Jimquisition: You Should Be Mad at Diablo III's Always Online DRM

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 NEXT
 

Sober Thal:
Spoiled entitled brats... (not this community, but the masses)

I love realize that you may be inconvenienced for a few hours...

I love realize that you are not poor, and can afford one days worth of work, or maybe $2 a day, for a month, isn't making your children starve...

I love realize that you want to curse out the big companies that make great games...

But seriously.... grow the fuck up!!!!!!!!!!1!!!!!!!1111!!!1!!!1111!!!!1

You are only buying the service, not buying the game. Service is second to your fucking tears.

You are entitled to bitch and complain. But since the world is full of pirate asshats... you have to deal with it.

You only have yourselves to blame 'PC community'. Don't pretend it isn't your fault Jim Sterling hacktavist types.

Reap what you sow damn it.

*feels great about your plight

Maybe when these things kiss your ass, you may like them more... you spoiled entitled brats...

Remember when you judged a game for it being a game? People born in the 80's and 90's have failed us in that regard.

*double face palm sigh

But why do honest players have to suffer through shitty DRM for pirates? Should I go punch every pirate in the face so companies don't put shitty DRM?

Companies are the ones putting up the service if the service only inconveniences honest players and lets pirates run rampant, what's the point of the service? (I just read that some Diablo 3 players have had their money stolen)

Why can't the game have an offline mode or offline characters at least? A big part of the community wants to play alone offline in case the servers don't work. If indie companies can have offline modes or characters why can't AAA developer Blizzard do it.

I am not expecting the game to give me a BJ, (haven't bought the game) but I expect it to have the least amount of problems possible when I am playing it. So when the publisher is the one creating the problems and their services doesn't work at stopping pirates or hackers I just have to facepalm.

Well... your problem is the real money auction house. Rather than tweaking drop rates so people don't HAVE to spend three months grinding for a slightly better hammer, they decided to perpetuate people spending real money on it, and then force the always online model to protect that.

In fact, it is Blizzard trying to take the place of all the gold sellers that 'are ruining the game experience'.

I don't understand the need for a Real Money Auction House. I don't understand how a game developer, who is supposed to be passionate about creating a game experience, actively makes a single player game require extra money to play.

But then again, I don't understand why people would willingly hand over real cash for a game you can complete with normal drops... which you play on your own... or co-operatively...

Seriously, why is the auction house a good feature?

I'm more concerned with how mainstream crap the game became. I wanted D3 to be amazing, but all it is, is the epitome of mediocreness.

Path of Exile is far better, for numerous reasons.

But sure, the DRM is bad and that's part of why I stopped playing it within a week.

loa:
I wonder if the console versions of Diablo 3 will be always-online too.
Maybe Diablo 3 is the apocalyptic harbinger of always-online-required console games.

Shh... don't let them onto it.

We may get a single player game yet. If they start this online shit trend on consoles I will have to teach Blizzard how hot hell can get.

ex275w:

But why do honest players have to suffer through shitty DRM for pirates? Should I go punch every pirate in the face so companies don't put shitty DRM?

Companies are the ones putting up the service if the service only inconveniences honest players and lets pirates run rampant, what's the point of the service? (I just read that some Diablo 3 players have had their money stolen)

Why can't the game have an offline mode or offline characters at least? A big part of the community wants to play alone offline in case the servers don't work. If indie companies can have offline modes or characters why can't AAA developer Blizzard do it.

I am not expecting the game to give me a BJ, (haven't bought the game) but I expect it to have the least amount of problems possible when I am playing it. So when the publisher is the one creating the problems and their services doesn't work at stopping pirates or hackers I just have to facepalm.

Why? Because the problem is with the player, not the games. Honest players have half a brain, and they can decide what they do all on their own. They aren't a slave to day one releases.

I don't condone violence, but yeah...

'Honest consumers don't exist here.' You are all held accountable if you think this is an honest inconvenience. Open your eyes! You know it to be true! Do you really think people who spend mass amounts of money want to hurt the people who give them mass amounts of money? NO!!@

It's so easy for the people (like you) to blame the ones who create what we want, instead of taking credit for ruining the things we want, that it makes me sick.

I get it, DRM is a failure when you consider the masses of nerds who can work around such things...

Congrats.

You win.

You are still (not you exactly, but the idea) fucking it all up for the rest of us.

