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
 

vileguy:
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.

Sorry, I'm having a hard time keeping up with what you're saying over D3's current 8 hour downtime...for a single-player game.

I actually was forced by friends to get Diablo III.

Anti-consumer stupidity is everywhere. The servers are now down for 8 hours, just like that - what, I'm euro? Well my friends aren't, so I have to play on the US servers. Which I didn't know existed, since it's hidden in the options menu, forcing me to restart over.

Since server transfers don't exist, likely due to the AH nonsense.

Compare this to GW2. A feature to play on other servers is part of the game. Playing with american friends is a non issue. THIS IS HOW YOU SHOULD ACT IN 2012.

Always online for games like this is nonsense, plain and simple. No option to play with your character with anyone is nonsense, too. Why the heck can I not have one character and play with americans AND europeans?

The entire thing is terrible. If I had known it was THIS bad, I'd not have bought it even with friends. I'd have waited for GW2 for that. Foolish, foolish me. Seems Blizzard joins the list of developers to avoid. Bioware, EA and Ubisoft are already on it.

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.

Exactly.

Here is what I see on both sides of the coin.
(TL:DR Browsers - See the bottom of the post)

Cry-Baby #1
"WAAHH, I can't play because there's no option for offline mode!"
"I paid for this game with hard earned money and I deserve to play it whenever I want, however I want!"

Cry-Baby #2
"Online is the answer to hackers, cheaters, dupers. So shut up and play!"
"And your banking account which has more money in it is directly connected to Blizzard, and this is their answer for your protection!"

Ok, seriously. Both sides have legitimate arguments for a debate. But quit all of your belly-aching and whining. I don't care what side of the coin your on and lets actually break this down.

Offline Play complainers.
IF YOU WERE BLIZZARD, How would you make it OFFLINE AVAILABLE?
- First of all, the Character Information would have to be stored locally on the computer. So your first step would be to somehow encrypt the player files, to prevent hackers from finding ways to cheat the system. This means, being able to identify when a HEX-Code Editor has been used on the file or other similar means.
- HOWEVER, preventing Character Hacks would ONLY come into play when the character goes ONLINE. So now the real problem for the original question comes into play. What can BLIZZARD do to identify what character files have been hacked or not when the character is registered to be played online?

My Answer:
OFFLINE Play would be made available by having the player CHOOSE during CHARACTER CREATION whether the Character is OFFLINE or ONLINE. Now, in order to SELECT "Online" the player MUST be ONLINE at the time, AND LOGGED INTO BATTLE.NET. What this will then do is your ONLINE Character Files would then be SAVED on the BLIZZARD Servers. This way there is NO possibility for an OFFLINE character to go ONLINE. Hackers, Cheaters, and Modders can all then enjoy what it is they do, to OFFLINE characters. But when it comes to utilizing ANYTHING that requires the internet, you have to go through your ONLINE account.

I have systematically SOLVED BOTH ISSUES.

"BUT I WANNA USE MY OFFLINE LVL 69 CHARACTER, ONLINE!" - Random Crybaby.

Look, if that were possible than you might as well say Good Bye to BOTH auction houses, and if anyone out there was planning on trying to make any real income from the RMAH. Sorry, You are now shit-out-of-luck because of this Random Crybaby.
Look by allowing Character Files that will eventually be hacked, cracked, and modded to go online and utilize the Online Functions. You are essentially allowing the dishonest people in the world to flood the online community with the "Best" End Game Equipment, Gold, Forging Items, etc. We would all be pissing Gold by the MILLIONS within a week. While this may be what some out there want, I'm willing to bet a GREAT deal more do NOT want that.
I've been anticipating this game just as long as everyone else who grew up playing Diablo 1, Hellfire, Diablo 2 & Lord of Destruction. To the guys who are already walking around with maxed out characters, congratulations! You just spent 1 - 1.5 weeks playing a game that took 12 YEARS to produce. I hope you enjoyed it. Because by MY MATH, if the Diablo Series continues down this same release pattern, Diablo 4 won't be released until ... 2040? Hope you enjoyed the game!

So Online play with Offline Characters is just not possible. HOWEVER, and this idea did just occur to me now, When a Character is selected to be an Offline Character, they get the option to be played via LAN with Family and Friends. Making it "Possible" to experience that "Multi-Player" Feeling without "tainting" the Online Community. Because Online Characters would not need to be made available for LAN, since those Character Files are kept on the Blizzard Servers. AND Since the Offline Character Files are saved locally on the machine, there's no need for further "protection" against such possibilities.

