What are these great advantages the online version brings?
Multiplayer, and bosses dropping pizzas.
Yeah, if only I could find a grindly clickfest P2W multiplayer RPG somewhere. Truly, Diablo III is revolutionizing the industry.
You know it's funny, you throw out "pay 2 win" in the case of diablo 3 like it's a prime example of "he who has the credit card conquers the game." But the availability of using the auction house to buy gear using ONLY in game currency kinda debunks that. It's a grey area of sorts. Yes, I used the AH to buy a better sword. I also didn't spend a dime besides what I paid for the game initially. Get drops, sell drops for gold, use said gold to buy better gear for yourself. It's a pretty standard setup for just about any MMO out there.
I know Diablo's not supposed to be an MMO but hey... never said it was perfect.
Adam Jensen: This is the next Assassin's Creed 2. First they'll come up with a server emulator and then they'll create a proper crack that doesn't even need an emulator.
Me neither. It doesn't look like something that's been in the works for 12 years. More like 2 years. I can't believe it took them this long for a game like that. And they butchered the game. Took away half of the feature one would expect a PC exclusive to have. A PC developer that doesn't add LAN support to their MULTIPLAYER games doesn't deserve my money. Instead I'm gonna buy 4 copies of Torchlight 2 for me and my friends.
GiglameshSoulEater: Another issue this kind of DRM means is that what happens when Blizzard shuts down or scrolls back he servers? I guess people will no longer be able to play. This is why I preferred old games. They don't have crap like this.
Eh, all that's happen is you'll start playing on the pirate servers, just you do for most online-capable games from dead companies
Me neither. It doesn't look like something that's been in the works for 12 years. More like 2 years.
Did they say that it was in development for 12 years? I am pretty sure it were just ~4y or so.
They were developing it secretly in house for a number of years either before or after WoW came out, then somewhere along the way they shit-canned the whole project and started from scratch. That was maybe 4 or 5 years ago, but in "total" they've been developing it for much longer. Not 12 years mind you but much longer than 4 years. People just assume it's been in development for 12 years since D2 was released that long ago. The reality is that WoW's initial release sucked up most if not all of their resources and it wasn't until it resulted in swimming pools of money that they could focus on D3 in earnest.
Honestly wish I could say where I read that, it was either here or on the D3 website some months ago.
OT: Hmm, true or not I've no doubt they'll get around to circumventing the system eventually. Good thing I'm not a Diablo fan or I'd be really pissed right now.
The RMAH could've been protected without forcing single player to be online.
Really? How so then?
people keep saying this, and yet have no idea what they are talking about. There is no way to do it. Having an offline mode, means all the data, (Including items) has to be stored on the customer computer. If the data is already on your computer, it is trivial to take the data, decrypt it, and duplicate it. This is exactly what happened in D2, and this is exactly what they aim to prevent in D3.
If you have a solution to somehow solve this dilemma, please, by all means, reveal it.
The RMAH could've been protected without forcing single player to be online.
Really? How so then?
people keep saying this, and yet have no idea what they are talking about. There is no way to do it. Having an offline mode, means all the data, (Including items) has to be stored on the customer computer. If the data is already on your computer, it is trivial to take the data, decrypt it, and duplicate it. This is exactly what happened in D2, and this is exactly what they aim to prevent in D3.
If you have a solution to somehow solve this dilemma, please, by all means, reveal it.
So, according to various people here, and various external sources, D3 operates much like an MMO. Level generation, item and mob placement, loot drops, all are calculated server-side. There's no reason multiplayer couldn't operate like that, while at the same time having the code available to do it locally for single player. Sure, hackers could reverse-engineer the data, figure out how to insert arbitrary items if they want, but big deal--it's single player.
Online, everything can be handled by the server. The server tells the client what items are in its inventory, equipped, dropped by mobs, everything. If the client tries to tell the server otherwise, the server can just reject it. They could go one further, and not only reject the data, but the client itself could be booted. That could get annoying if something started causing false positives though.
snowplow: This game marks the acceptance of several things: Always online DRM for singleplayer Ridiculous money schemes (HI 30% BLIZZARD CUT FROM AUCTION) Shit graphics Shit gameplay Shit voicework Shit story
This is the future. Gamers willingly pay $60 for this trash, proving to the industry that gamers will buy anything as long as its made by a well known company.
I'd rather give up gaming as a hobby than see another idiot praising Diablo 3 (DURR 9/10 ACROSS THE BOARD DESPITE IT BEING OBJECTIVELY SUBPAR)
You don't need emulated Diablo 3 for that, the legal purchasable game is more than enough to fit that description.
