Diablo Thread #5674: More proof that mandatory server connections in video games is a retarded idea

 Pages 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

Not really much to say here other than how retarded the modern trend of making all games online really is. I seriously doubt Blizzard would have had any real issues if they didn't require everybody to be online for their entire gameplay experience.

We've got the hardware and all the software on our computers, there's no reason why we shouldn't be able to run games all by ourselves, that's how PC gaming has worked for the past 30 years. It's akin to saying a guy isn't allowed to drive his car because his GPS won't connect.

But you might all be dirty, stinking, no good pirates!

Nah, it's stupid. It just inconveniences the player and makes Blizzard look bad.

image
Bravo Blizzard. You've managed to be worse than Ubisoft, that takes some real doing.
Besides the only ones who suffer from this are legit customers anyway. Any DRM will eventually get cracked, and then the pirates can enjoy it without all the bollocks.

And this is why i opted out of the game in the first place.

Maybe Blizzard will soon see the error of thier ways and patch it out. For singleplayer at least.

If Blizzard ever decide to patch the bullshit server connection out for people who ONLY want to play Single Player, I'll definitely get the game.

Until then, Torchlight 2 is a better game for the sole reason of OFFLINE MODE

I might be on the minority, but i played yesterday from 10 to 12 am central time, no prob at all; and then today from like 8 to 11 or so with friends and random people with no lag even across continents...

I see why they make the choice of making this a multiplayer based hack and slash rpg, knew what i was buying and are very satisfied with it, whatev, YMMV.

Yeah, I'm getting absolutely no problems connecting to servers. I think it's just a personal problem for you.

You know what, I'm not going to feel sad for you people. You knew very well what you were getting into the moment you purchased the game. I'd also like to congratulate everyone for proving Actiblizzard that they can get away with virtually anything. Honestly, I'd be surprised if consumer rights even exist ten years from now.

OK, so can someone explain this to me. I've never played a Diablo game, so I don't understand the rationale behind a single-player portion of any game being online-only. Even Demon's Souls is playable offline (hell, a lot of people prefer it like that).

So why make the single-player like that? What does it add?

Admiral Stukov:
image
Bravo Blizzard. You've managed to be worse than Ubisoft, that takes some real doing.
Besides the only ones who suffer from this are legit customers anyway. Any DRM will eventually get cracked, and then the pirates can enjoy it without all the bollocks.

Yeah this happen to me half an hour ago and I admit I starting to get annoying with the whole always online thing. I killed a boss and it drop one of the magical weapons, I run to it until I was diconnect. I quickly log back in and found myself at the start of the event so I lost that loot (sure I got a new loot at the end but now I'm wondering what it was).

DustyDrB:
OK, so can someone explain this to me. I've never played a Diablo game, so I don't understand the rationale behind a single-player portion of any game being online-only. Even Demon's Souls is playable offline (hell, a lot of people prefer it like that).

So why make the single-player like that? What does it add?

It's to prevent hackers from selling stuff in their latest cash cow, the real money auction house. That's it, any other reason is bull.

I'm quoting someone from Reddit,

"DRM sucks. Having to be connected to a server to play alone sucks. And thousands of people are complaining about that today... yet most of them don't understand why Blizzard doesn't offer online play. They say it's to prevent piracy, when it's not.

Blizzard has to run servers for at least 10 years to support this game, as they know from their past franchises, for the (very popular) multiplayer component. It shouldn't be surprising they looked for a way to get some recurring revenue from the game so that the ongoing costs are covered by the people still playing it. Their solution was the real-money auction house.

To run a real-money auction house, they have to absolutely eliminate hacking and duping, or rare items won't be rare and there will be no incentive to create a robust market which Blizzard can earn money from. The only sure way to eliminate hacking and duping is to run D3 like an MMO... put everything on a server you don't control. You can hack your client all day long, but since your characters, the world, mob spawns and deaths, experience and loot are all generated and stored on the server, you can't cheat and create items.

There is no single player game. They never programmed one. To offer one at this point would be as much design and programming effort as creating Diablo 4. So don't expect there to ever be an offline patch for D3. When you play single player, you're just playing a multiplayer server instance that happens to only have one player in it."