Now about the Online Community. Ok, yes you guys are correct when you talk about how the "Always Online DRM" is for your (As in you, the consumer's) protection. Especially when you start talking about the Real Money Auction House. I don't like my Credit Card attached to websites. I usually use Cash Cards, that I have to refill. This way if the Website/Servers get hacked, there's no connection between that website or server and my banking account. I don't even have my information on my PS3, I just buy PSN Gift Cards and call it good. So, believe me when I say, yes. I understand the need for the "protection". But here's something for you to wrap your "fragile wittle minds" around.
Gold Auction House. When Playing with your Online Character, EVERYONE has the option to use the Gold Auction House. Using the In-Game Gold as the means to buy and sell items in an Auction House. HOWEVER, only those accounts who have AUTHENTICATORS attached to them can access the Real Money Auction House. The purpose for this is two-fold. First of all, when you go to post an item in the Auction House OR purchase an item, it will ask you to CONFIRM YOUR ACCOUNT by entering in your Authenticator Code. This ensures that NO ONE ELSE can have access to the REAL WORLD Money you have uploaded into your account EXCEPT YOU! Second, When transferring the funds To or From your Blizzard Account, you have to yet again, enter in you Authenticator Code. Now, If the Diablo 3 Servers get hacked, No One can use the money you have uploaded to your account in the Auction House AND They can not transfer the money to some other account, stealing your money from you, because YOU have your Authenticator.

"But Authenticators cost money!"
Yes and No. If you think $4.99 (or is it $7.99...) is too much money to be spending for more than enough sufficient protection, then you are dumber than my rock collection. First of all, to those with Smartphones, the Blizzard Authenticator is FREE. F. R. Double-E, FREE. Or you can get the Key Chain, doesn't matter. Especially when you start looking at what the FEES are for USING the RMAH.

FEE: $1.00 (USD) to POST Equipment
FEE: $1.00 (USD) IF the Equipment Sells
FEE: 15% of Sell Price for Non-Equipment Items
FEE: 15% of Total Money Transferred to a Checking Institution

This means that for you to make ANY profit off of Equipment, It HAS to be sold at a MINIMUM of $2.01. And you will make a penny profit (literally). And 15%... For EVERY DOLLAR you put up, Blizzard gets 15 Cents of that, giving you an 85 cent profit. And then, to Transfer that 85 cents to your Checking Account they will take another 13 (12.75) cents, putting 72 cents into your account. FURTHERMORE, If this becomes a Source of Income, these Fee's that you've paid to Blizzard, do NOT count towards paying your State and Federal Taxes. So now you've lost even more money out of that $1.00 Non-Equipment Sell.
So if my math stands correct, you most likely will not see anything in the RMAH for less than $3.00, which is basically the price of the Key Chain Authenticator to begin with. If FREE is just too hard for you to get. (Some people don't have Smartphones, so the Key Chain version is perfectly suitable as a substitute.)

Now you can have those who want to play the game Offline or via LAN, those who want to hack and crack and mod the game. And Online Players, but who choose not to use the RMAH. Or those who choose to play Online and use the RMAH. And everyone can QUIT whining, and let me get back to playing the game!

:::::::::::::::::::::

TL:DR Browsers,

Offline Character Save Files should be saved locally on the Machine and are only available to be played Offline or via LAN Connections.

Online Character Save Files are saved on the Blizzard Servers, and only the Online Characters can access both versions of the Auction House, with those who want to use the Real Money Auction House only being those accounts who have an Authenticator attached to their account.

Digitaldreamer7:
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.

Jim is right and you are wrong. Sure, we bought the game, but that doesnt excuse it of not working right. Consumer rights don't end at purchase.

I also play a demon hunter like Jim, and latency issues with her are a goddamn pain in the ass. Especially the tumble ability is seriously affected by it. I get stuck in walls or enemies or she simply rolls back to the starting location.

Houshou:
snip

What you are suggesting is exactly how it worked in Diablo 2, and it worked just fine for the most part. Offline characters were unuseable in the closed battlenet.

"its not a singleplayer game"

but i have played diablo always as a singleplayer game and was damn happy with it. My question would be, why o why dont they have the same system as in diablo 2 were you could play offline, but didnīt have access to battle.net with those offline characters? (before anyone brings it up, yes... i know there is an seperated open network for those offline characters)

The simple answer to that would be: Money, cause everyone who has characters locked out of the online part of the game would be a potential lost customer for their auction house. While i kinda learned to live with the idea of an real money auction house, i really hate it, when money grabbing fools not only prevent players from playing, but also shut out all diablo fans who dont have an internet connection (or a bad one, or limited use, ...).

lapan:

Houshou:
snip

What you are suggesting is exactly how it worked in Diablo 2, and it worked just fine for the most part. Offline characters were unuseable in the closed battlenet.

Yeah, and I believe it would solve MOST of the complaints people are having with the game.

As for the "Region-Lock" ... Guild Wars solved that issue back in 2000. So whatever they did to make the game "Non-Region-Locked" ... What's taking the rest of the world so long to catch up?

lapan:

Houshou:
snip

What you are suggesting is exactly how it worked in Diablo 2, and it worked just fine for the most part. Offline characters were unuseable in the closed battlenet.

EC said basically the same thing in their episode on this topic a while back. Blizzard could very easily have implemented a separate offline single player for Diablo 3 (a la Diablo 2), but they simply chose not to, and that decision is fucking retarded whichever way you look at it.

RazadaMk2:
First time I have disagreed utterly with Jim.

In my eyes it is very, very simple. When they had offline/online characters, hacks made it into the game. Now they only have Online characters, hacks have yet to make it into the game and probably never will. Ergo, This system is a success and worth it.