If the shit head hacks didn't exist, we would have a more stable nerd economy. But noooooooooooo.... anyone with a handle on IP addressees thinks it's their fucking God given right to be entitled shit head. Fuck those people. Fuck them in the ass.... really hard.... so they bleed the money they forfeit. Let their ass be given up to a superior being who can regulate their shit head motives for the better... aka... let the people who make a thing, decide how to distribute a thing.

I'd love for all these hacker elite types to make something, then decide to give it away for free. You do realize you/they have the right, and the choice to do so, eh?

Who are you to decide for them?

Oh yeah, you (not you specifically, I'm talking about a group) do realize that you control and decide what you create, eh?

If I say it a million times, some kids still just refuse to get it....

You decide to sign your rights away.

You decide if your worth is the same as your commitments.

EDIT: Fun Fact = over 20,000 people are pirating games that aren't DRM titles, RIGHT NOW!!!!!

Fuck those people, and fuck their silly ideals. I don't get it. I won't get it. They are thieves. They are the reason DRM exists in other games.

I have no interest in playing Diablo III right off the bat, so there's that.

This is one of those times where I'm not even going to get the pirated version of it. I want nothing to do with playing the game.

The always online thing is to protect their online economy, something I do not give two shits about.

Honestly I don't care about the always online DRM. If you have a shitty internet connection you shouldn't have bought the game. It was announced way beforehand, so it's kind of your own fault for blowing your money on something you can't play. I'm not saying that you shouldn't complain. I'm just saying the "I paid good money for it!" argument doesn't really hold water because frankly you shouldn't have. You could have complained without paying for it or simply boycotted the game. The launch day problem is sort of valid, but I have limited pity for people with the free time to be staring at an error screen all day and crying about it.

Finally, I only ever play with friends so I would have to be online to begin with. Again, I'm not telling you not to complain. I'm merely asking that you don't tell me that I should be complaining, because frankly I don't give a crap and have perfectly valid reasons for not doing so.

Sorry Jim, but you're mostly wrong.

First and foremost, Online DRM and Server Management are not the same issue, and cannot be used interchangeably. The servers should have been handled better, but once they knew the issues were going to occur they warned [b]EVERYONE[/B] and well. Could have and should have been done better, but you are massively overreacting. Not the game community in general (they might be, but I'm only concerned with you in this post) - you specifically Jim

Second, if a game makes clear that it will have Online DRM, how is it wrong for them to sell it. Could they design around it, and not include it? Sure. But they could do the same with games that require DX11 - if someone buys something that their gaming rig is not capable of supporting, after the requirements have been announced, that is their own goddamn fault.

So glad I wasn't eating when watching this. In the future saying the word doesn't need the pictures of shit to get your point across. It would be funnier to say shit and put pictures rainbows instead.

While he had a lot on his plate, I'm surprised Jim didn't bring up that even with good online support, players don't really own the game they paid over $60 for. Since online support won't last forever, they're effectively just paying for the privilege of renting it. I can play my old PS 1 copy of Diablo whenever I want but the current copies of Diablo 3 won't be much more than glorified coasters or bits of data when Blizzard comes out with Diablo 4.

Personally, I have no reason to complain. I'm blessed with a mostly stable internet connect so the rare lag issues are not enough to ruin my enjoyment of the game. Did it kind of suck that I wasn't able to play on launch day? Yeah, but having been around for several MMORPG launch days I didn't expect much.

I do feel sorry for those without stable internet connections, though. Not because you paid money for it and can't play it (you should have known it requires an internet connection to play), but because you're missing out on a really fun game. And I think you do have every right to complain about that.

You could fix it so that some characters are solo characters and others are online characters, but I also kind of like the randomness of jumping in on any game, so I'm on the fence.

The only thing I fear is the inevitable server shut down some several years into the future. I enjoy playing old games; what if I want to pick D3 up again some eons in the future? Am I SOL? In that event, I certainly will complain.

beniki:
Seriously, why is the auction house a good feature?

Since in their other games (e.g. WoW) illegal real money services run rampant and there's nothing they can really do to stomp all the ants, Blizzard has decided to cut out the middleman. Presumably there will be no gold/item sellers because that service is already in the game. This way, they're making all that money that would otherwise go to third parties, and they're making their playerbase safer because usually those third party deals are a one-way ticket to getting your account hacked. Three birds with one stone.