DustyDrB:

So why make the single-player like that? What does it add?

Diablo 2 introduced the multiplayer aspect with an offline single player aspect. The thing was that in Diablo 2 Gold was absolutely worthless so people used items as currency (special rings, gems etc) but the problem was that people were able to hack and dupe offline and somehow bring it online. (I'm really not sure about specifics since I stopped playing at that point)

so yeah basically anyone who had been working on getting great items in multiplayer were screwed over by people who broke the game offline. And when you are offering a real money auction house for items (like they are in Diablo 3) it's pretty important to make sure that the items that are being sold aren't hacked or duped since it would completely screw up the system.

OT: I've only been disconnected once at roughly midnight my time and it was right before I was going to sign out anyway other than that I've not run into any issues whatsoever. I don't feel sorry for anyone who bought the game knowing full well it would be online only.

I've had no trouble connecting, but that doesn't mean I like it. Laggy, too. Oh well! It'll sell anyway!

Scarim Coral:

Admiral Stukov:
-snip-

Yeah this happen to me half an hour ago and I admit I starting to get annoying with the whole always online thing. I killed a boss and it drop one of the magical weapons, I run to it until I was diconnect. I quickly log back in and found myself at the start of the event so I lost that loot (sure I got a new loot at the end but now I'm wondering what it was).

Well I can only speak for myself, but I would never consider buying an always-online game that isn't 100% multiplayer at full price.
Incidentally Torchlight 2, made by most of the original developers of Diablo 2 is a third of D3's price, and has Online, Offline, and LAN play. It also have full mod support, and is DRM free.

I'm not saying this to be a smarmy dick, I'm just curious as to why people buy the sodding game to begin with.

Really? This isn't a surprise to anyone who doesn't spend a majority of their existence with their heads up their arse?

Apparently all they needed was confirmation that mandatory online is a BAD IDEA when someone is actually dimwitted enough to put it into practice but even still I doubt they'll have the sense to realize it.

Well, surprise surprise dumba**es, it's not a good idea, it doesn't work and all this has reaffirmed is that those who force this form of copy protection are still nitwits.

It's probably already been pirated, hasn't it?

Played today 11 hours straight (yes, i have no life. move along now), no lag, no dc's, worked like a dream.

Yes i do agree that there should be option to play offline for people who experience these problems. But those who bought it knew what they were signing in for...

Arcline:
I'm quoting someone from Reddit,

"DRM sucks. Having to be connected to a server to play alone sucks. And thousands of people are complaining about that today... yet most of them don't understand why Blizzard doesn't offer online play. They say it's to prevent piracy, when it's not.

Blizzard has to run servers for at least 10 years to support this game, as they know from their past franchises, for the (very popular) multiplayer component. It shouldn't be surprising they looked for a way to get some recurring revenue from the game so that the ongoing costs are covered by the people still playing it. Their solution was the real-money auction house.

To run a real-money auction house, they have to absolutely eliminate hacking and duping, or rare items won't be rare and there will be no incentive to create a robust market which Blizzard can earn money from. The only sure way to eliminate hacking and duping is to run D3 like an MMO... put everything on a server you don't control. You can hack your client all day long, but since your characters, the world, mob spawns and deaths, experience and loot are all generated and stored on the server, you can't cheat and create items.

There is no single player game. They never programmed one. To offer one at this point would be as much design and programming effort as creating Diablo 4. So don't expect there to ever be an offline patch for D3. When you play single player, you're just playing a multiplayer server instance that happens to only have one player in it."

Why couldn't they just make different characters for MP and SP? Let you have the option, instead of making it so that you have to play online all the time. This whole game seems to just be made so that Blizzard can rake in the money with their Auction House. Think about it, what if EA had done this? There would be angry mobs and petitions up the arse right now, yet there isn't because it's Blizzard. Why isn't this getting more outcry than fucking 15 minutes of an amazing trilogy of games? Because it's from Blizzard, and there are legions of nerdy fanboys waiting to defend their practises to the death. Blizzard only did this for their own gain, not to stop hackers or anything. All the people who defend the shitty practises are just showing that if a company is popular enough, they can trample their consumers for a few extra bucks.

hazabaza1:
It's probably already been pirated, hasn't it?