As for the whole internet connection thing? Well, I have made my view on that very, very clear over the last few days. The requirements for any given game are on the box. If you do not have the hardware requirements, you need to upgrade your hardware. And if you do not have DSL, well, you need to get DSL.

Either games start pitching towards the lowest common denominator (My old Laptop has 256mb of ram. Hell, we have an older one somewhere that has about 256mb of hard disk space) then games will stagnate.

The world moved. You didn't.

I know it sucks if you cannot play a game because you do not have the requirements. But these days, asking you to have a stable internet connection is no longer a huge ask. At all. Like asking you to have more than a GB of ram is no longer a huge ask.

5 years ago? Maybe.

Today? Nope.

PingoBlack:
Meh, Jim failed this time.
Still, I get him, bandwagon of popularity is hard to miss.
Mind you, he has a point, and a good one. But sadly, this kind of rant should have happened ages ago.

Sadly, Diablo 3 is a MMO, in the sense its 100% server run. I never heard Jim complain about Guild Wars even though it was a very similar deal. But yeah ... You gotta do what's hot I guess.

Blizzard deserve some rubbing in. They made a design decision to run Diablo 3 like Guild Wars.
But I will be watching this space for next DRM incident. And I will be watching if we can finally talk about details and complexity and not only ramble on impulse about what's hot.

Why in Jim's name did you NOT TELL PEOPLE THIS IN ADVANCE! You freaking knew how Diablo 3 is designed Jim, I know you have the technical knowledge as well. Too bad you didn't make this episode before purchase time, eh? I sure wish you did, so people would not hallucinate about singleplayer game that is designed to run 100% remote after they made an uninformed purchase.

The ignorance in these posts is frightening quite honestly, whilst I understand you all have your professional opinion to share on the matter you're still quite wrong.
The game is online only to support it's real money auction house scheme, that's it. The cost of having that one feature in the game is that players regardless of intent have to play with a stable and secure connection.

This is wrong, a single player game has no need of an auction house at all and certainly no use for a real money auction house.
This is why people are pissed, for a feature nobody asked for people are now suffering and can't play the game offline.

There is no sense in that decision at all.

The biggest mistake that Blizzard made with Diablo III was adding a solo-play option to it. It is a nice idea for people who don't want to group up but at the same time it is a bad idea for a game that is always online. Blizzard should have made Diablo III multiplayer only right from the start. Yes, it would have made people angry. It would justify why Diablo III would need to be always online. That is just my opinion on the matter.

RazadaMk2:
First time I have disagreed utterly with Jim.

In my eyes it is very, very simple. When they had offline/online characters, hacks made it into the game. Now they only have Online characters, hacks have yet to make it into the game and probably never will. Ergo, This system is a success and worth it.

The closed battlenet was mostly hack free, besides maybe map hacks, but even those users were regulary banned. And as recently seen not even diablo 3 is save from hacks.

As for the whole internet connection thing? Well, I have made my view on that very, very clear over the last few days. The requirements for any given game are on the box. If you do not have the hardware requirements, you need to upgrade your hardware. And if you do not have DSL, well, you need to get DSL.

Either games start pitching towards the lowest common denominator (My old Laptop has 256mb of ram. Hell, we have an older one somewhere that has about 256mb of hard disk space) then games will stagnate.

The world moved. You didn't.

I know it sucks if you cannot play a game because you do not have the requirements. But these days, asking you to have a stable internet connection is no longer a huge ask. At all. Like asking you to have more than a GB of ram is no longer a huge ask.

5 years ago? Maybe.

Today? Nope.

Not every country has a perfectly stable internet connection. Even large parts of america have horrible internet service. Many people use their laptops too, and wifi networks aren't always 100% reliable.

And even if they were, blizzard themselves can't keep up with the traffic either way and a large part of the latency issues is on their side.

Mmmmmh idk... It shouldn't be there, and everyone is right to complain about it being there, but those that bought it kinda lose a bit of complaining power in my eyes =p. In most cases it would be considered too late to complain about the taste once you've already swallowed the shit. My friend works in a resturant, and he'd never give out a new steak someone claims is "too red" after they already ate the damn thing!

rembrandtqeinstein:
I've been saying it forever. Even though I probably played d2 on bnet 90% of the time it doesn't matter. Not having the option to play offline single player, or lan multiplayer lost ac/blizz a sale.

GOD how it pisses me off that BF3 doesn't allow for offline singleplayer or MUCH MORE IMPORTANT, LAN... Wtf?! I was so looking forward to playing some LAN games on BF3 with my friends, it's always loads more fun to shoot your friends in the face rather than random people, so why can't I do this without finding a random empty server and HOPING that nobody else comes in to join us? ... And the best part about LAN in the past is that your statistics remain unaffected regardless so you may fool around without feeling like your letting your K/D down X3.

The problem here is that people ARE entitled.

Gamers are entitled to buy a game, especially at $60 American, that WORKS ALL OF THE TIME. And we're not talking about bugs. We're not talking about flawed coding in the game. We're talking about a game which is periodically UNAVAILABLE FOR PLAYING AT ALL because the servers are down. Or overloaded. Or being inundated with angry messages by from people who've bought the game and don't like what they're finding.