Don't forget that some gamers cheer that evolution on.
To a very large group of posters in this thread; Thanks for reminding me why I genuinely despised Blizz-fans.
I really don't see how the graphics are so shit, or why they need to be the main focus of the game, I am very happy with the graphics in D3 and I really don't see why they would need to be UBER STYLES BEST GRAPHICS EVAR!!!! like that is the only thing that matters ;/. The game was never trying to break any records with the graphics, blizzard has never been about making crazy graphics, but they have always consistantly made amazing cut scenes and diablo3s are no exception.
The game play is actually really good and everything I expected from a diablo game, fun addicting and so intense in hardcore.
The voice work i havn't had a problem with, in some parts it is quite funny but I'm not really paying that much attention to it so far, I don't think it was ever meant to be the main focus of the game, same with the story.
However I enjoy the lore of the diablo series, and the setting of the game, its a lot of fun for me.
You know unlike other games that get released and that is basically the finished product apart from extra paid for DLC or expansions, where bugs are not really fixed, no patching is done, blah blah blah. I know blizzard will be patching this game, adding new features into the online system, providing great customer support, fixing any balance issues, any errors an bugs that come up. They will provide an excellent service for the game for a long time (Judging by their other titles, there were still patches applied to bw even 10 years after its release). The price is justified by the ongoing service they provide in upkeeping their game. That and the fact that the replay of this game is very high, I know I will enjoy it for a very long time, for me it is definately worth the price.
Blizzard is a good and solid company, they might not always get everything right but they consistantly make very good games and don't drop their standards.
The always online is not that much of a bad thing, it doesn't just prevent piracy(or at least delay it), it also prevents the game from being full of hacks and bots and duped items and all this other trash that can really make the multiplayer experience less, for me that is worth it. I like the system they have made for the game to run this way aswell, it is so easy to join your friends games, or play alone if you want, I understand there are some issues with lag atm but I am confident Blizzard will make this not so much of a problem. They do actually address and fix issues their customers raise.
I am enjoying the gold auction house, I don't really care about the real money one, and I firmly believe it is not going to have any effect on the game for anybody except the people that use it. People can't buy hacked items, they have to drop in the game, the people who do buy these items have to play enouph to be at the right level to use them, and if you are really finding such a huge problem with it just play hardcore, the game is way more fun in hardcore anyway.
Yes they have appealed to a wider audience with d3, you can play more casual if you want in soft core, or you can play more intensly with hard core.
The RMAH could've been protected without forcing single player to be online.
Really? How so then?
people keep saying this, and yet have no idea what they are talking about. There is no way to do it. Having an offline mode, means all the data, (Including items) has to be stored on the customer computer. If the data is already on your computer, it is trivial to take the data, decrypt it, and duplicate it. This is exactly what happened in D2, and this is exactly what they aim to prevent in D3.
If you have a solution to somehow solve this dilemma, please, by all means, reveal it.
So, according to various people here, and various external sources, D3 operates much like an MMO. Level generation, item and mob placement, loot drops, all are calculated server-side. There's no reason multiplayer couldn't operate like that, while at the same time having the code available to do it locally for single player. Sure, hackers could reverse-engineer the data, figure out how to insert arbitrary items if they want, but big deal--it's single player.
Online, everything can be handled by the server. The server tells the client what items are in its inventory, equipped, dropped by mobs, everything. If the client tries to tell the server otherwise, the server can just reject it. They could go one further, and not only reject the data, but the client itself could be booted. That could get annoying if something started causing false positives though.
It is still an incredible amount of work to make both. If you have already made the model with a client server setup with battle.net integrated and have to make the whole thing again without. That is a lot of work.
And with the single player split comes a whole new host of issues that customer service will have to deal with. "why cant I play with my friends with my single player char". You know that is a bloody stupid question, how many do you think who bought the game and dont think that? The popularity of the game it self and support becomes a new kind of issue. They are not making games just for you. They are making it for millions of users.
What are these great advantages the online version brings?
Multiplayer, and bosses dropping pizzas.
And day long server outages rendering us unable to play. YAY!
Dont really mind em tbh. Ofc, wont be a blizz fanboy and deny it being total incompetence from their side (they knew it was going to be popular, and its not like they lack money :D ), but after a few reality checks it doesnt matter. Got so much other things to get done, so a days break just gives me time to wrap those things up.
Things like this just dont get to me, at all. Guess Im just not an angry person.
And day long server outages rendering us unable to play. YAY!