People who spend their time grinding for the best items will find themselves with a new and legitimate way to make money. Blizzard makes more money. It's also entirely optional. You can completely beat the game without resorting to the RMAH.

Sober Thal:

Why? Because the problem is with the player, not the games. Honest players have half a brain, and they can decide what they do all on their own. They aren't a slave to day one releases.

And? If someone pays for a preorder, or buys a game on day one, they should get to play the game on day one. I don't care if it's really hard to keep up with demand, or if those nasty pirates make life so much rougher for a poor little billion dollar multinational company, I paid the money to play it today, I get to play it today. End of story.

Sober Thal:

'Honest consumers don't exist here.' You are all held accountable if you think this is an honest inconvenience. Open your eyes! You know it to be true! Do you really think people who spend mass amounts of money want to hurt the people who give them mass amounts of money? NO!!@

Bullshit. I will not be held accountable for the choices of another person whose actions are outside of my control. If people can leave a grocery store without getting frisked, then I can play a game I bought without being accused of theft.

Intention is not a shield against incompetence. They may not mean to inconvenience honest consumers, but they do.

Sober Thal:

It's so easy for the people (like you) to blame the ones who create what we want, instead of taking credit for ruining the things we want, that it makes me sick.

I get it, DRM is a failure when you consider the masses of nerds who can work around such things...

Congrats.

You win.

You are still (not you exactly, but the idea) fucking it all up for the rest of us.

Damn skippy I'll blame Blizzard for this. They have every ability, every resource at their disposal to deal with these issues ahead of time and yet they consistently fail to do so. The first time something like this happened, I might be tempted to let it go simply because a group of people are dealing with a new problem, but this isn't the first time.

If a creator creates a faulty invention, is it the fault of the tools he used, the materials he incorporated, the hands that created the invention, or the people he wants to sell it to? I have a very hard time accepting the former of the options.

Walter Byers:

The Human Torch:
But Diablo 3 is not an MMO. WoW is an MMO, Diablo is not an MMO. No matter if you define Diablo 3 as singleplayer or multiplayer, it is not an MMO. So Diablo 3 runs on DRM. Same as Steam and Origin are glorified DRM systems.

D3 is an online multiplayer game. Jumping to the conclusion that its DRM is bad reasoning. I'm just pointing it out.

Except you're not. You're using the same flawed circular logic almost EVERY Diablo 3 defender has been using.

"Diablo 3 requires you to be online to play, which makes it a multi-player game. And, since it's a multi-player game, you need to be online to play it."

I mean, really? Really?! Just stop. Just.....stop. It's getting embarrassing at this point. If all of you out there defending this bullshit can't come up with a legitimate reason why Diablo 3 is the way it is, then stop making up excuses and lies. Just admit you're such an avid fan that you willingly turn a blind eye to all of the crap surrounding the game. Then we can all finally just talk about the game itself, the good and the bad parts, and not the shitty service/DRM.

Sober Thal:

ex275w:

But why do honest players have to suffer through shitty DRM for pirates? Should I go punch every pirate in the face so companies don't put shitty DRM?

Companies are the ones putting up the service if the service only inconveniences honest players and lets pirates run rampant, what's the point of the service? (I just read that some Diablo 3 players have had their money stolen)

Why can't the game have an offline mode or offline characters at least? A big part of the community wants to play alone offline in case the servers don't work. If indie companies can have offline modes or characters why can't AAA developer Blizzard do it.

I am not expecting the game to give me a BJ, (haven't bought the game) but I expect it to have the least amount of problems possible when I am playing it. So when the publisher is the one creating the problems and their services doesn't work at stopping pirates or hackers I just have to facepalm.

Why? Because the problem is with the player, not the games. Honest players have half a brain, and they can decide what they do all on their own. They aren't a slave to day one releases.

I don't condone violence, but yeah...

'Honest consumers don't exist here.' You are all held accountable if you think this is an honest inconvenience. Open your eyes! You know it to be true! Do you really think people who spend mass amounts of money want to hurt the people who give them mass amounts of money? NO!!@

It's so easy for the people (like you) to blame the ones who create what we want, instead of taking credit for ruining the things we want, that it makes me sick.

I get it, DRM is a failure when you consider the masses of nerds who can work around such things...

Congrats.

You win.