But that's the point. These are things Blizzard had a LONG damn time to find solutions to. They didn't. They didn't prepare for any of it, despite knowing full-well what can happen when you do this and how popular the franchise is.

If they're forcing players to be playing online, all the time, then the least they should fucking do is ensure that their game works -as well as- their MMO. Again, we're talking 'IS ACTUALLY PLAYABLE' here. Not 'WORKS FLAWLESSLY'. Or better yet, here's a novel idea, how about just silently swapping all the information over to ANOTHER SERVER when there's maintenance and letting people PLAY YOUR GAME!

Blizzard, honestly. You have fans literally BEGGING you to let them throw their money at you. Have you really become so rich and bloated as to think your current wealth means you're immune to bad decisions? I know you've got WoW going for you now, but... honestly... don't go shooting yourselves in the foot. You may very well need more than just your MMO to stand on. If people lose confidence in amazing games like Diablo and Starcraft, you're going to lose a lot of money to other game studios who will actually give players what they want.

I bought Diablo 3 on the principle of customer loyalty. When I can play it, you guys... it's great. It's amazingly fun. I'm not entirely sold on the lack of real, proper skill trees... but I think what you've done is interesting. I'm glad to see you changing up the formula a little. Except for the lack of basic attacks being useful. That blows. Hard.

Oh, and the fact that normal non-magical items are all worthless. That's wonderful. Then why have them at all? They're supposed to be for filling empty equipment slots and selling. You've made selling them pointless. So now the only reason to have them there is to make me accidentally pick them up and waste time tossing them out again.

Not cool. But it doesn't matter. The point is...

Always Online is nonsense. It's unnecessarily preventing a massive portion of your target audience from being able to play the game you made. Worse, it's actually preventing the people WHO DID BUY YOUR GAME from playing it!

And you're going to be hearing a LOT of complaints. Try to remember that, because for every who decides here and now that they're through with you... that's a sale lost. And it's a higher risk than piracy or used games will ever be.

Age or corporations is upon us, soon Eurocorp will be a reality. Legal entities known as corporations continue to strip the rights of us monkeys and they do it so easily by dangling sparkly objects in front of us, wads of cash in front of our leaders.

Video Games industry has joined the ranks of our corporate masters, bow now to your gods and let any heathen who dare challenge their ubiquitous authority be cast aside by their peers and exiled.

Wave good bye to your liberty, embrace your slavery as your mindlessly walk down a cloned high street. Ignore the cries of your fellow herd ahead and walk blindly into oblivion.

Crono1973:
It's not my job to solve Blizzards security problems nor should it be my burden to shoulder them. You are missing the point here, there was no need for a real money auction house in the first place.

I never said it was any of us consumer's right to protect the security information (though if we make the stupid mistake of posting our account information to a 3rd-party fan site that is run by malicious users, then the blame should go to us), but I don't think this auction house is a bad thing either. Gold farming and other e-commerce problems have been a nuisance to game designers of online games for awhile, and this is Blizzard's attempt to say "if you can't beat them, join them" with the Auction house. I really respect that move as fighting against gold farmers does and will cost a lot of money, yet here this legalizes while keeping the game fair.

Even if there was no auction house, something like this would've happened anyways given the online game portion. Blizzard would see their virtual assets being sold through Ebay or by malicious users to legitimate customers, which could in turn ruin their business practice because a small group of 3rd party people play the game as a job to make some money off ignorant users. This might still happen with some malicious users that don't want to share some of their profits with Blizzard, but at least this is Blizzard's attempt to legalize their "playstyle" without discriminating against them. That's the point I see this auction house is for.

Lyri:

RazadaMk2:
First time I have disagreed utterly with Jim.

In my eyes it is very, very simple. When they had offline/online characters, hacks made it into the game. Now they only have Online characters, hacks have yet to make it into the game and probably never will. Ergo, This system is a success and worth it.

As for the whole internet connection thing? Well, I have made my view on that very, very clear over the last few days. The requirements for any given game are on the box. If you do not have the hardware requirements, you need to upgrade your hardware. And if you do not have DSL, well, you need to get DSL.

Either games start pitching towards the lowest common denominator (My old Laptop has 256mb of ram. Hell, we have an older one somewhere that has about 256mb of hard disk space) then games will stagnate.

The world moved. You didn't.

I know it sucks if you cannot play a game because you do not have the requirements. But these days, asking you to have a stable internet connection is no longer a huge ask. At all. Like asking you to have more than a GB of ram is no longer a huge ask.

5 years ago? Maybe.

Today? Nope.

PingoBlack:
Meh, Jim failed this time.
Still, I get him, bandwagon of popularity is hard to miss.
Mind you, he has a point, and a good one. But sadly, this kind of rant should have happened ages ago.

Sadly, Diablo 3 is a MMO, in the sense its 100% server run. I never heard Jim complain about Guild Wars even though it was a very similar deal. But yeah ... You gotta do what's hot I guess.

Blizzard deserve some rubbing in. They made a design decision to run Diablo 3 like Guild Wars.
But I will be watching this space for next DRM incident. And I will be watching if we can finally talk about details and complexity and not only ramble on impulse about what's hot.