Dont really mind em tbh. Ofc, wont be a blizz fanboy and deny it being total incompetence from their side (they knew it was going to be popular, and its not like they lack money :D ), but after a few reality checks it doesnt matter. Got so much other things to get done, so a days break just gives me time to wrap those things up.
Things like this just dont get to me, at all. Guess Im just not an angry person.
It was just annoying to have it happen on a weekend of all things...
Yeah, if only I could find a grindly clickfest P2W multiplayer RPG somewhere. Truly, Diablo III is revolutionizing the industry.
You know it's funny, you throw out "pay 2 win" in the case of diablo 3 like it's a prime example of "he who has the credit card conquers the game." But the availability of using the auction house to buy gear using ONLY in game currency kinda debunks that. It's a grey area of sorts. Yes, I used the AH to buy a better sword. I also didn't spend a dime besides what I paid for the game initially. Get drops, sell drops for gold, use said gold to buy better gear for yourself. It's a pretty standard setup for just about any MMO out there.
I know Diablo's not supposed to be an MMO but hey... never said it was perfect.
Sure, you don't have to use the P2W mechanics. But they are certainly there for those who want them.
Grey Day for Elcia: It would work if they wanted it too, but they are so intent on squeezing money out of people with their real money auction house that they would never let it. See, all you have to do is make the single player version unable to connect to the servers. Done. If you start an offline character, they are permanently offline. Forever. No servers. No internet.
Totally fair how that works out, huh.
You missed the sarcastic point entirely. The point was that even if there were seperate online and offline people found ways to hack it. It happens no matter what game you play, take cod for example.
Um, I don't know if you actually play any of the Call of Duty games online, but hacking is very rare and anyone who does it very quickly finds themselves banned. I've played Modern Warfare 1 and 2, as well as Black Ops extensively and in all my years there, saw... maybe one hacker.
Besides, your entire point is irrelevant. You're saying there's no point in offering people single player content because people will find a way to hack multiplayer. Nice logic.
When did I say there was no point? I said that no matter how much you separate them people will still hack online so offering single player separate is not going to change if people hack online or not. Also, there are tons of hackers in cod games, play about an hour of CoD 4 and you'll find a hacked lobby on live.
Yeah, if only I could find a grindly clickfest P2W multiplayer RPG somewhere. Truly, Diablo III is revolutionizing the industry.
You know it's funny, you throw out "pay 2 win" in the case of diablo 3 like it's a prime example of "he who has the credit card conquers the game." But the availability of using the auction house to buy gear using ONLY in game currency kinda debunks that. It's a grey area of sorts. Yes, I used the AH to buy a better sword. I also didn't spend a dime besides what I paid for the game initially. Get drops, sell drops for gold, use said gold to buy better gear for yourself. It's a pretty standard setup for just about any MMO out there.
I know Diablo's not supposed to be an MMO but hey... never said it was perfect.
Sure, you don't have to use the P2W mechanics. But they are certainly there for those who want them.
I still dont get this non-sense of pay to win. There will be no gear on the RMAH that wasn't obtained through gameplay. P2W is a sentence used about micro transaction games where you have to pay to be competitive. It just doesn't work here.
You know it's funny, you throw out "pay 2 win" in the case of diablo 3 like it's a prime example of "he who has the credit card conquers the game." But the availability of using the auction house to buy gear using ONLY in game currency kinda debunks that. It's a grey area of sorts. Yes, I used the AH to buy a better sword. I also didn't spend a dime besides what I paid for the game initially. Get drops, sell drops for gold, use said gold to buy better gear for yourself. It's a pretty standard setup for just about any MMO out there.
I know Diablo's not supposed to be an MMO but hey... never said it was perfect.
Sure, you don't have to use the P2W mechanics. But they are certainly there for those who want them.
I still dont get this non-sense of pay to win. There will be no gear on the RMAH that wasn't obtained through gameplay. P2W is a sentence used about micro transaction games where you have to pay to be competitive. It just doesn't work here.
No, P2W as 90% of the internet uses it covers games where paying money gives you a gameplay advantage at all, not just games where paying money is the only way to get a certain gameplay advantage. But that's just semantics. Regardless of what we call it, the RMAH is part of a pretty messed up trend in game development. Edmund Mcmillen has a lot to say about this sort of design - he's specifically talking about mobile games, but his comments can be generalized to games like Diablo 3 as well.