You are still (not you exactly, but the idea) fucking it all up for the rest of us.

If the shit head hacks didn't exist, we would have a more stable nerd economy. But noooooooooooo.... anyone with a handle on IP addressees thinks it's their fucking God given right to be entitled shit head. Fuck those people. Fuck them in the ass.... really hard.... so they bleed the money they forfeit. Let their ass be given up to a superior being who can regulate their shit head motives for the better... aka... let the people who make a thing, decide how to distribute a thing.

I'd love for all these hacker elite types to make something, then decide to give it away for free. You do realize you/they have the right, and the choice to do so, eh?

Who are you to decide for them?

Oh yeah, you (not you specifically, I'm talking about a group) do realize that you control and decide what you create, eh?

If I say it a million times, some kids still just refuse to get it....

You decide to sign your rights away.

You decide if your worth is the same as your commitments.

EDIT: Fun Fact = over 20,000 people are pirating games that aren't DRM titles, RIGHT NOW!!!!!

Fuck those people, and fuck their silly ideals. I don't get it. I won't get it. They are thieves. They are the reason DRM exists in other games.

Ok, sorry if I sounded hostile, (but you do sound hostile towards me) it wasn't my intention. I am not necessarily blaming Blizzard for making good games or for trying to protect from being pirated, I just think the methods they are using aren't helping stop pirates and in some cases can increase piracy. (Just as Ubisoft on that one)

So pirates are why we can't have Nice Things, but companies aren't wising up that sometimes they are unwittingly creating pirates.

I just want to play good games without a hassle and its terrible that this industry is turning into a Us and Them fight, especially since I want to develop game myself.

Sorry, but here is where the argument fails and becomes your problem:

EVERYONE knew this was the model they were going with even before they put a demo out, right from the bat they said "The game is like this, this is the product we're selling."

And everyone still bought the game. Most pre-ordered game of all time. People bought the game, payed for i, before it launched. Did Blizzard even once promised smooth perfect servers from day one? Does ANYBODY who understand a bit about online games and MMO-Like games and Huge releases that require internet not know that there are server problems on the first week or so EVERY SINGLE TIME? Why did you expect it to be different when nobody ever promised you it would?

Now, see... it's not that i Defend Blizzard. I don't. I didn't bought Diablo 3 because of that. Because i was uncertain about this model and how it would effect me enjoyment of a Premium priced game... i WANT to play the game, it looks awesome... but i made it not my problem.

While, on the other hand... every single one who bought and complained and praised at the same time is at fault here. You don't like these DRM practices? You don't think this is fair to the gamer? Then stop bullshitting your way into metacritic to "give the developer a piece of my mind".

They don't care about your mind... they already have the piece of you they want. You GAVE it to them of your own free will... your money.

When gamers learn to protest with their wallets and NOT FRIGGIN BUYING games that have features or policies they don't want, causing a direct dent into the developers bottom line, this is not going to change. Ever.

Know why? Because you can bitch and whine all you want, to the company, to the developer... you bought it. That means you want it. That means you are Ok with what was said about the game and still wants it.

So there you have it. You can totally blame Blizzard for this... but they are second tier on this Blame game. First and center is the gamers who bought the game knowing of how it was being setup and just "assuming" Blizzard is going to give them a perfect server they never promised AFTER you payed them.

I really . . . I'm torn. Because I completely agree . . . but I also got to see the game in person the other day and I just. I want to play it so bad. Diablo 2 was a big part of my development as a gamer and D3 looks so fun . . . but I have principles. So, I find myself asking how much of a difference I, personally, am making in this case. I just want them to stop this stupid shit. I used to be in love with Blizzard. Now, every time I hear some new story about them, I feel myself getting a little more cynical.

Honestly, I've only seen criticism of Diablo 3's DRM. Can someone link me to the supposed defensive pundits?

bells:
Snip

Here's the thing, though: It's not an MMO. Like . . . MMO's HAVE to be online. That's the whole point. Diablo doesn't, though. Like . . . it didn't have to in the past and it doesn't right now. There's really no reason that you should HAVE to be online, and the fact that they arbitrarily set it up like that makes people feel cheated when it doesn't work. You're right. Most people knowingly bought the game anyway. That doesn't make what Blizzard did to it (and the fact that they apparently didn't anticipate the massive amount of people jumping on their servers) any less erfed up.