Why in Jim's name did you NOT TELL PEOPLE THIS IN ADVANCE! You freaking knew how Diablo 3 is designed Jim, I know you have the technical knowledge as well. Too bad you didn't make this episode before purchase time, eh? I sure wish you did, so people would not hallucinate about singleplayer game that is designed to run 100% remote after they made an uninformed purchase.

The ignorance in these posts is frightening quite honestly, whilst I understand you all have your professional opinion to share on the matter you're still quite wrong.
The game is online only to support it's real money auction house scheme, that's it. The cost of having that one feature in the game is that players regardless of intent have to play with a stable and secure connection.

This is wrong, a single player game has no need of an auction house at all and certainly no use for a real money auction house.
This is why people are pissed, for a feature nobody asked for people are now suffering and can't play the game offline.

There is no sense in that decision at all.

Well...

Firstly, an opinion (Which is subjective) cannot simply be "Wrong". Sure, it can disagree with your own, such as music you dislike being "Shit" in your eyes. Just going to throw that out there first.

Secondly, calling someone who disagrees with you ignorant simply because they disagree with you is bad manners. Understandable, but bad manners. I am not "Ignorant" of the reasonsoning behind Blizzard making the call for D3 to always be online.

Thirdly, Diablo 3 was never intended to be a single player game. Just a game that you can play single player (There is a difference). D2's community was obsessive about online play, hell there are probably some ludites on this very website who are not playing D3 because they prefer their level 97 ladder character and doing Baal runs with their friends. As for the whole always online thing?

You might dislike it, most might dislike it. But I simply do nto care about other people disliking it. If hacks dont get into the game, it is worth it in my eyes. That is part of the reasoning behind always online (If hacked items get into the game, the RMAH is fucked. So, calling me ignorant when your post actually supports my own? Awesome!)

And, finally, as for the whole "Some places done have very good interenet" argument? Does not change my lowest common denominator argument whatsoever. Some places dont have access to new computers. Should Blizzard pitch their games towards that market too? That is my point. Some places dont, the majority do.

As for the laptop argument? Well, I am on a laptop right now. On Wireless. Sometimes my internet goes down. So sometimes I cannot get online. Its rare because O2 provided us with a half-decent router, but it happens. Shit happens. It is called patience. It is a virtue.

Please, People, can we get over this notion that Diablo is a single player game? Or even the sequel to a single player game.

D2 was pitched at the Multiplayer market. As I have already pointed out in other posts on this issue, A lot of content was ONLY available online.

Bitch about the servers going down, yada yada yada. That I can get behind. But calling me ignorant and then referring to D3 as a "single player game", well, it shows your inability to form a coherent argument.

I know it sucks if you cannot play a game because you do not have the requirements. But these days, asking you to have a stable internet connection is no longer a huge ask.

Oh my god, the ignorance. How can you manage to get dressed in the morning without help?
Newsflash: The world isn't your american city.

Seriously, people. How come that the guild wars 2 BETA had a better launch than Diablo 3? It was far more playable. It allowed me to easily play with friends all over the world. It's server issues were quickly solved.

And it's a BETA. How come one company manages to provide a service for a beta that Blizzard, a much richer company, can't manage for a full game? That's pathetic! Ridiculously pathetic.

Always-online for a game like this is a hassle for consumers. It's trying to ship cost from the company (people moderating and finding hackers) to us (unable to log in and play). Worst, it doesn't even work. Hacking and cheating is already happening. The entire system FAILS.

It would work far better to let us play offline, connect to people at our leisure, just like D2 did.

Oh. Real money auction house. So THATS why we all have to suffer. This just proves that the RMAH is a terrible idea.

Firstly, an opinion (Which is subjective) cannot simply be "Wrong".

Wrong. If your opinion is that the moon is made out of cheese, then your opinion is wrong. The moment your opinion contradicts verifyable facts, you're simply wrong, wrong, and wrong.

Furthermore, calling you ignorant isn't a bad move. It's accurate. You are ignorant about the issue of online connections. Simple fact. You can hide behind "opinion" all you want, you keep being ignorant, and therefore wrong.

I agree completely, but diablo 3 doesnt really have a singleplayer option. sure you can shut down the other guys, but its not singlepalyer if the game calculates online.
The same problem happened to Ubisoft and EA when they launched their always on DRM. Now Blizzard has fallen to this trap too. is there no sensible gamemakers left?

lapan:

Not every country has a perfectly stable internet connection. Even large parts of america have horrible internet service. Many people use their laptops too, and wifi networks aren't always 100% reliable.

America is one of the worst internet connections out there. They stopped in 90s and dont seem to be updating while the rest of the world has went past them. sure there wont be stable internet in africa, but i think they have more important issues. As for the first and second world countries, it should not be a problem unless you live in a farm somewhere in middle of nowhere.
As fr Wifi, well its YOUR PROBLEM that you are using a wifi. You were told (if you ever met anyone that knows about it) that wifis are unreliable and still got it, then you made a mistake that you are responsible for.

zefiris:

Wrong. If your opinion is that the moon is made out of cheese, then your opinion is wrong. The moment your opinion contradicts verifyable facts, you're simply wrong, wrong, and wrong.