There is an on going theme these days to use a very basic video game shell and hang a "power up carrot" in front of the player. the player sees this carrot, and wants it! all the player needs to do is a few very rudimentary repetitious actions to attain it, once they get to it, another drops down and asks them to do more... but then the catch... instead of achieving these "goals" by running on the tread mill, you can instead just pay a single dollar and you instantly get to your goal! better yet pay 10 and unlock all your goals without even having to ever play the game!
words can not express how fucking wrong and horrible this is, for games, for gamers and for the platform as a whole... this business tactic is a slap in the face to actual game design and embodies everything that is wrong with the mobile/casual video game scene.
Sure, you don't have to use the P2W mechanics. But they are certainly there for those who want them.
I still dont get this non-sense of pay to win. There will be no gear on the RMAH that wasn't obtained through gameplay. P2W is a sentence used about micro transaction games where you have to pay to be competitive. It just doesn't work here.
No, P2W as 90% of the internet uses it covers games where paying money gives you a gameplay advantage at all, not just games where paying money is the only way to get a certain gameplay advantage. But that's just semantics. Regardless of what we call it, the RMAH is part of a pretty messed up trend in game development. Edmund Mcmillen has a lot to say about this sort of design - he's specifically talking about mobile games, but his comments can be generalized to games like Diablo 3 as well.
There is an on going theme these days to use a very basic video game shell and hang a "power up carrot" in front of the player. the player sees this carrot, and wants it! all the player needs to do is a few very rudimentary repetitious actions to attain it, once they get to it, another drops down and asks them to do more... but then the catch... instead of achieving these "goals" by running on the tread mill, you can instead just pay a single dollar and you instantly get to your goal! better yet pay 10 and unlock all your goals without even having to ever play the game!
words can not express how fucking wrong and horrible this is, for games, for gamers and for the platform as a whole... this business tactic is a slap in the face to actual game design and embodies everything that is wrong with the mobile/casual video game scene.
Diablo has always been a P2W system. Blizzard just wants a hand in the money that is switching hands via its product.
Sure, you don't have to use the P2W mechanics. But they are certainly there for those who want them.
I still dont get this non-sense of pay to win. There will be no gear on the RMAH that wasn't obtained through gameplay. P2W is a sentence used about micro transaction games where you have to pay to be competitive. It just doesn't work here.
No, P2W as 90% of the internet uses it covers games where paying money gives you a gameplay advantage at all, not just games where paying money is the only way to get a certain gameplay advantage. But that's just semantics. Regardless of what we call it, the RMAH is part of a pretty messed up trend in game development. Edmund Mcmillen has a lot to say about this sort of design - he's specifically talking about mobile games, but his comments can be generalized to games like Diablo 3 as well.
There is an on going theme these days to use a very basic video game shell and hang a "power up carrot" in front of the player. the player sees this carrot, and wants it! all the player needs to do is a few very rudimentary repetitious actions to attain it, once they get to it, another drops down and asks them to do more... but then the catch... instead of achieving these "goals" by running on the tread mill, you can instead just pay a single dollar and you instantly get to your goal! better yet pay 10 and unlock all your goals without even having to ever play the game!
words can not express how fucking wrong and horrible this is, for games, for gamers and for the platform as a whole... this business tactic is a slap in the face to actual game design and embodies everything that is wrong with the mobile/casual video game scene.
First of all unless you are 90% of the internet, then that statistic is wrong.
Secondly you are making a strawman.
3rdly your attempt to give weight to your strawman you are name dropping someone quote completely out of context and with no relevance to what is going on. If his quote counts about D3 then his quote is incorrect since the same method of gear distribution was happening in D2.
3rdly your attempt to give weight to your strawman you are name dropping someone quote completely out of context and with no relevance to what is going on.
Grindy games that establish a reward mechanic, then allow players to pay money for rewards? Sounds pretty relevant to me.
Diablo has always been a P2W system. Blizzard just wants a hand in the money that is switching hands via its product.
The solution would be to design the game such that P2W isn't an issue in the first place, not to make it a core pillar of gameplay (to the extent that they remove core features like modding and an offline mode).
Darkmantle: If you have a solution to somehow solve this dilemma, please, by all means, reveal it.
Separate online and offline characters. Still play online single player as you currently can where those can later be played with others and use RMAH but an offline mode as well for people who just want to play single player and not care for the online components, completely shut off from it making it still safe.
The solution would be to design the game such that P2W isn't an issue in the first place, not to make it a core pillar of gameplay (to the extent that they remove core features like modding and an offline mode).
They did that in WoW. They removed trade by making items BoP. It didn't help. You have to remove progression completely to remove this. To even suggest this is asinine.
This has nothing to do with hacks and cheats and everything to do with money.
