as we know, is doing me a selfless service by existing and this is really all my fault for sucking at life) decided I can't play without a stable connection. You have no idea how the adult world works, all of your comments have been frustratingly black and white.

SC2 was fine even when you had to log-in battle.net every time. And I'm going out on a limb here even before the game comes out (which I assume is ok because people have been taking potshots at it all day like they own a copy of the damn thing already), this game is going to be great and wildly successful, even if 10% of the target demographic has a less then stellar internet connection (a generous guess).

Yeah I assume the game is going to be great also (which is okay because assumptions based on evidence are a perfectly natural phenomenon that we all do daily and don't need to be constantly acknowledged as a concept), and some people won't be able to experience it because even the single player portion is always online. If DRM could be racist, always online would be the Grand Wizard.

Sorry broski didn't mean to offend you that much. And I mean that. I'm not saying that you or anyone else with a spotty internet suck at life. All I'm saying is that if a publisher decided to produce an always-online-system requirement because they think it will make for a better experience, then by god they have every right to do it. Although it does suck for those with bad connections, acting like blizzard is the "blight of the world and are retards" for doing what they did is a horrible reaction.

The developers are just looking forward towards innovation (and towards piracy protection I suppose), They're not gaming gods but seeing as blizzard has had a pretty impressive portfolio thus far people should give them the benefit of the doubt, not break their balls and complain. I'm sure it wasn't all that of an easy decision for them either, and I highly doubt that they saw this as arbitrary or an "unnecessary restriction" just to f**k with people. Might be that they are right and this is where triple A titles should be going, for a better gaming experience, protection of piracy, and mitigation of "farmers" through an integrated (presumably controlled) auction house. I know that 3rd world countries like Philippines would have a much harder time pirating the game and duplicating the actual experience with this DRM (I know because I grew up there and a non-pirated game is a an immense rarity).

All that aside if a developer releases an online game or a game that has really high PC requirements and a person does not have a reliable connection or a good enough PC respectively, then they should probably not buy the game. Or alternatively get a better connection or buy a better PC. If you really think blizzard is out to f you over then vote with your wallet. end of story. I'm not sure if people think viciously complaining about the issue will make blizzard retract their statement and redesign the system but I wouldn't hold my breath.



quick q1: I take it your not buying the game?

quick q2: Is internet some sort of ominous god in other countries? Where in god's name do you live where internet is dependent on weather and the complete restructuring of houses/city blocks? I know for a fact that normal residential houses doesn't need much as far as data wiring, you don't even have to conceal them if you don't want to, so unless you have some heavy duty fiber-optic cables embedded in the ground, wiring is relatively cheap. Not being a dick just professional curiosity, I'm an architect/Urban Designer in the making and if there is anything I know about the "adult world" I know how most homes are put together. As I understand it satellite internet is not at all commonplace so weather by and large shouldn't affect your connection and if a neighborhood/block have a fiber-optic cable then they would prolly be the last people to have spotty internet. So that would leave dial-up which I highly doubt anyone still has, or DSL/Cable in which case it would be easy to get a better wi-fi router, if that's not the problem then change/cancel the provider. I've rarely heard of set data caps for residential houses though, is that common in Europe?

also, Has anyone looked at AirCards (USB mobile broadband cards) as an alternative for all their connectivity woes? If you travel too much or have a data cap then why don't you just turn your laptop or your phone into your own personal router. An added cost to your data plan but if you cut your own crappy dsl/cable provider it might actually save, idk just a thought. I don't have one so I can't say too much about them.


P.S. People will probably just make an unofficial "play offline patch" to download a few days after release anyway so all this might be in vain.