It also doesn't make it okay that they're not able to play a game that they payed good money for. Like. It's pretty simple. If you pay for a service, the person providing the service is legally obligated to give it to you unless you break the contract somehow.

Let's go with another example. I pay you to move my furniture. There's a risk that you could drop my furniture or otherwise fuck it up. I'm aware of this. Now let's say that you didn't secure my furniture properly in your truck. On the way, lamps fall over and valuables break. The fact that I was aware that it was a risk doesn't automatically mean you're no longer at fault, and it doesn't mean that I'm just shit out of luck and I don't get to have my stuff anymore.

I paid you to move my furniture. You, in your (hypothetical) ineptitude, decided to do it in the worst way possible, and, as a result, I did not receive the service that I payed for. I deserve a refund. Because I paid you money and did not get what I was promised. It's not a perfect analogy, but you get the point.

You buy Diablo 3, you should be expected to be allowed to play it. If Blizzard's servers are down, you cannot play the game and you are being cheated out of the service that you payed for. Because Blizzard did not do what they could to hold up their end of the bargain.

And, like. Even if I accepted your argument as-is, that doesn't mean that people shouldn't bitch and moan as loudly as possible. If you're unsatisfied with a service you paid for (for any reason), you should notify the management. Period.

Also, I'm sure there are plenty of people who bought the game, but just didn't know that this was a risk, for one reason or another. You can say all you like that it's their fault for being ignorant or whatever, but that doesn't make it any less of a douchetastic move on Blizzard's part.

ex275w:

Sober Thal:
Spoiled entitled brats...

Q1: But why do honest players have to suffer through shitty DRM for pirates? Q2: Should I go punch every pirate in the face so companies don't put shitty DRM?

Q1 ANSWER: Because tens of thousands of people continue to pirate.

Q2 ANSWER: Yes, Punch them in the face, and kick them in the balls. They are the ones who continue to make big business punish you.

Herp de fucking derp.... if they (pirates) didn't exist, you wouldn't be punished. Life is kinda simple that way, eh?

It's too late to think this way tho. We have to come up with a pill... for the world... that gives worms... to ex girlfriends, er uhm I mean... pirate shit heads need to be exterminated!

I think the only thing worse than Sterling's humor is his delivery, but sometimes I think he's the last sane person who has something like a voice in the game industry. He doesn't suck corporate dong or shit all over gamers like MovieBob.

So thank you Mr. Sterling. Thank you for having the balls to be right.

Vigormortis:

Walter Byers:

The Human Torch:
But Diablo 3 is not an MMO. WoW is an MMO, Diablo is not an MMO. No matter if you define Diablo 3 as singleplayer or multiplayer, it is not an MMO. So Diablo 3 runs on DRM. Same as Steam and Origin are glorified DRM systems.

D3 is an online multiplayer game. Jumping to the conclusion that its DRM is bad reasoning. I'm just pointing it out.

Except you're not. You're using the same flawed circular logic almost EVERY Diablo 3 defender has been using.

"Diablo 3 requires you to be online to play, which makes it a multi-player game. And, since it's a multi-player game, you need to be online to play it."

I mean, really? Really?! Just stop. Just.....stop. It's getting embarrassing at this point. If all of you out there defending this bullshit can't come up with a legitimate reason why Diablo 3 is the way it is, then stop making up excuses and lies. Just admit you're such an avid fan that you willingly turn a blind eye to all of the crap surrounding the game. Then we can all finally just talk about the game itself, the good and the bad parts, and not the shitty service/DRM.

Let me add to the sane man (men[s]{womens) argument here and ask all y'all D3 defenders this:

If D3 HAS to always have an internet connection, then why doesn't Torchlight 2?

Why does Torchlight 2, which is as you D3 fanboys say an 'online multiplayer game", not need to be always connected to the internet for people to play together?

Well?

Exactly. You got screwed by ActiBlizz, and now you're all just flailing around, grasping at straws trying to justify losing 60 USD on a mediocre game with terrible DRM.