Sorry, but you're wrong. The reason it's always online is -not- piracy, it's to add a layer of anti-hacking security, which is in turn necessary to make Blizzard money on the RMAH.
This is not a defense of that, by the way, I just want to see anger for the right reasons.
Wait, I think we sort of agree... Blizzard wants people to be unable to cheat and hack, as doing so would make their little auction house money grab useless.
The game is going to take up a shitload of server space.
Server space accrues costs.
Instead of having a monthly fee for a game of this magnitude, Blizzard released an streamlined method of real money item auctions (which people were doing on eBay anyway), and are taking a small amount of each transfer. They could potentially lose money off this idea, but it will help pay for the servers SOMEWHAT.
So stop bashing them for the freaking auction house.
Also, Diablo 3 is pretty sweet for anyone who has a stable internet connection (90% of you) and the ability to not get butthurt over silly little intricacies of games (apparently about 5% of you).
Darkmantle: If you have a solution to somehow solve this dilemma, please, by all means, reveal it.
Separate online and offline characters. Still play online single player as you currently can where those can later be played with others and use RMAH but an offline mode as well for people who just want to play single player and not care for the online components, completely shut off from it making it still safe.
Immensely simple solution.
That's exactly what Diablo 2 was and it didn't work.
Grey Day for Elcia: Why are we in a situation where people who stole Diablo 3 are able to launch the game and just... play, while people who purchased the game have to wait for servers to be fixed to play single player?
Steal the cracked game, play it.
Buy the game, don't get to play it.
That DRM sure did work >_>
Online only was never about the DRM or piracy. It was keeping the game less susceptible to cheating and hacks.
~If you truly believe that you are being incredibly naive. It's partly to promote the auction house, partly DLC. It doesn't stop hacking. WoW gets hacked and they are using the same system here. ~Not to mention, how does forcing you to be online stop hscks and cheating? If im playing offline, who cares?
I simply refuse to buy Diablo III until either the always on is removed or the server issues are fixed and an Australian server is setup (no I will not connect to a US server and lag just to play a SP game). For a company that has the most popular MMO on earth and years of experience in MMO games not to mention popular games in general, its pathetic and disgraceful that the login issues are happening. If they want always on DRM, then they HAVE to make it work all the time, or else us gamers need to tell them to get stuffed.
Sorry, but you're wrong. The reason it's always online is -not- piracy, it's to add a layer of anti-hacking security, which is in turn necessary to make Blizzard money on the RMAH.
This is not a defense of that, by the way, I just want to see anger for the right reasons.
Wait, I think we sort of agree... Blizzard wants people to be unable to cheat and hack, as doing so would make their little auction house money grab useless.
The game is going to take up a shitload of server space.
Server space accrues costs.
Instead of having a monthly fee for a game of this magnitude, Blizzard released an streamlined method of real money item auctions (which people were doing on eBay anyway), and are taking a small amount of each transfer. They could potentially lose money off this idea, but it will help pay for the servers SOMEWHAT.
So stop bashing them for the freaking auction house.
Also, Diablo 3 is pretty sweet for anyone who has a stable internet connection (90% of you) and the ability to not get butthurt over silly little intricacies of games (apparently about 5% of you).
Darkmantle: If you have a solution to somehow solve this dilemma, please, by all means, reveal it.
Separate online and offline characters. Still play online single player as you currently can where those can later be played with others and use RMAH but an offline mode as well for people who just want to play single player and not care for the online components, completely shut off from it making it still safe.
Immensely simple solution.
That's exactly what Diablo 2 was and it didn't work.
You should go ahead and watch the Jimquisition. Right now. Even if you hate Jim with every fiber of your being like me. Watch it and post this argument in the video's thread.
The solution would be to design the game such that P2W isn't an issue in the first place, not to make it a core pillar of gameplay (to the extent that they remove core features like modding and an offline mode).
They did that in WoW. They removed trade by making items BoP. It didn't help. You have to remove progression completely to remove this. To even suggest this is asinine.
Yeah, you could make a very good case that this kind of grindy RPG slot-machine is inherently going to be poorly balanced. I mean, you have items that are inherently better than other items and mechanics that significantly limit the access to those items. If you wanted to eliminate P2W, you'd probably need to eliminate scarcity or eliminate progression based on finding better items. Blizzard, of course, would rather make hilarious amounts of money than make a balanced game.
Grey Day for Elcia: Why are we in a situation where people who stole Diablo 3 are able to launch the game and just... play, while people who purchased the game have to wait for servers to be fixed to play single player?
Steal the cracked game, play it.