Furthermore, calling you ignorant isn't a bad move. It's accurate. You are ignorant about the issue of online connections. Simple fact. You can hide behind "opinion" all you want, you keep being ignorant, and therefore wrong.

I want to have your babies. I am so damn sick of misinformed fuckwits thinking that none of the opinions they have can be 'wrong'. The adage "everybody's entitled to their opinion" is increasingly becoming the cloak of people who either lack the intellectual capacity to defend their opinions, or the integrity to admit that they may have gotten things wrong.

as Sun Tzu put it:
the supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.

i simply deny blizzard or any company my money when they pull a stunt like this
i will not be abused and will-not perpetuate exploitative systems
if everyone would act this way no company would be able to exploit you
except by blatantly changing terms after launch

My neck hurts from nodding in agreement. Thanks, you twat.

I can't help but think Runic Games (Torchlight and Torchlight II) is doing a merry jig. All this hooplah about Always Online basically means more potential sales for them.

Oh and to those people saying that the customers knew about the Always Online DRM before purchasing, you're right. But that was because people expected Blizzard to do their fucking job and make sure the servers could withstand the number of players logging on.

I'm not crazy about Minecraft's plans to move it's singleplayer to remotely hosted servers either, because I can see the same thing happening.

Fair enough, gamers have a right to be pissed - but surely people should be pissed at the right people, surely we don't have to hear about it! Blizzard have a complaints department no?

When these things happen, it leaks into everything, this site, youtube, facebook - butthurt gamers whine about not being able to play a game, and people who don't care have to hear about it. It's pointless to whine at us, go whine at Blizzard, because I can guarantee that Blizzard aren't scouring the interweb, looking for complaints to deal with. Target the right people, Blizzard themselves, and concentrate that annoyance on them, let them have it, and maybe try and get on with your life in the meantime.

Everything will get sorted out, just takes time, it's not like Atari and their Test Drive 2 fuckery - game was unplayable for about 2 weeks, then they promise some free DLC to make up for that, nice of them, so you'd think - until you realise that they still haven't released the DLC after well over a year. It could be worse, at least with Blizzard you kinda know that things will be resolved, there's no need to bitch and whine to anyone who'll listen.

There hasn't really been much whining about Diablo3, and that's a good thing Jimbo - because I don't want to hear it, the only people who will benefit from hearing it, as I said, are Blizzards complaint department. Channel that rage and get results, and don't annoy the rest of the gaming community, it's all win.

Gekidami:

draythefingerless:

Gekidami:
You know what else is sh!t publishers think we'll just eat right up?: Games that are broken on release.

You know what game Jim loved and had nothing bad to say about?: Skyrim.

You know where this is going?: Yeah.

No i dont. please continue. im anxious to see where its going. my money is on a strawman argument. but please. fascinate me.

Just sayin', Jim isnt immune to a 'chocolate' moustache. Seems he's willing to call out some BS, but ignore others.

This deserved to get called out just as much as (if not even more than) online DMR:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RaeU3DvW5-o

Yet it got nothing but praise.

That's developer incompetence, this is developer greed/maliciousness.

Try again.

This episode gave me WAY to much information as to the type of porn Jim looks at. *scrubs self with steel wool*

OK, so, as kind of an outsider to this whole thing (never played a Diablo game, was interested in D3, saw that it had the 'online only' thing, kept my wallet firmly closed), things seem to boil down to:

1) People complaining about the terrible connection problems: justified - if you'e going to have a game that can only be played online, Blizzard, you should probably, you know, make it actually accessible online?

2) People complaining that the game does not have an offline single player mode (or much of a single player mode at all): only semi-justified. As far as I'm concerned, you can be disappointed that what Blizzard has made is essentially Diablo Online, but you can't complain about it in the sense that you were ripped off. They were pretty open, as far as I saw, about the fact that you're not going to get much out of single player D3. Hey, this disappointed me too, but it contributed to me *not buying the game*

3) The world would be a better place without the RMAH? I don't actually fully understand what the whole auction house thing is, but it seems to be at the root of all the problems, one way or another. I did find the bit in Jim's video about Blizzard making their problems 'ours' to be an interesting point, and a way I hadn't loooked at it before.

I'm not trying to pick any fights, just calling it as I see it. I welcome any (civil) correction ofhow I've summed things up - it just seems to be getting very confused as to what people are *actually* complaining about, vs what other people claim everyone is complaining about, vs what is actually a problem that Blizzard should be censured for, vs what is just people whinging about finding out after the fact that the game they bought was not, in fact, a clone of Diablo 2, but something different.

Somehow I'm reminded of the 'Apple can do no wrong' fanboys and fangirls when thinking about this argument. Most people no longer think of Itunes as oppressive DRM, despite the fact that it is, it's just wrapped in an attractive store/service backed by a company with an excellent PR department.

At any rate, I won't be buying Diablo III unless they release a version that allows offline only play. I rarely agree with Jim, but on this issue I just can't see it any other way.

I'll leave everyone with this. Food for thought anyway

http://videogames.memebase.com/2012/05/13/video-game-memes-cant-wait-for-diablo-iii/

Walter Byers:

Naeras:
Anything that has a single player mode is a single player game.