Rarity.avi

I agree with all the ideas except the word whine. Its very important that you DON'T WHINE. You SHOULD COMPLAIN and CRITICIZE but DON'T WHINE. Whining implies an impotent tantrum that does nothing but annoy other people who can't do anything about it anyways.

commasplice:

bells:
Snip

Here's the thing, though: It's not an MMO. Like . . . MMO's HAVE to be online. That's the whole point. Diablo doesn't, though. Like . . . it didn't have to in the past and it doesn't right now. There's really no reason that you should HAVE to be online, and the fact that they arbitrarily set it up like that makes people feel cheated when it doesn't work. You're right. Most people knowingly bought the game anyway. That doesn't make what Blizzard did to it (and the fact that they apparently didn't anticipate the massive amount of people jumping on their servers) any less erfed up.

That's irrelevant to the situation because a game developer can do whatever the hell it wants. If they WANT their single player game to have online all the time, they can totally do it. Doesn't even have to justify or explain a damn thing "we want it, this fits with out vision" Done. End of talk.

But here is the thing... you don't have to buy it.

They were up front about it "out game needs to be fully online at all times", people made the same call you did back then "but it doesn't have to be... it's stupid to make it so" and yet... most pre ordered game of all time.

The message Blizzard got from this? It's not necessary maybe, but it doesn't stop people from buying it, and we think it will help US. so we're doing it like this.

And their next game will also do it... and the next one... and then another company with big titles will also start doing it, and then these companies will do the same with their smaller titles and new IP's because by then it will be "that's just how it is nowadays"... and there we have. Guilty in the consumer.

There.

Crono1973:

Voltano:
I'm sort of mixed on whether I should call this plan "DRM" for myself, but I can't deny that some people would see this as DRM. I think the security features are here to protect people's credit card information/identify from malicious users since the auction house system in this game is the biggest feature advertised (so far). However, from what I heard the auction house system isn't even available yet. So...Yeah, right now, I can see this being DRM. Broken, annoying, and pointless DRM.

But even if the auction house system is implemented, this is still Blizzards' problem to protect the identity of their customer base, as Sterling stated here. We expect a great, *secure* service from Blizzard when we put down money for this game, but not something that would restrict us from getting into the game. I haven't played the game myself--lack of money and interest being my only reasons--but everything I hear is that its a good game. I just don't see how its justified to put down any money for a game that has a service plan as restrictive as it is right now.

Maybe in a few weeks (Months? Years?) this problem will be resolved. But for now, this does serve as a good example that even high quality games from highly respected developers could be broken from DRM.

The RMAH was created to put more money into Blizzards pocket and the DRM is forced on us to protect the RMAH.

So, if I interpret that sentence correctly, am I to assume that you're implying that Blizzard/Activision cares more for the money than it does for its consumers? Cuz yeah, it's never been more apparent that's the case.

Captcha: one hit wonder. More like one hit blunder, there Captcha.

Sober Thal:

You are entitled to bitch and complain. But since the world is full of pirate asshats... you have to deal with it.

You only have yourselves to blame 'PC community'. Don't pretend it isn't your fault Jim Sterling hacktavist types.

Reap what you sow damn it.

Thaaaat is an absolutely terrible argument.

Does the fact that some people (pirates) shit in the punch bowl make it at all acceptable to punish anyone (other PC users who may or may not pirate) who is even tangentially related to them? I think not.

You're basically saying that EVERYONE is guilty of pirating, so EVERYONE should have to pay for it, but that's patently false. Only SOME people are to blame for pirating, and the only people who pay for the game clearly did not pirate it and, as such, should not be punished because of pirates.

By your logic, it would be entirely acceptable for me to refuse to serve people with hats (PC users as a whole) in my coffee shop just because a person wearing a hat mugged me a few weeks ago and the hat wearers should have to reap what they've sown. The fact that the mugger wears hats (plays PC games) is not at all indicative of the morality of others who share his love of hats.

Then, you go on to say that it's somehow the PC community's duty to regulate piracy. It's not. It's not even Blizzard's job. It's the government's. And they're kind of terrible at it, from what I can tell.

As soon as I heard that Diablo 3 would require a constant on-line connection, I knew I would not be purchasing the game. After talking to some of my heart-broken students who couldn't connect to the server to play a game that they legitimately purchased, my decision was reaffirmed. With all these great games out there, I have neither the time nor the patience to wait around trying to connect to a server.

For the record, "always on-line" = DRM. It may not be the intent, but it is the impact.

I will continue scorning smug Diablo 3 players talking shit about people who opt for Path of Exile or Torchlight 2. A pox on them for their unrepentant hubris.

commasplice:

Sober Thal:

You are entitled to bitch and complain. But since the world is full of pirate asshats... you have to deal with it.