Buy the game, don't get to play it.
That DRM sure did work >_>
Online only was never about the DRM or piracy. It was keeping the game less susceptible to cheating and hacks.
If they are worried about cheating and hacks, make an online mods and an offline mode, where a character made in the later cannot be used in the former and vice-versa.
This has nothing to do with hacks and cheats and everything to do with money.
Wrong.
While you are right in that this has something to do with money (Of course it does, since it's Activision-Blizzard now with Captain Kotick on bridge), you are wrong in that it doesn't have anything to do with cheats and hacks.
You see, even if they separate the offline and online components in the game, the offline-components will still have to reside on the players computer for there to be an offline-mode. Hackers can therefore use the information about how the game is run locally to create hacks that also work online. This is partially why Diablo 2 was so hack-infested. It had seperate online and offline-modes like by your suggestions, but since hackers had access to the offline mode, they could easily use that knowledge to craft hacks.
Unless Blizzard made some easily exploitable mistakes, the difficulty of creating a hack without access to the offline mode is increased massively.
Grey Day for Elcia: Why are we in a situation where people who stole Diablo 3 are able to launch the game and just... play, while people who purchased the game have to wait for servers to be fixed to play single player?
Steal the cracked game, play it.
Buy the game, don't get to play it.
That DRM sure did work >_>
Online only was never about the DRM or piracy. It was keeping the game less susceptible to cheating and hacks.
~If you truly believe that you are being incredibly naive. It's partly to promote the auction house, partly DLC. It doesn't stop hacking. WoW gets hacked and they are using the same system here. ~Not to mention, how does forcing you to be online stop hscks and cheating? If im playing offline, who cares?
Diablo 1&2 online dupes and item hacking came from offline aspects of those games. They tried to limit it in D2, by separating the offline and online aspects, but it didn't work.
It is still an incredible amount of work to make both. If you have already made the model with a client server setup with battle.net integrated and have to make the whole thing again without. That is a lot of work.
And with the single player split comes a whole new host of issues that customer service will have to deal with. "why cant I play with my friends with my single player char". You know that is a bloody stupid question, how many do you think who bought the game and dont think that? The popularity of the game it self and support becomes a new kind of issue. They are not making games just for you. They are making it for millions of users.
No, it's not really a lot of work. Code reuse is quite a time-saver.
As for the other thing, they've dealt with that before. Single and multiplayer characters have been separated since the very beginning. Classic Diablo had no mixing of SP and MP characters at all--you wanted to play multiplayer, you started a new character.
Online only was never about the DRM or piracy. It was keeping the game less susceptible to cheating and hacks.
~If you truly believe that you are being incredibly naive. It's partly to promote the auction house, partly DLC. It doesn't stop hacking. WoW gets hacked and they are using the same system here. ~Not to mention, how does forcing you to be online stop hscks and cheating? If im playing offline, who cares?
Diablo 1&2 online dupes and item hacking came from offline aspects of those games. They tried to limit it in D2, by separating the offline and online aspects, but it didn't work.
The dupe bug in Classic Diablo stems from a lack of sanity checking in the code for picking up items. It really didn't have anything to do with online or offline. The creation and importing of hacked items was possible because the game had little protection from its memory being overwritten by an outside source. Again, not really anything to do with online or offline there. D2's problems similarly stem from a lack of sanity checking between server and clients.
The main issue with both is that the peers all trust each other to some degree. They likely had to, due to hardware limitations back then they simply may not have had the power to act otherwise. D3 however is different. The server now essentially acts as God, determining everything from player positioning (handled by clients previously) to loot drops. The server tells the clients what they have, what they get, what they're hitting, and doesn't take anything in return (or shouldn't, as it would be silly for the server to say, "a bronze ring of mana dropped" and then blithely accept a client telling it "I picked up an obsidian ring of the zodiac"). If Classic Diablo had had this model, the infamous Godly Plate of the Whale (impossible for the game code to generate on any level, and thus can only be imported with a trainer) would never have existed--at least in multiplayer, where the server could just up and say no. It'd work in single player, with no server to tell the game no, but big deal, if people want to cheat (and get a crappy armor, GPoW sucks, it was only popular because people are idiots) in single player let them.
It is still an incredible amount of work to make both. If you have already made the model with a client server setup with battle.net integrated and have to make the whole thing again without. That is a lot of work.
And with the single player split comes a whole new host of issues that customer service will have to deal with. "why cant I play with my friends with my single player char". You know that is a bloody stupid question, how many do you think who bought the game and dont think that? The popularity of the game it self and support becomes a new kind of issue. They are not making games just for you. They are making it for millions of users.