D3 doesn't have a single player mode. Every time you start a new game it's in multiplayer mode as in multiple players can be part of that game.

That's like calling a dungeon in WoW a single player dungeon because you zoned in by yourself.

Yes, please ignore the important part of my post and quote the detail that you disagree with. People bought this game for single player, and the guys who are complaining are the ones who can't play single player. That's a simple fact, and no arguing from your part is going to change that. It's a single player game. End of story.

Another reason why the comparison is faulty is that a sizable portion of WoW instances cannot be completed without an entire group, several of them can't even be entered without a group. That's not the case in D3.

zefiris:

I know it sucks if you cannot play a game because you do not have the requirements. But these days, asking you to have a stable internet connection is no longer a huge ask.

Oh my god, the ignorance. How can you manage to get dressed in the morning without help?
Newsflash: The world isn't your american city.

Seriously, people. How come that the guild wars 2 BETA had a better launch than Diablo 3? It was far more playable. It allowed me to easily play with friends all over the world. It's server issues were quickly solved.

And it's a BETA. How come one company manages to provide a service for a beta that Blizzard, a much richer company, can't manage for a full game? That's pathetic! Ridiculously pathetic.

Always-online for a game like this is a hassle for consumers. It's trying to ship cost from the company (people moderating and finding hackers) to us (unable to log in and play). Worst, it doesn't even work. Hacking and cheating is already happening. The entire system FAILS.

It would work far better to let us play offline, connect to people at our leisure, just like D2 did.

Oh. Real money auction house. So THATS why we all have to suffer. This just proves that the RMAH is a terrible idea.

Firstly, an opinion (Which is subjective) cannot simply be "Wrong".

Wrong. If your opinion is that the moon is made out of cheese, then your opinion is wrong. The moment your opinion contradicts verifyable facts, you're simply wrong, wrong, and wrong.

Furthermore, calling you ignorant isn't a bad move. It's accurate. You are ignorant about the issue of online connections. Simple fact. You can hide behind "opinion" all you want, you keep being ignorant, and therefore wrong.

*sigh*

One, I am not American, it seems that the majority of those that are complaining are.

Two, A stable internet connection is not that much to ask in the modern world. At all. Everysingle one of my friends has a stable internet connection. These are not "Rich white people" these are "Working class, usually unemployed people of multiple different ethnicities" (I had to point that out, your assumption that I am some ignorant American is usually coupled with the assumption that I am some moron with only white friends and all of the issues associated)

Three, your personal attack, claiming that I am some moron who is unable to dress themselves. This is based on me having a different opinion to your own. Your opinion is now "Fact" my opinion is now "A bunch of lies that make me sad because it is a different opinion from my own. Example: I think Quantative Easing is simply a term used for a bullshit economic policy which is not dealing with the causes of our current economic woes but trying, and failing, to deal with the symptoms. I do not think that Quantative Easing is "Wrong and a bunch of lies created by ignorance" I just disagree with it because I do not think it is the best system.

I am not claiming my view is fact. I am admitting my view is personal and subjective. You should do the same. There is no "Right" answer within this argument. Assuming that your opinion is worth more than any other opinion, well, it shows that you are truly an idiot. I assume your knowledge of higher education is "Something that happens to other people". Considering your inability to understand the nature of a debate.

Did you not notice the parenthesis? Opinions on if something is good or bad are purely subjective opinions. It is not an opinion that goes against fact (Like you seem to think) just an opinion that something is or is not bad. If I assume, like I stated above, quantative easing to be a "Bad" economic policy, I am not somehow more correct than someone who thinks that it is a "Good" economic policy.

"This music is not good music" - Subjective opinion.
"The moon is made of cheese" - Objective opinion.

One can be proven, the other can not. If it cannot be proven, it is subjective. If it is subjective, there is no "Right" answer as your personal opinion is just that, PERSONAL.

I am given to understand from the various people who are too busy playing D3 to get angry on the internet that the vast majority of the server issues have been dealt with. And I am willing to put significant amounts of money on GW2 crashing on the first day of release, at least if it sees the same amount of traffic the D3 servers saw.

So, In summary:
My opinion on whether something is good or bad cannot be "Wrong" simply because it disagrees with your own. You can disagree with it, you can state your reasons for disagreeing with it, but ultimately your subjective opinion is as valid as my subjective opinion on this issue. Your need to resort to personal attacks shows you inability to understand how debates are to be carried out and the weakness of your own argument. Stating "You are wrong" as many times as you can does not make me wrong, it just shows your inability to correctly argue why I am wrong.

Oh, and as for hacks and cheating getting into the game? Sure, a security loophole has been discovered (These things happen) and accounts are getting hacked. That is a massive failing and I will not defend Blizzard, bar saying "These things happen and it should be sorted out shortly". This could happen to GW2, it could happen to any online service. However, as of yet, I have seen no proof of hacked items within the game. As in, Items with inflated stats that should nto be in the game. You simply stating that these items exist is simply not enough. Screenshot or it did not happen.

In closing? I think that the system of always being online is not a bad system. You disagree. You are entitled to your opinion, I am entitled to mine. Both of our opinions are equally valid and I accept that. Do not resort to personal attacks as doing so is grounds for a ban on this website.

Digitaldreamer7:
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.

It's the old catch-22: if you don't like it, don't buy it (and implicitly, don't talk about it). If you do buy it, you have no right to complain. Of course you should be able to complain and criticize regardless of whether you bought it or not. Whether or not I bought something isn't a very good measure of it's quality, is it? This is just a round-about ad hominim. You don't say their argument is bad, but rather they are bad for making it.

So you say if I bought Diablo III and also criticize it I am an entitled prick. I think that miiiiiiiiiight be unfair, and an ad hominim to stop me from criticizing a videogame. Also I don't think "entitled" means what you think it means. What it doesn't mean is "doesn't like what I like".

It doesn't matter if they announced they were shitting all over us before they did it. It still stinks. And I very much doubt that most people criticizing Blizzard were blind-sided by this as you seem to imply. I don't know why you think that, except maybe it helps you look down on us as idiots scratching our thick monkey craniums wondering what happened. Expecting a product to work at least up to industry norms is not unreasonable. Besides, not everyone reads websites about games. When I buy a sandwich, I don't do any research whatsoever to find out if it will be edible. I just assume that a sandwich can be eaten. I don't blame anyone who didn't know about this for not doing the kind of exhaustive research many of us do. I think we tend to forget we are in the tiny minority on that count.

As for security, their track record so far isn't very good. So you already have to deal with hackers and farmers. Dupers I assume are on the way, but it hardly matters. Pretty soon people are going to be buying gear with real money that hackers stole from your account. I fail to see how this is better than any similar title.

And you like DRM? That almost doesn't make sense. DRM is not designed to enhance the user experience in any way. Do you mean you're glad it's stopping pirates? I mean, I understand the necessity of airport security but who the hell likes it? No one says to themselves "I really am enjoying that this person with the scanner is seeing me without my clothes on right now. Oh goody, now they want my shoes!" Is it possible you just like anything that Blizzard does regardless?

TitsMcGee1804:
Snip

You're comparing a game that came out three years ago on a pretty short development time with no budget to one that's been in development for what? Eight years and had All the Money?

Lets wait to see Torchlight 2 before we talk about levels of polish between games. You know, the one that measures up far better to D3.

It goes like this:

1) You bought a game. An expensive game, thanks to the fact that EA/Activision somehow managed to con us all into thinking that $60 is the new acceptable baseline.

2) You cannot play it.

3) The developer's bad decisions are responsible for the second item.

4) Your experience would not be affected in any meaningful way if the third item had not taken place.

5) Why is this an issue? Activision/Blizzard screwed up, and you're the one that's suffering for it.

...and this is another reason why, no matter how popular or even how GOOD Diablo III is, I do not give even 5% of a fuck about it.

Digitaldreamer7:
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.

Yes, I guess it WAS pretty dumb of people to buy a game when they knew they would only be able to play it when the servers are online AND that the servers would regularly go down and Blizzard would be COMPLETELY able to keep up with demand. I mean, they must have been some kind of IDIOTS to expect that they'd actually be able to PLAY the game they paid for. They really should have known better. So obviously it's all their fault and Blizzard are completely blameless.

You see that? That's how moronic you sound.

This video did a pretty good job of summarizing exactly why I have absolutely zero interest in acquiring Diablo III.

This nonsense is completely unacceptable and I refuse to reward that with my time and money.

trollpwner:
I like the trigger finger joke at the end. I've had something similar with Serious Sam. (A game in which the name "Jim Sterling" incidentally shows up in the credits.)

OT: Looking forward to the arguments used to justify why you can't use a game you paid for when you bought it. Should be good.

EDIT: is this relevant?

image

I'm not saying they didn't plan properly, but having first hand knowledge of large scale deployments of servers, the answers aren't always "throw more money at the problem to make it go away". If the problem is code related or configuration related, adding a billion login and play servers would not change anything.

I sincerely doubt there were anything less than all hands on deck trying to get everything working. Why do you think publishers and developers have a policy of launching at the beginning of a week? They expect shit to go wrong. It's no different in a non-video game corporate environment - shit can go wrong. Sometimes its piss poor planning, sometimes its just an alligator you didn't see.

I can't honestly remember ANY multi-player game launches going off with zero downtime. In fact most of them end up with thousands of pissed off "can't play on day one" players. But it's good to see the Oracles of Information spewing forth their discontent in the form of sage advice from the cheap seats about this or that could have fixed the problem. Hey, I have an idea!

http://jobs.blizzard.com/

Feel free to amaze the world when the Starcraft MMO comes out and the planet doesn't grind to a halt because you were there to make sure they were ready at launch. While you are at it, can you fix global warming and world hunger? k thx bye!

I'm not saying Blizzard couldn't have done better, but why do we as players go through this every goddamn game launch? There are always problems at game launch. ALWAYS. This is not news. And yet, time and again people take the day off of work and don't get to play because *gasp* the company failed to properly get everything working on launch day.

If this game launch was your first, congratulations! Consider your virginity taken. It's pretty much like this from here on out.

 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