You only have yourselves to blame 'PC community'. Don't pretend it isn't your fault Jim Sterling hacktavist types.

Reap what you sow damn it.

Thaaaat is an absolutely terrible argument.

Does the fact that some people (pirates) shit in the punch bowl make it at all acceptable to punish anyone (other PC users who may or may not pirate) who is even tangentially related to them? I think not.

You're basically saying that EVERYONE is guilty of pirating, so EVERYONE should have to pay for it, but that's patently false. Only SOME people are to blame for pirating, and the only people who pay for the game clearly did not pirate it and, as such, should not be punished because of pirates.

By your logic, it would be entirely acceptable for me to refuse to serve people with hats (PC users as a whole) in my coffee shop just because a person wearing a hat mugged me a few weeks ago and the hat wearers should have to reap what they've sown. The fact that the mugger wears hats (plays PC games) is not at all indicative of the morality of others who share his love of hats.

Then, you go on to say that it's somehow the PC community's duty to regulate piracy. It's not. It's not even Blizzard's job. It's the government's. And they're kind of terrible at it, from what I can tell.

George Takei was a victim of a world war, and forced into internment camps. PC gamers should never be compared the greatest/most gay Captain Starfleet ever gave a ship to.

Sulu suffered for our sins.

PC gamers suffer for their sins.

bells:
Snip.

I didn't say Blizzard had no right to do it. I said it was messed up. What I meant is that it's bad business practice. It's bad business practice to screw over your consumers in order to make an extra buck on a product that was already slated to break records. It's greedy, it's douchey and it's terrible. People have a right to be upset. I agree that they should boycott, but the fact that they didn't doesn't just suddenly make everything their faults. They didn't cause the problem to begin with, Blizzard did.

Sober Thal:
Snip

Touché. I do admire Mr. Takei.

commasplice:

Sober Thal:
Snip

Touché. I do admire Mr. Takei.

I admire Brad too.

It takes a tough cookie to deal with such a savvy ninja ; )

NameIsRobertPaulson:
It's depressing to find myself agreeing with Jim. Not a huge fan of his. But he is right. Peter Gabriel is completely loopy.

OT: It comes the "gamers today are entitled brats" thread avalanche that follows this kind of thing.

And was that real gameplay? Cause it looks more boring than Path to Exile or Torchlight 2... and TL2 is still in beta.

Path of Exile is still in beta too =)

Dunno why I felt the need to point it out, but I did.

...I LOVE PoE.

Ahem.

OK I do feel that the "cheater" problem with single player games which cannot be transfered to multiplayer... yeah... non issue.

You shouldn't need to be online to play on single player... you could be connected however it's not essential. However needing to be connected when playing online.. I think that is far, however I also think they are fucking morons for not being able to count... we have XXX servers and XXXXXXXXX people and if X server can only handle XXX people... we may have a lack of servers...

ddddddddddddeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeerp

Wrong, wrong, wrong and wrong Jim.

You are wrong because no one forced games to go out and buy this game. You are wrong because this was long announced before the game released, people knew this was the way it was going to be. So they knew this, dropped 60 bucks, and now whine because they bought a product without doing the research, without remembering what's been said about the game since it was announced... that is ONLINE ONLY. if you don't want ONLINE ONLY don't buy it. The entitled pricks are the ones who buy it and expect something they were told that they WERE NOT going to get.

Edit: I've had it since beta, I installed it before it went live, i was in and playing within an hour of release and you know what. i was happy that I could log in and play with other people who weren't hackers, dupers, assholes, farmers etc. I was happy that I can play in a random group with random people and know that they got their gear legitimately. I'm happy with my purchase, i'm happy with the game and I like always on DRM. I like support from one of the greatest developers of all time.

Complaining about D3 is fine and complaining about server issues is fine, but Blizzard doesn't owe us any more than they are providing. We pay for a license to play, but we're not guaranteed 100% availability - that's impossible to provide, even for something like Google. Launches have problems, and the 24 hours of hell that was May 15 was a reasonable failure. Approximately half of the first 24 hours the game was available to play, and in the first week it's been available roughly 80-90% of the time. There is some lag and other issues, but the game's new. If you bought the game, you have years to play it without any additional cost. If you can't handle launch problems, then simply buy the game a week or two after launch.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here