No, it's not really a lot of work. Code reuse is quite a time-saver.
As for the other thing, they've dealt with that before. Single and multiplayer characters have been separated since the very beginning. Classic Diablo had no mixing of SP and MP characters at all--you wanted to play multiplayer, you started a new character.
Now that is factually false. You would almost have to start from scratch when it comes to char creation and remake the system for how items register because there isn't an account overlap.
And classic Diablo 2 didn't have the Battle.net that we have to day. That is a bad comparison to say the least. Also you didn't have the level of service now. Totally different world.
It is still an incredible amount of work to make both. If you have already made the model with a client server setup with battle.net integrated and have to make the whole thing again without. That is a lot of work.
And with the single player split comes a whole new host of issues that customer service will have to deal with. "why cant I play with my friends with my single player char". You know that is a bloody stupid question, how many do you think who bought the game and dont think that? The popularity of the game it self and support becomes a new kind of issue. They are not making games just for you. They are making it for millions of users.
No, it's not really a lot of work. Code reuse is quite a time-saver.
As for the other thing, they've dealt with that before. Single and multiplayer characters have been separated since the very beginning. Classic Diablo had no mixing of SP and MP characters at all--you wanted to play multiplayer, you started a new character.
Now that is factually false. You would almost have to start from scratch when it comes to char creation and remake the system for how items register because there isn't an account overlap.
Of course, it wouldn't need to have any account overlap, it wouldn't need an account at all. Single player characters wouldn't be tied to an account well unless you consider the user account on Windows as why would they need to be? They're local.
And classic Diablo 2 didn't have the Battle.net that we have to day. That is a bad comparison to say the least. Also you didn't have the level of service now. Totally different world.
I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. Yes, D2 worked differently. I think I pretty much covered that. I'm not pointing to it as a successful model (albeit moreso than Classic Diablo's peer to peer system), if that's what you're thinking.
Of course, it wouldn't need to have any account overlap, it wouldn't need an account at all. Single player characters wouldn't be tied to an account well unless you consider the user account on Windows as why would they need to be? They're local.
What you dont seem to understand how big a deal the account is. Where do your gold register? it registered at you Battle.net account before. You need to set up a completely different system to undertake this. Everything from items, to lvls needs to register somewhere. The Battle.net account was at the center of that and now just make a char? Not that simple. the system it self need to be remade almost from the bottom up. You just removed the spine of the game.
Of course, it wouldn't need to have any account overlap, it wouldn't need an account at all. Single player characters wouldn't be tied to an account well unless you consider the user account on Windows as why would they need to be? They're local.
What you dont seem to understand how big a deal the account is. Where do your gold register? it registered at you Battle.net account before. You need to set up a completely different system to undertake this. Everything from items, to lvls needs to register somewhere. The Battle.net account was at the center of that and now just make a char? Not that simple. the system it self need to be remade almost from the bottom up. You just removed the spine of the game.
No, I think it's you who doesn't understand. An account wouldn't be needed because instead of storing the character data in a file on a remote server, it's stored in a file on the local host. All the stuff you're worried about would actually be the same, only the destination for the output would be different. That's not very hard to change. The concepts needed to accomplish it are taught in basic and intermediate level programming courses.
Of course, it wouldn't need to have any account overlap, it wouldn't need an account at all. Single player characters wouldn't be tied to an account well unless you consider the user account on Windows as why would they need to be? They're local.
What you dont seem to understand how big a deal the account is. Where do your gold register? it registered at you Battle.net account before. You need to set up a completely different system to undertake this. Everything from items, to lvls needs to register somewhere. The Battle.net account was at the center of that and now just make a char? Not that simple. the system it self need to be remade almost from the bottom up. You just removed the spine of the game.
No, I think it's you who doesn't understand. An account wouldn't be needed because instead of storing the character data in a file on a remote server, it's stored in a file on the local host. All the stuff you're worried about would actually be the same, only the destination for the output would be different. That's not very hard to change. The concepts needed to accomplish it are taught in basic and intermediate level programming courses.
Are you kidding me? You cannot be serious. What exactly is your exp with this? The whole game itself is build up around the account system. To say "You just save it in a file on the local computer" Is no where near as simple. How the heck do you intend to do that? Just copy paste the battle.net system for saving the chars. Oh yeah that is integrated to all the other feature that needed them to force the system to be online. How can I break this down for you. This is a square peg round hole situation. Its not just "Oh you just save the files on the computer" First you need to make the char files work without the framework of battle.net as well as make something that would work in place of the battle.net account. We are talking at the very least 6 months of work here.