Of course it has, all Blizzard did is give the pirates a bigger challenge. Which they of course would get through. All this DRM is only punishing paying customers.

hazabaza1:
It's probably already been pirated, hasn't it?

No, and i doubt it will ever be. AFAIK almost all the NPCs are moved serverside, without being connected to a blizz server you will get static mobs at most.

ToastiestZombie:
Of course it has, all Blizzard did is give the pirates a bigger challenge. Which they of course would get through. All this DRM is only punishing paying customers.

You are talking out of your ass here or actually have seen a working pirated copy? Because i looked for one for a friend, couldn't find -.-

gigastar:
And this is why i opted out of the game in the first place.

Maybe Blizzard will soon see the error of thier ways and patch it out. For singleplayer at least.

You can't "patch it out" the server connection is integral to the game itself.

gamma:
If Blizzard ever decide to patch the bullshit server connection out for people who ONLY want to play Single Player, I'll definitely get the game.

Until then, Torchlight 2 is a better game for the sole reason of OFFLINE MODE

Again, you cannot "patch it out." The single player game cannot function without a server connection because the server handles so much of the game.

ToastiestZombie:

Arcline:
I'm quoting someone from Reddit,

"DRM sucks. Having to be connected to a server to play alone sucks. And thousands of people are complaining about that today... yet most of them don't understand why Blizzard doesn't offer online play. They say it's to prevent piracy, when it's not.

Blizzard has to run servers for at least 10 years to support this game, as they know from their past franchises, for the (very popular) multiplayer component. It shouldn't be surprising they looked for a way to get some recurring revenue from the game so that the ongoing costs are covered by the people still playing it. Their solution was the real-money auction house.

To run a real-money auction house, they have to absolutely eliminate hacking and duping, or rare items won't be rare and there will be no incentive to create a robust market which Blizzard can earn money from. The only sure way to eliminate hacking and duping is to run D3 like an MMO... put everything on a server you don't control. You can hack your client all day long, but since your characters, the world, mob spawns and deaths, experience and loot are all generated and stored on the server, you can't cheat and create items.

There is no single player game. They never programmed one. To offer one at this point would be as much design and programming effort as creating Diablo 4. So don't expect there to ever be an offline patch for D3. When you play single player, you're just playing a multiplayer server instance that happens to only have one player in it."

Why couldn't they just make different characters for MP and SP? Let you have the option, instead of making it so that you have to play online all the time. This whole game seems to just be made so that Blizzard can rake in the money with their Auction House. Think about it, what if EA had done this? There would be angry mobs and petitions up the arse right now, yet there isn't because it's Blizzard. Why isn't this getting more outcry than fucking 15 minutes of an amazing trilogy of games? Because it's from Blizzard, and there are legions of nerdy fanboys waiting to defend their practises to the death. Blizzard only did this for their own gain, not to stop hackers or anything. All the people who defend the shitty practises are just showing that if a company is popular enough, they can trample their consumers for a few extra bucks.

The reason is that for SP to be offline, you would need to store code which is now exclusively server side (item drops, monster spawns, etc.) on the client computer. Thus allowing replication of those code and allowing pirated servers to pop up much more easily.

I'm not really saying this is a good reason at all, as the only way in hell I'm ever going to buy D3 is if I can play it offline; but this is the reason.

Tanakh:

hazabaza1:
It's probably already been pirated, hasn't it?

No, and i doubt it will ever be. AFAIK almost all the NPCs are moved serverside, without being connected to a blizz server you will get static mobs at most.

Here's a rule of the internet. The hackers ALWAYS find a way. They could get the server code, make it usable by LAN servers then allow people to play offline. I'm sure it's not as easy as that, but they will do it within a year. Funny, the pirates will be able to play this 10 years down the line when Blizzard takes the servers down. Imagine it like this. There's a shop, it has only one thing on sale and that's milk. To legitimate customers the milk is only allowed to be opened whilst it's in a fridge owned by the shop. After everyone's finished with their milk and decides to get some more, or drink it again the fridge has been turned off. To any thieves that come in and steal it the milk has an inbuilt cooling system that allows them to open it anywhere they want, anytime they want.