Sorry, but you're wrong. The reason it's always online is -not- piracy, it's to add a layer of anti-hacking security, which is in turn necessary to make Blizzard money on the RMAH.
This is not a defense of that, by the way, I just want to see anger for the right reasons.
Wait, I think we sort of agree... Blizzard wants people to be unable to cheat and hack, as doing so would make their little auction house money grab useless.
The game is going to take up a shitload of server space.
Server space accrues costs.
Instead of having a monthly fee for a game of this magnitude, Blizzard released an streamlined method of real money item auctions (which people were doing on eBay anyway), and are taking a small amount of each transfer. They could potentially lose money off this idea, but it will help pay for the servers SOMEWHAT.
So stop bashing them for the freaking auction house.
Also, Diablo 3 is pretty sweet for anyone who has a stable internet connection (90% of you) and the ability to not get butthurt over silly little intricacies of games (apparently about 5% of you).
Darkmantle: If you have a solution to somehow solve this dilemma, please, by all means, reveal it.
Separate online and offline characters. Still play online single player as you currently can where those can later be played with others and use RMAH but an offline mode as well for people who just want to play single player and not care for the online components, completely shut off from it making it still safe.
Immensely simple solution.
That's exactly what Diablo 2 was and it didn't work.
THAT IS NOT WHAT DIABLO 2 WAS! I guess no one here ever actually played Diablo 2 other than as a circle jerk with their friends, but for those of us who have participated in ladder matches, and topped the charts, D2 had Single-player(offline), and then OPEN Battle.net and CLOSED Battle.net(Online), and they even had officially tracked and Blizzard sponsored Ladder rankings, which often times had vastly different loot table from the current single-player and open battle.net version of the game. Usually the next patch would allow access to these items single-player and in open battle.net, but in the CLOSED battle.net online competitive environment there was no way to get these items, or dupe these items, as they were stored server side, and were not available otherwise, and your characters on the closed servers were stored server side.
What this means is that you are right, it is IMMENSELY complicated to design this system, and I doubt anyone here could do it... BUT BLIZZARD ALREADY HAS!!! They just decided to shit on their fan base, because the pre-orders alone more than covered all the costs that D3 has and likely will accrue.
God... Really, no one else here has played D2 competitively on the closed battle.net servers? Really? You guys don't deserve to discuss whether or not D3 is a disappointment to the fans if you've never played the previous games, clearly you aren't a fan...
EDIT: Proof:Does the ladder offer anything beyond a more stable economy? Yes there are some items that can only be obtained with a ladder character such as some class specific and elite uniques. There are also some ladder-only rune words as well as cube recipes that can only be created by a ladder character. While these items can eventually make their way to non-ladder after a ladder reset, they can only be initially found or created by using a ladder character.(http://classic.battle.net/diablo2exp/basics/charactertypes.shtml)
God... Really, no one else here has played D2 competitively on the closed battle.net servers? Really? You guys don't deserve to discuss whether or not D3 is a disappointment to the fans if you've never played the previous games, clearly you aren't a fan...
That paragraph makes it hard to take you seriously with your "true-fan" attitude that you have going there.
God... Really, no one else here has played D2 competitively on the closed battle.net servers? Really? You guys don't deserve to discuss whether or not D3 is a disappointment to the fans if you've never played the previous games, clearly you aren't a fan...
That paragraph makes it hard to take you seriously with your "true-fan" attitude that you have going there.
How? Can you argue with anything at all that I said? No, except for my unrelated opinion that people who quote how broken D2 was need to actually play the game if they are going to say stupid crap... And I never said I was a true-fan... I'm not really I never played Diablo, and while I got into D2 alot, I haven't bought D3 either... all the release of D3 did for me was make me create a new ladder character on may 2nd when they reset the D2 ladders... If you think I have a "true-fan" attitude, then it just goes to show how little knowledge anyone else has displayed about what is and is not possible in both a Diablo game, and in programming in general.
You know it's funny, you throw out "pay 2 win" in the case of diablo 3 like it's a prime example of "he who has the credit card conquers the game." But the availability of using the auction house to buy gear using ONLY in game currency kinda debunks that. It's a grey area of sorts. Yes, I used the AH to buy a better sword. I also didn't spend a dime besides what I paid for the game initially. Get drops, sell drops for gold, use said gold to buy better gear for yourself. It's a pretty standard setup for just about any MMO out there.
I know Diablo's not supposed to be an MMO but hey... never said it was perfect.