Admiral Stukov:

Scarim Coral:

Admiral Stukov:
-snip-

Yeah this happen to me half an hour ago and I admit I starting to get annoying with the whole always online thing. I killed a boss and it drop one of the magical weapons, I run to it until I was diconnect. I quickly log back in and found myself at the start of the event so I lost that loot (sure I got a new loot at the end but now I'm wondering what it was).

Well I can only speak for myself, but I would never consider buying an always-online game that isn't 100% multiplayer at full price.
Incidentally Torchlight 2, made by most of the original developers of Diablo 2 is a third of D3's price, and has Online, Offline, and LAN play. It also have full mod support, and is DRM free.

I'm not saying this to be a smarmy dick, I'm just curious as to why people buy the sodding game to begin with.

My reason for buying the game in the first place (intially I wouldn't had bought it due its current features) is being obligated to my mate (a hardcore Diablo fan who refuse to try the beta since to him it was "unfinished") since we all know a game is ten time more fun when being played with friends (I don't exactly play alot of multiplayer sort of games). However in saying so he haven't bought it right away due to being short on cash at the money and will buy it at the end of this month.
I admit I am actually enjoying the game much to my suprise however this is the first time that I played an isometric rpg. I guess this would mean I would had loved playing Touchlight and the upcoming sequel.

Lawllerskater:
Yeah, I'm getting absolutely no problems connecting to servers. I think it's just a personal problem for you.

Well, Blizzard server instability has always been a major problem for new releases. I spent many a Tuesday bashing my head against a wall back in my WoW days. Birds fly, fish swim, Blizzard breaks their goddamn shit every time they try to patch something.

Every. Single. Time.

So though I've not played the release version yet, I can tell you from Diablo Beta experience, World of Warcraft Patch/Expansion experience, AND all the hubbub on the internet about it right now,

that you are extremely, objectively wrong. You're a lucky exception to blizserver shitstorms, apparently.

Somebody mentioned more proof? No? Ok.

AC10:

ToastiestZombie:

Arcline:
I'm quoting someone from Reddit,

"DRM sucks. Having to be connected to a server to play alone sucks. And thousands of people are complaining about that today... yet most of them don't understand why Blizzard doesn't offer online play. They say it's to prevent piracy, when it's not.

Blizzard has to run servers for at least 10 years to support this game, as they know from their past franchises, for the (very popular) multiplayer component. It shouldn't be surprising they looked for a way to get some recurring revenue from the game so that the ongoing costs are covered by the people still playing it. Their solution was the real-money auction house.

To run a real-money auction house, they have to absolutely eliminate hacking and duping, or rare items won't be rare and there will be no incentive to create a robust market which Blizzard can earn money from. The only sure way to eliminate hacking and duping is to run D3 like an MMO... put everything on a server you don't control. You can hack your client all day long, but since your characters, the world, mob spawns and deaths, experience and loot are all generated and stored on the server, you can't cheat and create items.

There is no single player game. They never programmed one. To offer one at this point would be as much design and programming effort as creating Diablo 4. So don't expect there to ever be an offline patch for D3. When you play single player, you're just playing a multiplayer server instance that happens to only have one player in it."

Why couldn't they just make different characters for MP and SP? Let you have the option, instead of making it so that you have to play online all the time. This whole game seems to just be made so that Blizzard can rake in the money with their Auction House. Think about it, what if EA had done this? There would be angry mobs and petitions up the arse right now, yet there isn't because it's Blizzard. Why isn't this getting more outcry than fucking 15 minutes of an amazing trilogy of games? Because it's from Blizzard, and there are legions of nerdy fanboys waiting to defend their practises to the death. Blizzard only did this for their own gain, not to stop hackers or anything. All the people who defend the shitty practises are just showing that if a company is popular enough, they can trample their consumers for a few extra bucks.

The reason is that for SP to be offline, you would need to store code which is now exclusively server side (item drops, monster spawns, etc.) on the client computer. Thus allowing replication of those code and allowing pirated servers to pop up much more easily.

I'm not really saying this is a good reason at all, as the only way in hell I'm ever going to buy D3 is if I can play it offline; but this is the reason.

That's still not an excuse for a game that's been 10 years in development. Blizzard could of spent time making a game that eclipses Diablo 2 in every way, provides a good SP and MP experience and brings hundreds of hours of non repetitive gameplay to the table. But instead they chose to spend time working on an auction house, that they can get more money from (the cut of money Blizzard gets from the purchases their is MASSIVE). It's just a shame because I know Blizzard fanboys will continue to fanwank over this game, setting the example that if you have a loyal fanbase you can step on them as much as you want and they won't complain.

DustyDrB:
OK, so can someone explain this to me. I've never played a Diablo game, so I don't understand the rationale behind a single-player portion of any game being online-only. Even Demon's Souls is playable offline (hell, a lot of people prefer it like that).

So why make the single-player like that? What does it add?

Supposedly prevents cheating.

Why they couldn't just include a single-player mode completely severed from the multi-player?

Begins with a P and rhymes with Iracy.

DustyDrB:
So why make the single-player like that? What does it add?

For me it adds:

- 100ms lag for my 4 man with friends. I play with guys from canada, US, korea, australia and i live in mexico; granted the korean guy has higher latency, but without dedicated servers this would be as laggy and a fuckfest as Magika for example.

- Joining whatever mission i want to do and do it with other people. Dunno why, maybe its only because its new, but i am enjoying the hack and slash a lot more whit other people around, we'll c in a few months.

- Persistent loot accessible everywhere. Because i tend to miss my savegames, but this would be doable with just cloud storage.

It also made it a pain in the ass to play if you wanted to play the release day (though i got lucky and didn't had problems at all), and unplayable without internet. And of course Blizz is making buckloads of money with this and the real money AH.

Give and take, i knew what i was buying, and so far so good. Spent 3-4 hours in the morning talking in vent and playing with a canadian friend i havent played with in ages, only that was worth it.

Nway, as a single player hack and slash RPG? It's mhee, thinking it as the first "multiplayer diablo clone"? it improves a LOT, and since i can't lan with friends this is as good as it gets.

ToastiestZombie:
-snip-

Ohh, so talking out of your ass, got it. Well, thats a bummer for my friend -.-

Woodsey:

DustyDrB:
OK, so can someone explain this to me. I've never played a Diablo game, so I don't understand the rationale behind a single-player portion of any game being online-only. Even Demon's Souls is playable offline (hell, a lot of people prefer it like that).

So why make the single-player like that? What does it add?

Supposedly prevents cheating.

Why they couldn't just include a single-player mode completely severed from the multi-player?

Begins with a P and rhymes with Iracy.

Actually it becomes with G and rhymes with Tweedy. They didn't do it because of pirates because pirates will ALWAYS find a way to get a game for free. It's not like the pirates would of ever bought the thing in the first place. They only did it so that they can get money from the auction house.

I'm very prone to nerdrade, but c'mon guys, this isn't that big of a deal.

Scarim Coral:

Admiral Stukov:
-snip-

My reason for buying the game in the first place (intially I wouldn't had bought it due its current features) is being obligated to my mate (a hardcore Diablo fan who refuse to try the beta since to him it was "unfinished") since we all know a game is ten time more fun when being played with friends (I don't exactly play alot of multiplayer sort of games). However in saying so he haven't bought it right away due to being short on cash at the money and will buy it at the end of this month.
I admit I am actually enjoying the game much to my suprise however this is the first time that I played an isometric rpg. I guess this would mean I would had loved playing Touchlight and the upcoming sequel.

To be totally honest, Torchlight 1 is a bit lacking in some areas. Like for example only a single town, a rather lacklustre story, and so forth. On the other hand it has far meatier combat, the pet that can go sell stuff for you so you won't have to retur to town every five minutes, and having the advantage of having so low system requirements you can basically run it on a toaster.
In either case it's 15 bucks on steam, or free if you preorder the sequel for 20.
And, perhaps most importantly, there's a free demo. Not nearly enough games have a demo these days.

 Pages 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked