Backlash over online requirement surprises Diablo 3 developer

Gamers haven’t been thrilled at the prospect that Diablo 3 will require a persistent Internet connection for the single-player component of the game. According to senior producer Alex Mayberry, forcing users to maintain a link to Blizzard’s servers will allow the company to “provide a much a much more stable, connected, safer experience than we could if we let people play off-line.” You know, because safety has always been a big concern with single-player games that run entirely offline.

Although one might assume that combating piracy motivated Blizzard’s decision, MTV says otherwise. Vice President of Online Technologies Robert Bridenbecker told the site that DRM was never part of the equation when Blizzard discussed making Diablo 3 an online game. Instead, the company wanted to create a consistent user experience that allowed characters to move seamlessly between the game’s single-player and multiplayer elements.

Bridenbecker has been surprised by the backlash, citing that Blizzard has been doing online games for 15 years, and that the industry as a whole is moving in that direction. Requiring an Internet connection for an MMO like World of Warcraft is very different than mandating one for an RPG like Diablo, though.

I’ve never been all that into the Diablo series, but I’m curious to see whether enterprising crackers will manage to hack their way around the online requirement. Given how quickly DRM schemes are broken these days, I’d expect an offline patch to appear on torrent sites not to long after Diablo 3‘s official release, if not before the game hits store shelves.

Comments closed
    • provoko
    • 8 years ago

    I want offline single player, I want lan, I want mods, I don’t want to play on Blizzard servers.

    • johng123
    • 8 years ago

    you are retarded if you think blizzard is actually surprised that people don’t like DRM. blizzards out of touch? are you retarded? you are also retarded if you think pc gaming is better than console gaming. some people don’t like dealing with antivirus and stupid shit interrupting you while you are gaming and the infinite amount of other stupid shit that you nerds have grown accustomed to and don’t even think about anymore because you spend all day every day on the computer

      • morphine
      • 8 years ago

      Heh. Thanks for the laugh.

      Now can I stereotype the typical console jock in return? Please? Pretty please? With a cherry on top?

        • johng123
        • 8 years ago

        did i hit a little too close to home for you?

          • morphine
          • 8 years ago

          Keep’em coming! That way I don’t even have to bother typing up the stereotype.

            • johng123
            • 8 years ago

            lawl, u mad

          • Cuhulin
          • 8 years ago

          Awww, a sentence that didn’t start with “you are retarded if”. And here, I had thought that was your “here’s your sign” phrase!

          Blizzard itself acknowledged being out of touch with something about its consumers when it said it was surprised by the very predictable backlash regarding D3.

            • johng123
            • 8 years ago

            thats called lying, theyre not out of touch idiot, out of touch would mean the backlash actually surprised them

      • CaptTomato
      • 8 years ago

      The 2 biggest problems PC gamers face is launch day difficulty due to cheap as chips QC, and patching required for unpopular hardware, but hang on a sec, don’t consoles also face launch day problems….I think they do, so if one chooses to go with popular PC gear{like I’ve done}, there’s rarely a problem that isn’t fixed within a few days, sometimes a few short weeks.

      I strongly suspect that many console gamers haven’t experienced a true PC game, haven’t experienced how slick and adjustable games like Far Cry, Fear05, Crysis+WH, and even the PC only racing sims with firstclass MP and every possible option for ensuring maximum performance from your steering wheel, unlike GT5 which forces you to accept what they deem appropriate.

      Yeah, consoles really, really are better than PC games despite being low rent turds on most occasions, and even the good console games are no match for PC games from a GFX POV, so you’re really just championing a device aimed at kids…perhaps that explains it, you’re a tween and have NFI, LOL.

        • johng123
        • 8 years ago

        no offense, nerd, but a keyboard and computer mouse are pretty laughable input devices. if you didnt spend all day every day on the computer you would realize that a joystick is a lot more fun. this is coming from someone who played more diablo 2 and unreal tournament than everyone else here combined. once you grow up a little bit and mature and realize that you are wasting your life being on a computer all day every day you will realize that that the “gfx pov” doesn’t matter and that you dont want to spend so much time configuring your computer and trying to get it to work when you can just use a console. not to mention a console costs way less than your computer. most people have a life and so the argument that you can build a computer from parts that plays a game at a higher resolution than a console is pretty laughable

          • CaptTomato
          • 8 years ago

          Listen deadshit, knock off the attitude and don’t speak such utter nonsense about a joystick being superior, it’s merely an option, however it’s commonly understood that when fast movements are required a KB&M is superior, unless u stupidly think the best FPSers use a gamepad, LOL.

          As for having a life, it’s obvious you’re just an arrogant and broke teen{I’m 43}, and as I’ve explained before the actual cost of ownership is peanuts anyway, but it’s clear you don’t value anything except convenience and the consumption of any ole shit no matter how inferior to the PC version or how gimped it is due to being developed for 6yr old HW and the inferiority of a gamepad in the firstplace.

            • l33t-g4m3r
            • 8 years ago

            Don’t feed the troll. He’s obviously trolling.

            • sweatshopking
            • 8 years ago

            not that i agree with him, or his attitude, but you’re not doing the best job arguing with him.

            -you counter his opinion on joysticks/gamepads with your own opinion, both are obviously anecdotal, and you might be talking about FPS, and he might be talking platform, in which case you’re both right.
            -you argue with his accurate lower cost point by saying “you’re a broke kid”, which is really irrelevant. I’m broke, and your elitist “i’m rich and 43″ point detracts from intelligent discussion.
            -his accurate argument that the console is more convenient, and generally easier to use with no required F’ing with to fix is countered with ” it’s clear you don’t value anything except convenience and the consumption of any ole ****” when he clearly made clear he values his convenience.

            I don’t like his attitude any more than you do, but you’re not winning this one currently. part of the issue is that both sides are presenting [i<] opinions [/i<] , which are hard to prove/disprove. consoles have their place, and pc's have long been sliding into a fps/strategy pit, with not much else coming over. the reality is that consoles are a better place to play many games, like SFIV ( i own it on pc and it blows), 90% of the worlds platform games, most racing games, fitness games, etc. Really anything but shooters and strategy is better on a console.

            • CaptTomato
            • 8 years ago

            “‘most racing games”‘

            Even GT5 doesn’t fully support the very popular G27 racing wheel, unlike 2008’s GTR Evo[PC only} which gives me complete support including full button mapping, proper FFB and my choice when it comes to steering values.

            I’m not rich btw, but I have enough to buy a new PC every few yrs, and considering how cheap they are, I can’t see the crazy objection to their cost unless one is an unemployed actor etc.

            As for all that consoles offer to those who want them, that’s fine, but why degrade/gimp the PC version?….I mean if they want me to stop spending on gear and software, they’ll succeed…..hopefully a much more powerful DX11 PS4 is around the corner and PC games won’t have to suffer much.

            Consider BF3{at least the HD promo vids}….I’d be happy with that and small increases along the way for a long time as it looks so good, but Bioshock2 was degraded compared to B1, FONew Vegas was degraded compared to F03, F1 2010 was degraded AFTER the patch for heavens sakes, and don’t forget, some of the games which the latest releases are based on, were console ports anyway, so with some games, we’re trying to catch up to console port quality from 2007.

            • sweatshopking
            • 8 years ago

            whoopdido. it doesn’t work with a wheel.

            i can’t afford to upgrade every few years, and whilst i currently am unemployed, couldn’t afford it when i was working. it’s called being high school educated. there are millions of us in NA, so i’m not alone here. minimum wage is crap pay, but it’s what i typically make (or slightly above).

            why gimp the pc? they don’t. they straight over port it. you’re asking for them to do a ton MORE work for a smaller market. some do. some don’t.

            I doubt a dx11 ps4 is around the corner, as DX is microsoft’s platform, and sony isn’t likely to license it. they’ll probably continue with openGL

            i’m merely saying you’re being fanatical, and irrational.

            i agree pc ports often suck, but it’s a tertiary market. i can’t really complain too loudly. if the pc version isn’t great, don’t buy it, which i understand is frustrating, but to argue that “OMG CONSOLES ARE GARBAGE I HATE THEM ALL!!!!!!!11111” with anecdotal evidence is silly.

            • CaptTomato
            • 8 years ago

            “””whoopdido. it doesn’t work with a wheel”””

            Something else you don’t own huh?…I just bought a G27 for $400aud.
            Your problem seems to be that you want me and those who prefer the PC advantage to drop down to your level, I mean that’s your real argument, it’s not really about the features that consoles have that I’ve overlooked, you can’t stand it that someone else might have more than you.

            If the PC isn’t that great of course I won’t buy it, but why should I stand mute just cause the casual gaming crowd are unaware of how good PC games used to be, and how much better they should be.

            • sweatshopking
            • 8 years ago

            no. i don’t [i<] have [/i<] a problem. you're the one with the problem. i was merely saying your losing this argument too a fool. 400$ on a [i<] video game wheel [/i<] ? now i just think maybe you're a fool. i don't give a rats what you've got. seriously, don't be ridiculous. my point was that you're taking a stand that doesn't need to be taken. consoles and pc's can co-exist, without all the fanboy rage you've got. just have a hug bro.

            • CaptTomato
            • 8 years ago

            Mate, I don’t need your advice on dealing with trolls or nutters ok, and we’re way off topic, so stay on track.
            You’re mighty talkative for a PS3 fanboy, LOLOLOL.

            • sweatshopking
            • 8 years ago

            LOL. i haven’t owned a console since snes, and exclusively play pc. i just think you’re losing your mind.

            • CaptTomato
            • 8 years ago

            “”i can’t afford to upgrade every few years”””

            Translates as….I’m too lazy to work overtime, or find supplemental income.

            • sweatshopking
            • 8 years ago

            LOL. i guess. something like that. people have different requirements. I value the time i spend with my family, and i’m willing to “purchase” that time at the expense of my computer.

            • Anonymous Coward
            • 8 years ago

            My wife would never allow me to work overtime unless it was to put food on the table.

            • johng123
            • 8 years ago

            of course you can aim faster with a mouse, that doesn’t make it more fun or any less uncomfortable. also some people have these things called friends who also want to play split screen, but you never realized that because again, you live on a computer.

    • mcnabney
    • 8 years ago

    For the people who don’t think this will be an issue, have you considered how likely the servers will remain on after Diablo 4 comes out? I still play games I bought 8-10 years ago. Even GotY-type games like KotoR would have long ago shut down authentication servers. For that reason ALONE I will never purchase single-player games that require ongoing and eternal server approval to play.

      • tfp
      • 8 years ago

      That is true however have you considered that they could patch the game so that it doesn’t require the login some time in the future and that Blizzard supports games for years after they are created?

      At the end of the day, 50 bucks for that game will be worth more then dropping 50 going out to eat or going out to a movie.

        • Anonymous Coward
        • 8 years ago

        [quote<]At the end of the day, 50 bucks for that game will be worth more then dropping 50 going out to eat or going out to a movie.[/quote<] It might still be worth it, but you're falling into their profit-maximizing trap. They want rentals. Ownership is for them, not you. Some day, you'll think of the fun times you had playing this and that, and you'll see its all gone completely because they found it did not maximize their profits to allow you to keep the game around.

          • tfp
          • 8 years ago

          Could be, seeing how few games I buy anymore no one is maximizing profits on me. 🙂

        • provoko
        • 8 years ago

        That’s a huge IF. The interview has dev cleary saying that they don’t want to go down that path. So a patch would have to re-engineer the game.

        I could buy an audio CD or tape for $20, and that music lasts forever; Diablo 3 won’t unless they ship it with single player.

        • mcnabney
        • 8 years ago

        Send your bank account numbers to me and I promise I will put some money in there. Oh, and it will be $60 for the game.

      • swiecki
      • 8 years ago

      You do realize that Blizzard has a fantastic history of online support for their games, right? They supported starcraft for 9 years before starcraft 2 was released. In fact, battle.net for SC1 is still up to this day. They also don’t have a yearly franchise incentive (like madden with EA) to take down servers.

        • destroy.all.monsters
        • 8 years ago

        Pre-Activision, yes. Still utterly no excuse for not having single player offline.

        When C+C 4 did this it killed it because not only was it a bad game but no one wanted to put up with that. The problem is that people actually think branding means something – so they’ll follow whatever primrose path Blizzard wants to set up for them.

      • Madman
      • 8 years ago

      Bioshock servers are occasionally down, and you can’t even install the game then. That was the first DRM game I brought, accidentally, and definitely the last one.

    • burntham77
    • 8 years ago

    I love gaming, especially PC gaming, but even I have to say enough with the complaining. For cripe’s sake, it’s just a video game. A minor inconvenience will not make it a bad game. Besides, this is just how things are going, not just with Blizzard but across the board.

    And if your internet goes down for a day for some reason, well holy crap you might have to read a book on your tablet. Or go to the pool. They have those now.

      • Voldenuit
      • 8 years ago

      [quote<]And if your internet goes down for a day for some reason, well holy crap you might have to read a book on your tablet. Or go to the pool. They have those now.[/quote<] When AT&T U-verse goes down, it goes down for days at a time. When PSN got hacked, it was down for weeks. Now Blizzard has the most experience with persistent servers around with their years of running WoW, but any chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Why are they so intent on beating us over the head with it?

      • mcnabney
      • 8 years ago

      The problem isn’t just having to be online to play. It is also that when Blizzard turns the server off (or it goes down) the game you paid for is GONE.

      • Anonymous Coward
      • 8 years ago

      [quote<]A minor inconvenience will not make it a bad game.[/quote<] It just makes it into a throw-away game. A game that you know is temporary from the day you buy it. It looks like some games that I liked while a young adult I might end up playing with my offspring, because no one is interested in making a better one.

    • tanker27
    • 8 years ago

    HAH. I love Penny Arcade’s response to all of this. [url=http://art.penny-arcade.com/photos/i-bMtwfTg/0/L/i-bMtwfTg-L.jpg<]link[/url<] I am guessing that it adequately describes 99% of all you naysayers.

      • Krogoth
      • 8 years ago

      Nah, we are concern what this will eventually lead to. It is a measure that’s woefully ineffective at fighting piracy, cheating and counterfeiting. The only thing that it defeats is the used sales market, while it annoys the crap of legit users who aren’t fortunate enough to have a reliable, constant internet connection. Let alone a reliable, constant wireless local connection.

      The move is entirely bone-headed and motivated by greed. The next big publisher fad is setting up subscription fees for their “games” which they want to treat as a “service”.

      I am voting my dollar my saying “no” to this. Pirating it gives them the wrong message. “I want to play it!, but I wouldn’t pay for it!”, which adds more fuel to the piracy scapegoat.

      • l33t-g4m3r
      • 8 years ago

      No, I’m not going to buy it. What does it really do better from other hack n slash rpg’s? It looks like diablo 2 with WOW 3d graphics. I’d rather play something else.

      • mcnabney
      • 8 years ago

      Nope. Not going to buy it. Partly for the eternal activation requirement and partly because it just looks like Gauntlet Legends – a ten year old arcade console game.

      • MrBojangles
      • 8 years ago

      Lmao My thoughts exactly bout all the people complaining about this non-issue requirement. Would also even wager that this cartoon strip also fairly accurately answers the question “Why is blizzard surprised”.

    • Antias
    • 8 years ago

    Oh well, looks like I won’t be buying this game then.
    No – i’m not against having to play online, I just don’t have a home internet connection.

    Also I was looking forward to the availability of an RPG that has randomly generated dungeons (for the replayability factor) for the frequent 15 hr flights i have between AU and USA and the 24 hr flights I have between AU and EU, and there sure isn’t any internet connection on those long haul flights.
    Sigh – looks like Skyrim/Oblivion it is then… 🙂

    • xtalentx
    • 8 years ago

    Didn’t Blizzard get the same reaction from Star Craft II losing it’s LAN option? Why are they acting surprised?

      • l33t-g4m3r
      • 8 years ago

      Over half the reason blizzard’s games were so popular was the lan option. Taking out lan support was a low blow to the player. How anyone can still be a fan of the series after this, I don’t know.

        • sweatshopking
        • 8 years ago

        i adore SC, but sc2 didn’t work for me. i play 90% of my games on lan, so sc2 was a no go. me and my boys play lan still.

          • provoko
          • 8 years ago

          Yea same here. I actually bought SC2 and then got my money back when I couldn’t play offline (unless I connect online every 3 weeks) and no lan. There are soooooooo many lan cafe’s that are GIMPED.

    • Vrock
    • 8 years ago

    PC gamers sure do complain a lot about their hobby and the companies who make it possible.

      • CaptTomato
      • 8 years ago

      I grew up with PC games, not console gimped stuff that looks good at 15ft on a 40in TV.

        • Vrock
        • 8 years ago

        I grew up with PC games, too. I quit playing them in 2007. Got tired of the endless upgrade cycles and the annoyances of getting games to run correctly.

        You got anything else to say besides “ZOMG moar grafix!!!!” ? I’d rather play a game on a 55″ TV from the comfort of my lounge chair than sit at a computer desk with a 20″ monitor.

          • yogibbear
          • 8 years ago

          I have my PC hooked up to my TV. It looks better than any console, and I’m sitting in the comfort of my $4000 couch. Now who is the idiot?

            • Vrock
            • 8 years ago

            You are, for spending $4000 on a couch?

            Most people use their PCs for primary functions other than gaming. I fully realize that you *can* hook a PC up to a TV, and I’ve thought of doing so myself, but for me it just doesn’t make sense.

            • sweatshopking
            • 8 years ago

            i lol’d at this too. 4k on a couch? what is it made of gold?

          • PenGun
          • 8 years ago

          I sit at my desk 30″ from a 34″ Sony CRT. The Superfine Pitch semi pro tube. It is a very sweet display.

          I don’t play kids games. These click to shoot fiascoes leave me cold. Torchlight I gave to several people but playing it was ridiculous. I play Stalker mostly and ya know the couch does not make a good place to play such a demanding game.

          I have a deep hatred for consoles because of what they have done to video gaming. The cheapest is good enough approach and the constant effort for less hassle for the players and more control for the companies reminds me of the causes of your economy’s present collapse. Stupidity and greed are the cause of your present economic problems and the analogies to console gaming are striking.

            • Vrock
            • 8 years ago

            See, that’s the problem with many PC gamers: you’re so exclusive, twitchy, snobby, and judgmental that you’ve effectively created a niche market for yourselves. Furthermore, you both revel in your elitism and despise it at the same time. You want the video game industry to cater solely to you, but you don’t want everyone to be like you because you enjoy being snobs. Hey, guess what? YOU’RE NOT THE MARKET. Deal with it. And what’s more, you’ll never be the market. You constantly piss and moan about everything your niche hobby has to offer, *including* the developers who produce some of its best and most popular games. Many of you pirate and torrent whatever you can, and complain about the shrinking market and increased DRM.You lie to yourselves that consoles are for kids, and that there is not now, nor has there ever been, a good console game. It’s bizarre. My theory is that you don’t really like playing games, you just like bitching and putting on a false sense of self-importance.

            You sir, take yourself and your hobby *way* too seriously. Labeling people who enjoy console games as stupid and greedy? Wow. I’m off to play Castlevania: Lords of Shadow. It’s a kid’s game with sub-par graphics and boy, is it fun.

            • PenGun
            • 8 years ago

            You are welcome. 😉

            • sweatshopking
            • 8 years ago

            you get a + from me vrock. there are tons of console games i like. I generally play pc, but it’s because that’s what i have. there are a ton of good console games.

            • CaptTomato
            • 8 years ago

            “‘Hey, guess what? YOU’RE NOT THE MARKET””

            We’re a part of the market{at least for the moment}, but hey, if the stupid are going run amok, more power to em huh?
            As for pirating, I suspect most people do some, but I have 100’s of DVD’s, 35 blurays and counting and at one point, 35 or so boxed games, I also bought gaming peripherals, and in about 3hrs, I’m going to spend $400aud on a Logitech G27.

            • Vrock
            • 8 years ago

            You’re as much a part of the video game market as Masarati is of the car market. That is to say, not a substantial part at all.

            • CaptTomato
            • 8 years ago

            I understand, but my goal is to keep people informed about the reality of PC gaming vs console gaming in my own special way.

            • Vrock
            • 8 years ago

            You make no sense.

            • CaptTomato
            • 8 years ago

            “‘Stupidity and greed are the cause of your present economic problems and the analogies to console gaming are striking”‘

            Bravo my friend, I find it staggering that some of these goons have the nerve to defend these constant slimy decisions, and as I mentioned before, when you get the formula right you can make 100’s of millions on a single game, and this doesn’t include DLC and next yrs new release.

            • sweatshopking
            • 8 years ago

            “I DESERVE EVERY GAME MADE CUSTOM FOR MY PLATFORM OF CHOICE” = GREED

            • CaptTomato
            • 8 years ago

            LOL, greed is good, LOL.
            I’m just annoyed that so many PC games are tampered with due to them being console ports vs PC games ported to console.

            • sweatshopking
            • 8 years ago

            greed is not good. it’s destroying our entire world. that economic view is a fallacy.

          • CaptTomato
          • 8 years ago

          I have a 1920×1200 26in PC monitor and a 37in 1080 LCD both on my PC desk, and my PC is 3yrs old and have no cause to upgrade, so it sounds like you don’t know what to buy and when.

          Ever improving GFX and PHSX helps with immersion and visual storytelling, it’s also the undeclared promise of technology, but you’ll clearly settle for pathetic facial animations, character animations, muted sounds and explosions just to avoid the occasional driver update, LOL.

      • CaptTomato
      • 8 years ago

      Have you played Far Cry2004, Fear 2005, Quake4 2005….go and check out those games and be amazed at the smoothness and options for the PC.

        • Vrock
        • 8 years ago

        I’ve played Fear and Quake 4 on the PC. Didn’t much care for either of them. Wouldn’t have cared for them regardless of the platform they were on, though.

      • Anonymous Coward
      • 8 years ago

      You’ve got things backwards. Its my hobby, [i<]our hobby[/i<], that makes these companies possible. Instead of being grateful for us, their customers and the reason they have a job, they try and exploit us. When I go out to eat, I don't tell myself how happy I am that the restaurants make it possible, I expect the staff to be thankful that I have come to spend my money with them.

    • napobm43
    • 8 years ago

    I think most of the people who are upset about this are upset by the principle of this decision and realize that it won’t make a difference to them realistically. The fact is that Diablo II was meant to be played online and so is Diablo III. Blizzard definitely knew that they could curb (albeit not totally eliminate) piracy as well as cheating with this decision and last time I checked, those are two things that HONEST people should be on board with in the first place. Blizzard has a responsibility to at least try to deter the unscrupulous types from adversely affecting the gameplay experience of the majority of people playing the game that decide to pay for the game and play it the way it was meant to be played. You can bet that now that they are allowing people to sell items for real money that they have procedures in place to identify hackers who are trying to sell hacked items for profit. Nobody is foolish enough to think that people won’t try and succeed to some degree in doing that, but this type of stuff will need to be policed heavily now that it can be done to turn a real world profit within the game itself. There are drawbacks to people who are trying to play with a connection that can’t be completely trusted to be stable, but the merits of the decision still outway this potential pitfalls. I’m completely on board with the decision and wouldn’t have it any other way.

      • CaptTomato
      • 8 years ago

      “”HONEST people should be on board with in the first place””

      The paying customers should suffer for no reason?
      COD games make about a BILLION dollars, are you telling me that the game and advertising cost more than say a few hundred million?, IOW, the right game can make a BILLION dollars profit every 2 yrs…..a BILLION DOLLARS, yet here you are encouraging these greedy jerks to keep imposing all sorts of restrictions on the people who PAY for the game.

        • napobm43
        • 8 years ago

        “The paying customer should suffer for no reason?”

        Exactly, I don’t think the paying customer should suffer for no reason either which is exactly why I SUPPORT this decision. The PAYING, HONEST customer isn’t against this decision because they think that detering piracy and cheating is a GOOD thing. The dishonest customer who wants something for nothing or wants to cheat the game instead of playing it as it was meant to be played doesn’t like this decision. The only people with a legitimate gripe are those who have concerns that their unstable internet connection will lead to a hinderance of their gameplay experience.

        You act like Blizzard shouldn’t try to make as much of a profit as they can. Last time I checked, that’s what businesses are in business to do. If doing this is were all about making more money (which it isn’t, BTW), I’d still be on board. Just because you pay for the game doesn’t mean that you should get to mod it or cheat when you play it. That’s the core argument here. I realize I’m probably in the minority on a board on this site to have the position I do on this issue, but this is Blizzard’s game to create and they are free to make it as restrictive or not as they want. As the customer, you have a choice. Just because you buy the game doesn’t give you the right to cheat it or cheat others playing it or make it something that Blizzard doesn’t intend for it to be. If you do want to play games restricted in this fashion, don’t. If all games get to be like this and you don’t like it, make your own game or don’t game at all. Find a hobby that better suits your personality.

          • Voldenuit
          • 8 years ago

          [quote<]The PAYING, HONEST customer isn't against this decision because they think that detering piracy and cheating is a GOOD thing.[/quote<] I am a paying, honest customer and I am firmly opposed to Blizzard's actions. By requiring a constant internet connection, Blizzard limits my mobility when playing. Gamers who play on trains, airlines, sidewalk cafes (not every cafe has free wifi), LAN parties are affected. By requiring a constant internet connection, Blizzard reduces the reliability of my gaming experience. Even if I have an ISP with 100% uptime, I am at the mercy of server load, net congestion, Blizzard/Activision's downtime, router instability etc. By requiring a constant internet connection, Blizzard has a stranglehold on the longevity of the game. They can, at their discretion, choose to stop supporting the game whenever they feel like it. I could find myself feeling nostalgic about the game in 10, 15, 20 years' time, and find myself unable to play. How exactly is this helping me for being honest? It's no surprise that I choose to remain honest, but to discard the 'paying customer' sobriquet. Let some other sucker put up with their bull****.

            • l33t-g4m3r
            • 8 years ago

            Krogoth’s explanation hit the nail on the head. DRM is designed to destroy the used market, it doesn’t combat piracy.

            [quote<]DRM has never been about fighting piracy, that's publisher's "PR lip service". It has always been about wrestling "control" away from the end-users and killing the used game market. Piracy is the perfect scapegoat for publishers to pull off their subscription based scheme.[/quote<]

            • MrBojangles
            • 8 years ago

            “By requiring a constant internet connection, Blizzard limits my mobility when playing. Gamers who play on trains, airlines, sidewalk cafes (not every cafe has free wifi), LAN parties are affected.”

            To the gamers playing on trains, airlines, and sidewalk cafes this is still a non issue .They do these things on smartphones and handhelds, not gaming laptop’s which you would have to have in order to play d3 on the go.You and the rest throwing this argument out there.Are creating some scenario that won’t naturally come up in the real world.At least not for 9/10 of the gaming crowd your referring to. Last time i check gaming capable laptops usually get 1-2 1/2 hours play time tops.I doubt there will be a single case here in the real world.Where someone shakes there fist in anger cursing blizzard, for there inability to play d3 for the first hour or so of there trip. Before there battery dies completely and there forced to whip out the old trusty smart phone for the remainder of there trip.

            As for lan parties u still will most likely have internet, and if you don’t,,,,Who cares????The lan party crowd are not a very big piece of the gaming crowd.And if they want to play multiplayer d3 with there friends they will still be able to. Via the internet at home just like 99% of us were going to do in the first place.

            “By requiring a constant internet connection, Blizzard reduces the reliability of my gaming experience. Even if I have an ISP with 100% uptime, I am at the mercy of server load, net congestion, Blizzard/Activision’s downtime, router instability etc.”

            To the ones throwing this gem of an argument out ,,, i really don’t know what to say.Other than seek professional help.You need rehab. If the prospect of having a hour or 2 down time every once in a blue moon.Is a deal breaker,and something you just cannot live or cope with.What you have is a gaming addiction not a hobby.

            “By requiring a constant internet connection, Blizzard has a stranglehold on the longevity of the game. They can, at their discretion, choose to stop supporting the game whenever they feel like it. I could find myself feeling nostalgic about the game in 10, 15, 20 years’ time, and find myself unable to play.”

            ……………………

            • Voldenuit
            • 8 years ago

            The only cogent stance you seem to be taking is the same as Blizzard’s – “if you don’t like what we’re doing, go play another game”.

            And that’s fine with me, since that’s exactly the same stance I am taking, namely, putting my gaming dollar somewhere else.

            • napobm43
            • 8 years ago

            So you’d rather pay to play Diablo III with that other people are playing for free on a pirated copy of the game as well as with people who have hacked the game to gain an unfair advantage?? You’ve pointed out the drawbacks. Congrats – I conceded that there are drawbacks to the decision. My point is that the drawbacks don’t outweigh the benefits of the decision.

            Look, tons of people complained that a major drawback of Diablo II was people who were hacking and duping items/characters. I was one of them and still am one of them. This was something they had to fix particularly when, as I pointed out earlier, Blizzard intends to allow people to sell items for REAL MONEY. Storing characters, etc. on Blizzard servers comes at a cost to them. My guess is that such a cost is what led them not to store characters for Diablo II on their servers and instead store them on the users hard drive. They HAD TO do something about this if they wanted to make sure that people wouldn’t have the same complaint about this game as they had about the previous version 10 years ago. THIS IS how they help you for being honest and how they try to deter those who aren’t.

            • Krogoth
            • 8 years ago

            Public online gaming is always going to be plagued by hacks and cheats. It is a fact of digital life, deal with it. That’s why you always try go play with people who you know in person and use private servers. The removal of LAN and dedicated server support makes it more difficult to accomplish that.

            I never understood why people would pay real money for fake digital items that only as valuable as game in question is relevant. You don’t even need “best” of everything to be effective at hack/slash games.

            Blizzard’s system isn’t going to stop counterfeiting and hacks. It will still happen, but it will be more underground. It will only encourage “gold mining” from sweatshop netcafes.

            • Voldenuit
            • 8 years ago

            No, I’d rather not pay for a product where the publisher strips unnecessary control from the legitimate user.

            Yes, there were lots of cheating issues with D2 online with item duplication etc. But Activision could have easily handled that by making it so that only online play required authentication. If you want to play single player, they should have given users the option to create offline or online versions of characters – only online characters could be played in both single and multi-player.

            Instead, they chose a heavy handed approach that shows no regard for their users.

            • MrBojangles
            • 8 years ago

            “Yes, there were lots of cheating issues with D2 online with item duplication etc. But Activision could have easily handled that by making it so that only online play required authentication. If you want to play single player, they should have given users the option to create offline or online versions of characters – only online characters could be played in both single and multi-player.”

            So obviously you’ve never actually played d2 and are just kinda talking out the rear on this.They DID give us the option of playing both offline and online single/multi player games in d2.They DID require activation and indvidual product key’s for all online play but not for offline play.This aproach is exactly what failed in the d2 and allowed for rampant hacking,cheats, and item duplication. Making the same game avaiblable both offline and online required that all game files be stored locally.Which is what allowed the hackers accesses to there stored char, item, and map files.The hacks started offline then get ported to online play.Which is sad really cause 90% of the fanbase played pretty much exscluviously online anyway’s.Since there was no viable means offline to switch items between chars for playing or storage purposes ,something that’s kinda vital in a game centered around random item farming. So no blizard isn’t screwing over there fanbase/users with this.On the contrary they seem to know exactly who there dedicated d2 fans are and are desighning this game acordingly.

            • Krogoth
            • 8 years ago

            I’m fairly certain that “online” mode saved the characters onto the server. The problem was that server would sent a snapshot to the client, so it could run the game. This where the crackers would alter the file and upload it back to the server along with the cheats.

            I don’t see how having a constant internet connection would solve this. Crackers can still find a way to inject the server with hacked files. It will definitely happen, because there is money to be made in this. Activision wouldn’t care, until hack items destroy their “legit market” sales.

            • Voldenuit
            • 8 years ago

            The problem with D2 was with implementation, not philosophy. They did a shoddy job of ‘security’ in D2 by making files and unencrypted data available on the client side. If they don’t fix this with D3, no amount of online verification will help. If they do, I don’t see why a segregated online/offline experience is impossible.

            At the end of the day, sufficiently skilled and motivated hackers will always find away around their security. But what they are doing compromises usability for the average gamer.

          • CaptTomato
          • 8 years ago

          “‘Find a hobby that better suits your personality”””

          But this is on the cards dopey, but I thought before I give it all away, I’d strongly criticize the decisions that are putting people off, including me.
          And it’s been explained to you that some of us think these DRM measures are part of a longterm plan to wrestle control away from paying customers.

          And don’t patronize us either dopey, unlike you, we’re not going to bend over.

            • napobm43
            • 8 years ago

            “Don’t patronize us either dopey, unlike you, we’re not going to bend over.”

            Don’t patronize from the guy who’s resorting to name calling. Gotta love it.

            All that’s been explained to me is that there are a bunch of people who like to complain about software companies developing better strategies to (a) turn a profit off of the games they produce and (b) protect their products from piracy and cheating.

            “DRM measures are part of a longterm plan to wrestle control away from paying customers.”

            DRM stands for “digital rights management”. The complainers on this issue are so consumed with with fact that they should have the right to do whatever they want with the software they’re buying that they completely ignore the rights of the software company. In your first post above, you start quoting how much money the software companies are making (like you have a clue when you don’t) and act like you’ve got the right to determine how much money is enough money for them to make off the product they produce. They’re supposed to try to come up with ways to make as much money as possible. What kind of business would they be if they didn’t??

            • Krogoth
            • 8 years ago

            A.) The only reason that DRM exists is to ensure a steady revenue for shareholders. It achieves this by removing any end-user control. Everything else is secondary at best.

            B.)It is completely ineffective at preventing piracy and cheating. As long as crackers have access to the code. It can be crack with sufficient time and resources. The only victims of DRM are legit users. DRM is only effective at eliminating one thing, the used sales market.

            The reason why some people are fighting DRM is because, they feel that the new measures are completely unnecessary. Major publishers are only punishing the honest customers with unnecessary BS and crap. They are trying too hard to squeeze blood from the fiscal “rock”.

            That’s why I sincerely hope that the move towards subscription based DRMs will end in fiscal disaster. Creating another video game crash, because that’s the only way the major shareholders and publishers will get the idea that their near-sighted strategy will not work.

          • Antias
          • 8 years ago

          I’m a paying honest customer, I even bought the m14x over the m11x for my travels as it has a optical disk drive in it and the games I play (oblivion, ME1&2, DA1&2) perform a disk check – don’t for 1 second think that the “no cd patches” you use aren’t illegal… they are here in AU as they are fundamental changes by an unauthorised user to the core product.
          I also don’t have an internet connection at my residential address. I perform all my updating etc.. from my work connection then take the laptop home.
          So please don’t “assume” I’m for this decision. It prevents me from purchasing a game that I was very much looking forward to. I legally purchased Diablo 1 & 2. Looks like 3 is not a go’er for me unfortunately…

      • clone
      • 8 years ago

      I’m a paying customer who hates cheaters & piracy.

      that said I won’t be buying Diablo III despite my long timer gaming with Diablo II and Diablo I.

      I also did not buy StarCraft II because of it’s imposed online single player component despite having played all of the previous games from Blizzard as well as all of the StarCraft books and many Diablo and WarCraft books.

      I know I’m nothing to Blizzard… just one person amongst many but then again Blizzard has become nothing to me but another game company amongst many that is now getting lost in the crowd of those taking choice away from the consumer.

    • Sahrin
    • 8 years ago

    [quote<]Backlash over online requirement surprises Diablo 3 developer[/quote<] Translation: Blizzard out of touch with customers. If you don't understand why we're suspicious of an online requirement, you really don't deserve to work in the games industry. Know your customer. Understand what he wants.

      • Krogoth
      • 8 years ago

      Because, the Blizzard from 90s-early 2000s no longer exists.

      Acitvision is calling the shots. They want to make the Diablo and Warcraft IP into own versions of CODs.

    • rika13
    • 8 years ago

    I’ll probably buy D3 so I can use the RMT AH to make money. Being online only is not unexpected, being that most people have broadband nowdays and I’ll take being online over something like Starforce anyday.

      • Krogoth
      • 8 years ago

      The problem isn’t the lack of broadband. The problem is having “reliable” broadband and not to mention that there are some users who have to pay at a GB/$$$ basis. There are some major ISP who trying to move in this direction for its mainstream users. It is absurd to require an internet connection to just play “single-player” mode and LAN. It kinda defeats the purpose. I wouldn’t mind it so much, if it was only for authenticating the installation like CD-keys of the old days. Requiring a constant phoning home is just crossing the line. I am paying with my wallet by not support games that are trying to push for this. Pirating it doesn’t solve the issue. It gives the wrong message to publishers and adds fuel to their little blame game.

    • FireGryphon
    • 8 years ago

    Games are fleeting entertainment. Instead of ‘owning’ it, it’s like going to a ball game — once the game is over, you leave and the experience is over. Being able to purchase physical media and have manuals and boxes made it seem like the experience was persistent and tangible, but it really isn’t and the industry’s move towards the cloud is underscoring that.

    The problem I see with this is that the industry is going to self-destruct. The video game industry emerged when people actually had something physical to define their games. My hunch is that when all we have is a list on Steam to represent our titles we’re going to stop caring as much and focus on other outlets that have more tangible elements. If gamers don’t own their games anymore, gaming will become a casual thing that won’t support the multi-million dollar titles coming out now.

    Don’t believe me? Services like Steam are doing okay now, but most of its games are casual indy games. Most importantly, though, the whole reason why DRM and constant Internet connections cause such a uproar is because it takes the game out of our control. It’s a psychological thing.

      • ludi
      • 8 years ago

      I just replayed Quake last month, 14 years after playing it for the first time, and 15 years after it first came out.

      I like a well-executed service such as Steam, but keep your grubbing hands off my physical media. If I can’t buy hardcopy or store a digitally-downloaded copy in some way that allows me to resurrect and run the single-player elements at will, then it had better be selling for $15 or less.

        • ew
        • 8 years ago

        Right there with you. If they insist on these anti-feature then they sure aren’t going to get $50 from me. I can wait until it hits the bargain bin.

      • Hurstmeister
      • 8 years ago

      I dont really see it self destructing. People are too much like sheep and will follow the masses to define what is and what is not the ‘norm.

      I feel the same as you. I miss the days of setting up lan parties and doing what we wanted with our own software. When you pay for something you want to have something tangible within your grasp. Developers what to lease software to us taking away what we had become comfortable with.

      When the next generation of computer savvy kids grow up they will be accustomed to how things are now and will eventually become. For us we remember what it was originally like. The kids today only know what is in front of them. They could care less how we ‘used to do it’.

      • Voldenuit
      • 8 years ago

      [quote<]Games are fleeting entertainment. Instead of 'owning' it, it's like going to a ball game -- once the game is over, you leave and the experience is over.[/quote<] Except in this analogy, the stadium uses your retinal scan as your ballgame ticket, and shines a bright light into your eye the entire game to make sure that it's still you and you haven't beamed someone else to replace yourself.

      • Anonymous Coward
      • 8 years ago

      [quote<]Games are fleeting entertainment. Instead of 'owning' it, it's like going to a ball game -- once the game is over, you leave and the experience is over.[/quote<] This all makes me miss D&D or similar elaborate table-top games. Its something you have, that no profit-maximizing jerk can take away.

        • BobbinThreadbare
        • 8 years ago

        Pen and paper games are still very much alive, you just needs a couple friends to play.

    • ShadowTiger
    • 8 years ago

    The biggest issue for me is lack of modding support.

    I love using cheats, save game editors, and changing game files.

    This lets me get the full game experience without spending 100+ hours in some cases, as well as letting me unleash the full potential of the game engine.

    For example, in diablo 2 I made a sword that has 100% chance of chain lightning on attack, gives a amplify damage curse, and has fanaticism aura. This makes it alot of fun to run around on the hardest difficulty and wack away at monsters that are normally impossible to kill.

    If you take away this capability, im stuck with what the developers had the imagination to come up with.. which is always sorely lacking (in my opinion).

    • Bensam123
    • 8 years ago

    Wow, just wow…. This really goes to show you that there really no longer is anyone working at Blizzard that is still in touch with gamers. It’s like trying to get a ‘rich’ person to understand what and why a ‘poor’ person does what they do.

    Not that gamers are poor, but it shows that the social and cultural gap is so huge they can’t even begin to understand why something happens when it does, even when it is explained properly. Their brains simply cannot grasp the HOW and the WHY. Quite literally a case of the Ivory Tower.

    They simply explain away how awesome their system is and how everyone should use it regardless of what people actually think. It’s not just the constant internet connection thing… Blizzard has been doing it for years and it’s even more clear with the real money AH.

    • Krogoth
    • 8 years ago

    Why is everyone so surprised?

    This is the future of gaming in general. The big publishers are moving towards a subscription-based scheme. The gaming networks/digital distributors are just the first step in the process. The days of off-line and LAN gaming are over. Consoles aren’t immune to it, in fact they are already ahead of the curve.

    DRM has never been about fighting piracy, that’s publisher’s “PR lip service”. It has always been about wrestling “control” away from the end-users and killing the used game market. Piracy is the perfect scapegoat for publishers to pull off their subscription based scheme.

    Diablo III is going to be the spiritual successor to the WoW franchise, it is going to be the bloody same thing except the art direction is going to be more grim-dark. (IMO, WoW was Diablo II’s spiritual successor).

    Diablo II already has beaten the “hack/slash” from me. The whole setup doesn’t do it for me anymore. That’s why I never got into any of the major MMORPGs. Diablo 3 will be no exception. I’m not going to missed it either. The lore is probably going to go full retard like WoW did to the Warcraft lore.

      • ShadowTiger
      • 8 years ago

      Actually I think Warcraft lore started getting messed up with Warcraft 3, but thats just my opinion. The background story in the original Warcraft manual was pretty good and much different from the later games.

      • Dirge
      • 8 years ago

      I agree about this being the future of gaming in general no matter what BS excuses blizzard spouts about providing a better experience. Take me back to the good old days where you could buy a game and actually run it without the need for big brothers supervision.

      • ew
      • 8 years ago

      [quote<]DRM has never been about fighting piracy, that's publisher's "PR lip service". It has always been about wrestling "control" away from the end-users and killing the used game market. Piracy is the perfect scapegoat for publishers to pull off their subscription based scheme.[/quote<] This deserves a bump!

    • Phookia
    • 8 years ago

    What Robert Bridenbecker needs to show the community is the overall value of an “always online” game. While playing Diablo2 I played on BNet and single-player direct connection with my dad who refused to play on BNet, the solution of an “all modes in one” experience is appealing to end of not splitting my time. That said am I willing to give up playing the game on a laptop while on a trip? at a hotel where I don’t want to be online? Does the cross game world chat offer enough value to me to want this?

    This really does seem like console thinking where I run a game and have friends join me to increase the experiance (Fable2+). The system isn’t perfect (Boarderlands, quite game start multi-player game wait for server to respond, crash to menu, repeat) but it is out there and the ability to join friends and family when play time lines up is great! (Steam TF2 and LFD1/2 Join game friend is in)

    But if you choose to have a single-player and a multi-player you have to offer the value. For me I don’t find the value in having a single world where I can choose single player mode if I want to but still be online.

    • sschaem
    • 8 years ago

    cracking DRM != rewriting server based services

    Diablo3 account, inventory, character management, etc.. code is all run on the server. So your ‘DRM’ hacker might have a hard time rewriting this code just looking at encrypted network packets.

    The fact that Diablo 3 use a cloud model to verify/manage game resources (items) is frankly a non issue for 99.99% of single players.

    For all of you whining babies … how many of you are really affected ?
    in short , how many of you run LAN parties where you simply cant get any internet access?

    Allot of noise for absolutely nothing.

    “OMG, OMG, this game need an internet connection, we are all being totally ripped off here!!!”
    say the whiner on his tweeter account while watching a seal with a bucket on youtube…

    • scribly
    • 8 years ago

    I don’t mind at all. As long as the game has good build in cheats. I never played any diablo single player game without cheats and I am not going to start now

    • someuid
    • 8 years ago

    “provide a much a much more stable, connected, safer experience than we could if we let people play off-line”

    “citing that Blizzard has been doing online games for 15 years, and that the industry as a whole is moving in that direction”

    These people make morons look intelligent. I can’t believe they get paid six+ figure salaries for making such amazingly stupid comments to try and justify their limited game design choices. I would have thought a Vice President would have more gray matter between the ears and not speak to the customer base like they are a bunch of 5 year olds in a communist propoganda training class.

    ..!.. you Blizzard.

    • nanoflower
    • 8 years ago

    Whether the game can be hacked to allow offline single player game play depends on what they are storing online. If it’s just account information then it should be possible to remove the need for that, but if it is actual game content then it’s going to be very difficult to replace that content.

    I hope that Blizzard reconsiders this requirement as it’s the one change that may force me to decide to not purchase the game. I was looking forward to Diablo III after spending probably hundred of hours playing D2 both online and offline. I’ve probably spent at least double the time playing offline as I got tired of all the PKs running around online once the group I used to play with started to split up. So single player became my choice for my D2 fix as there’s no concern about someone coming along and ruining your game. That allowed me to play the game anywhere that had a computer regardless of whether I had an Internet connection or not. With D3 that won’t be possible so the game becomes much less attractive to me.

    • PeterD
    • 8 years ago

    Finally people start to be aware of the fact that online should not always be necessary.

    • Exo
    • 8 years ago

    I not really shocked by this decision. I have a stable connection and I don’t see why I would want to play offline anymore. I’m have been a huge player of D2 and when I was playing solo I was online anyway to see and talk to my friend. When you look how much duplication broke the economy of D2, I understand the choice of Blizzard to ask for a constant connection to play single-player. Even when I’m not at home and I want to play games, I use my cellphone for tethering to acces the web, looking TR :), and play online.

      • Skrying
      • 8 years ago

      1. Think beyond your self. Just because you don’t have an issue staying connected doesn’t me other’s won’t. I hardly ever play single player games and before this news the vast majority of my D3 play would have been multiplayer any way. However, I know several people who this negatively impacts. Even more concerning is that this offers no benefit to players.

      2. Blizzard could have implemented a system where players would be required to choose between a mixed mode character or single player only. Mixed mode characters would require an Internet connection, just like how in Starcraft II achievements require a online connection. Single player only could be played offline and how the person wants to play. This system works, it prevents duplicates without negatively impacting people who do not have a Internet connection or a connection with stability issues.

      3. Not every person is able to or willing to pay for a phone and data plan capable of tethering. Again, think beyond your self for one moment.

        • Exo
        • 8 years ago

        1. I think if we look at the future of gaming, most gaming company will do the same. Blizzard taking the step while been in the front plan will surely evoke a lot of disagreement, but I believe this is how its have to go.
        2. But for the point your saying that offering offline mode wont’t affect the possibity of creating hacks, I think your are wrong. In D2, hacks was so accesible and it’s been used by a lot of people in open battlenet, even muself to test build and stuff. This, I’m mostly sure, created a negative impact for letting everyone acces duplication hack in closed battlenet.

        • indeego
        • 8 years ago

        1. [i<]"Even more concerning is that this offers no benefit to players."[/i<] It offers me a chance to play an almost certain A level game. Diablo/II are easily in top 15 games of all time for me. An online requirement isn't a hindrance to most people. This is 2011. I have 4 computers / 3 mobile devices at home and all are useless without connectivity at home already. 2. Sure they could of but they chose not to. So what? 3. Take your own advice. It's readily apparent you won't get this game, you are upset, and you will speak by not buying the game. Blizztivision will know on release if this impacts sales, and they will either evolve or perish. This is how evolution in biology and economies work.

    • derFunkenstein
    • 8 years ago

    So what I’m curious about is if this is like StarCraft II’s online-only play, where you have to activate the game online and you can only play your particular campaign online, but there’s an offline component where you can at least play the game offline without your saves and achievements, or if it’s like WoW’s online-only play where you really have to be online-only.

    • aspect
    • 8 years ago

    I’m surprised that they are surprised, there was outrage with Starcraft and no LAN and there will be for this.

    • BiffStroganoffsky
    • 8 years ago

    If and when they do not attain their projected sales/profit numbers, they will blame the people who download the pirated version(s) that do not require an internet connection to play the single player campaign. Some of that ‘piracy’ may well be people who bought the game but don’t want to deal with the call home to work in single player mode of course…which will inflate the number of pirates and bolster their claim of lost revenue. Oh what a vicious cycle.

    • lilbuddhaman
    • 8 years ago

    This is a tiny blip on my radar compared to the REAL MONEY auction house which is ANONYMOUS for both the bidder and seller.

      • derFunkenstein
      • 8 years ago

      That has potential to be game-breaking, unless you can specify that you don’t want people who have been buying on the auction house in your game.

    • Vrock
    • 8 years ago

    Boy oh boy, console gaming just keeps looking better and better, eh?

      • Jahooba
      • 8 years ago

      No, it still looks like crap compared to the PC…

        • Vrock
        • 8 years ago

        Oh noes, the graphics aren’t quite as sharp. Meh.

          • rxc6
          • 8 years ago

          Yeah!! I wouldn’t want better graphics or a more powerful processor… btw, what are we doing at this enthusiast website?
          /sarcasm off

          Sigh…

            • SPOOFE
            • 8 years ago

            Point
            .
            .
            ,
            ,
            ,
            ,
            ,
            ,
            Your head

      • derFunkenstein
      • 8 years ago

      Oddly enough there have been plenty of rumors about D3 on the PS3. I’d buy that version if it had cross-platform multiplayer. 😀

      • bcronce
      • 8 years ago

      yeah, just looks at Sony and how well the implemented not needing the internet……. Anyone remember their online services going down and taking many games with it?

        • Vrock
        • 8 years ago

        Sure, because nobody’s ever been hacked before. Please.

        And yes, all my single player games worked *just* fine without the PSN.

      • Skrying
      • 8 years ago

      How does this make console gaming look better? Issues like monthly/annual fees as with Xbox Live or lengthy periods without service like the Playstation Network are just as big if not bigger issues.

      In addition, publishers are already exploring ways to limit console gamers in similar fashion. Things like one-time-use keys for multiplayer are in the future of console gaming just as always-on DRM schemes are in the future of PC gaming.

      It sucks, all of it.

        • Vrock
        • 8 years ago

        I was able to play all of my single player games just fine without the PSN or the internet. PSN is free. Hacks happen.

        The readers of ths site are so anti-console it’s ridiculous.

          • Hallucinosis
          • 8 years ago

          Can you play your single player Playstation 3 games on a plane?

          This is a PC enthusiast site. Maybe you’re in the wrong place. I’m sure there are plenty of console fanboy sites out there.

            • CaptTomato
            • 8 years ago

            But is it a game enthusiast site?

            • Vrock
            • 8 years ago

            I thought it was a tech enthusiast site.

            • CaptTomato
            • 8 years ago

            That’s what I thought but I hate consoles and any underpowered handheld device.

            • SPOOFE
            • 8 years ago

            So go find a console/handheld-hating site. I bet there’s a few of them.

            • CaptTomato
            • 8 years ago

            Or what?

            • sweatshopking
            • 8 years ago

            OR I’LL REPLY TO EVERY POST YOU MAKE.

            • CaptTomato
            • 8 years ago

            As long as he doesn’t wear me down with stupid comments, I’ll be fine.

            • SPOOFE
            • 8 years ago

            If you can tolerate your own stupid comments, I don’t think there’s much my stupid comments can do.

            No, really. Go find a console-hatin’ site. You’ll be among intellectual peers.

            • CaptTomato
            • 8 years ago

            oh I thought this site was a little more democratic……but it looks like I’ve exposed your true colours Mr dictator.
            I “hate” consoles as they impact PC gaming, otherwise I wouldn’t give a hoot, but since you’re impressed by any ole low rent game, I’m sure you’ll keep both hands busy, lol.

            • Vrock
            • 8 years ago

            Consoles don’t impact PC gaming, the tiny PC gaming market impacts PC gaming. Don’t be mad at consoles, be mad that you have a niche hobby.

            • SPOOFE
            • 8 years ago

            Or you’ll continue looking silly.

            • CaptTomato
            • 8 years ago

            I’ll only look silly to those who like low budget low rent games.

            • Vrock
            • 8 years ago

            Low budget, low rent games?

            Obviously, you know fuck-all about console games.

            • CaptTomato
            • 8 years ago

            I know they’re gimped compared to the PC in GFX/phyx and controls.
            Don’t wet your pants either ok?

            • Vrock
            • 8 years ago

            Controls, debatable, and dependent on the game genre. Graphics, yep they’re inferior. But the way you anti console types talk, you’d think the world was still playing Atari 2600. I challenge you to play any of the top or near top tier console games and then complain that the game sucked because of graphics. As for physics, what’s the noticeable advantage?

            • CaptTomato
            • 8 years ago

            What about the atrocious Deadspace 2008, that was a nasty console turd from the controls POV.

            • Vrock
            • 8 years ago

            Also, Vita. PSP. And a very few PS3 laptops.

      • Krogoth
      • 8 years ago

      No, they are becoming more and more alike.

      Next generation consoles are going to be a dedicated gaming PC with a predictable hardware platform.

      PS3 and 360 are almost there. They just need official keyboard/mouse support, once that’s accomplished. It will be the final nail in mainstream PC gaming’s coffin.

        • Meadows
        • 8 years ago

        [quote<]"They just need official keyboard/mouse support, once that's accomplished."[/quote<] This appears as a complete sentence, but doesn't make sense.

        • Vrock
        • 8 years ago

        PS3 has official keyboard and mouse support. PC boys are just all butt-hurt because their platform is in a long and steady decline. It’s sad, really.

          • Krogoth
          • 8 years ago

          For the console itself, yes. Game support is another matter.

          Like I said, once consoles put 100% official support for keyboard and mice. Mainstream PC gaming will finally die.

          IMHO, gaming in general has been in decline. Consoles are feeling it too. Too many rehashes, nobody has the balls to try to do something innovative or at least different. It seems every title and genre is taking after infamous Madden Roster update strategy. Just replace roster update with graphical update.

          I fear that the push for subscription based schemes are going to be catalyst that will cause the next video game crash. Big publishers seemed to think that they can milk the same franchises forever.

          I haven’t bought that many new games in recent years. I don’t pirate them either, because it gives publishers/developers the wrong message. But, that’s another can of worms.

          It doesn’t matter that much to me, though because I have move onto other things.

      • Krogoth
      • 8 years ago

      Man, Vrock

      The butthurt is strong with this crowd.

      I guess haters are going to hate.

        • paulWTAMU
        • 8 years ago

        There does seem to be some unwarranted dislike of his statement 😉 The only real problem I see is that consoles keep moving towards being more like PCs–I wonder if the next generation will require you to connect to their networks for some games? That’s a horrifying though.

          • tfp
          • 8 years ago

          I thought that already happened

            • Vrock
            • 8 years ago

            Did it? What games?

            • tfp
            • 8 years ago

            [url<]http://tinyurl.com/3ggz2n7[/url<]

    • bthylafh
    • 8 years ago

    Bet you Torchlight 2 won’t have that kind of DRM.

      • indeego
      • 8 years ago

      It will also likely have 1/10 the gameplay (not that there’s anything wrong with that.)

        • HisDivineOrder
        • 8 years ago

        I would not take that bet.

          • nanoflower
          • 8 years ago

          I wouldn’t either. They know very well what the public wants and may be able to deliver it now. It was harder for Torchlight as they didn’t have any name recognition or a stockpile of cash. Now that they’ve proven that they can deliver a Diablo quality game and they’ve heard many comments from their customers on what they liked and didn’t like about Torchlight (needs multiplayer! 😉 ) I’m sure they will be doing their best to provide just what the customers want. It will be interesting to see how Torchlight II compares with Diablo III. Given the background of the people involved with Torchlight II I’m not going to assume they can’t deliver a game as compelling as Diablo III.

    • crabjokeman
    • 8 years ago

    Crap like this only makes the humble indie bundles that much more appealing.

    • MaxTheLimit
    • 8 years ago

    Developers are surprised?

    ‘ Wait a minute. You are upset? Why? All we are doing is taking things you used to like about the title and the gaming experience and giving you excuses why it’s better this way. Why are you so upset? ‘

    I am NOT buying Diablo 3. I loved Diablo 1, I liked Diablo 2, but Diablo 3 is frustrating me just hearing and seeing how it will be…

    Thankfully, Path of Exile looks like a pretty good substitute 9 and it’s free ) I might even buy some micro transaction items to support the makers of the game.

    I’m sure Blizzard and their Diablo 3 title will do fine without me.

    • Arclight
    • 8 years ago

    Look, it’s not like they are pissing off those who play pirated games, they just alienate honest people who actually pay. If i was a fan of Diablo i’d be pissed right now….

      • bittermann
      • 8 years ago

      I will buy Torchlight II before this…unless they reverse the requirement.

      • Waco
      • 8 years ago

      I’m not buying Diablo III because of this BS. No modding, no LAN, and a cash marketplace?

      Yeah, screw that.

    • Hurstmeister
    • 8 years ago

    I imagine 20 – 30 yrs from now when virtually all software is run on and from the ‘cloud’ no one will really care. Our little set top box that replaced the obsolete PC will be designed specifically for that model. I guess that wold be the ultimate in DRM management.

    People want simplicity. Turn it on and it works. Look at how successful the tablet market is working. I can see the PC migrating to ‘Set top boxes’ once the cloud becomes proficient enough to support the masses. The days of Bit Torrent and P2P will be long gone as a result. Piracy will have to evolve into something else entirely.

    I’m not a fan of online only single player DRM. I’m a big fan of the Assassin’s Creed games and the last 2 had a few quirks that were really aggravating when I couldnt play. I had the Steam version of AC2. After a hdd crash I had to reinstall the game and it wouldnt allow me to enter my cd key. Kept telling me that it was already in use. Duh, its mine. I contacted UBI Soft’s customer punishment and followed their advice to no avail. They kept putting it off on Valve. Valve support wasnt much better, their online support sucks.

    After 2 weeks of nothing I reverted to using a pirated copy of the game so I could finish it. Thats the kind of thing thats really frustrating. The people with legit copies have to bend over backwards while the people using pirated copies actually do have a more enjoyable gaming experience. At least in single player they do.

      • bcronce
      • 8 years ago

      I really don’t see the PC going anywhere when it comes to gaming enthusiasts. A bigger more expensive PC will always be faster than a small cheap set-top box.

      I would agree that set top boxes could become a huge gaming market. In 20-30 years, I bet they can pack quite a powerful computer in the size of a MP3 player.

        • Hurstmeister
        • 8 years ago

        If everything (Computing and storage etc) is done on the cloud,.. then there will be absolutely no need for high end vid cards, gigs of ram or large hdd capacity. Granted this is hypothetical,.. but I can see it going this way in 20 – 30 yrs.

        The PC will become obsolete. We will all have nothing more than little work stations with a preset group of applications. Most (common) people do not want to fool with installing software. With the future model all you do is lease an application,.. log in and it begins working much like a web application. All games will be played at max resolution with all eye candy turned on. There will be virtually no need for any local optimizations.

        I can see this as a reality and within my life time. Look how much has changed just in the last 20 yrs. We cant even begin to imagine what it will be like in 20 – 30 yrs.

          • l33t-g4m3r
          • 8 years ago

          The thing is, for the cloud to obsolete vid cards, someone has to put a huge amount of money up front for a cloud render farm. Anyone with a brain realizing what’s going on should not give these people a single dime, and they’ll go bankrupt from not being able to pay off the loans/bills.

      • PeterD
      • 8 years ago

      Do you honestly believe that “virtually all software” will be “run on and from the ‘cloud'”?

        • indeego
        • 8 years ago

        “virtually all software” will be “run on and from the ‘cloud'”?

        Virtually all software will require cloud elements to operate.

        I agree with that as well. I don’t like it either, but Developers adore the “cloud” because it is a leash to revenue for them.

        • Hurstmeister
        • 8 years ago

        With the exception of what ever minimal instruction set is needed for your ‘Set top’ box,.. yes. I can see this happening.

        Think outside of the box. We are computer geeks to most of the world (Well most of us). I cant begin to tell you how many people struggle with even rudimentary tasks such as searching for something on Google. Its an unknown to them. People want to turn it on and expect it to just work out of the box. They really dont want to configure anything. For us this is minimally simplistic. For some it may as well be a foreign language. Remember Dos or early windows? Getting your Adlib or SB16 working meant editing your ini file,.. hell even getting a cdrom to work sometimes meant writing your own string.

        To put it into perspective maybe I can explain it a different way.
        30 – 40 yrs ago people were expected to have a minimal of basic mechanical skills to own a vehicle. You did not pump your own gas and many vehicles required adjusting the valve as part of its regular scheduled maintenance the same as changing the oil or flushing the transmission.

        Today almost no one even changes their own oil much less understands the principles of modern EFI. We want to get in and just drive. Turn it on and we expect it to work. I see the PC following this same trend,.. where the average person will be expected to do less and less.

          • PeterD
          • 8 years ago

          “I cant begin to tell you how many people struggle with even rudimentary tasks such as searching for something on Google”

          Ok. But than why does eg MS changes so much in Windows and making it people more difficult? I know some people who felt rather confident with Outlook Express, and WHAM! All at a sudden they need Windows Mail and are completely lost.
          Maybe OE needed changes under the hood – I can imagine that.
          But why do they have to change they steering wheel? I don’t think that’s a big help.

      • PeterD
      • 8 years ago

      “People want simplicity. Turn it on and it works. Look at how successful the tablet market is working.”

      I agree with that. Being online is not part of simplicity.

      PC’s have been enormously complex during the last ten years, quite the contrary to what M$ was advocating during the nineties.
      Part of that added complexity is due to internet connections and other network connections.
      I prefer a simple box which can run all my important software offline.

        • Hurstmeister
        • 8 years ago

        I dont see ‘Main stream’ software be able to work in an ‘off line’ mode. The idea of being online or offline probably wont matter in 30 years. Everything will be ‘Online’ in some form or another,.. right down to your washer and dryer or even your alarm clock.

        Its difficult to imagine right now because of the complexities involved. But I believe this will become the norm for society as a whole. Everything will be interconnected in some way.

        Odds are wireless technology will surpass fiber as the medium for speed and total through put in the future. The costs and maintenance of getting and keeping fiber to every point on the globe is just not feasible. I doubt that it will happen in my life time or even yours. How ever,.. in 50 – 100 yrs I can see wireless becoming the way everything stays ‘connected’. Imagine a single tower being able to serve all the wireless needs of a 500 – 1000 square mile radius with bandwidth to spare. Impossible today,.. but who know what 100 yrs will bring.

          • PeterD
          • 8 years ago

          “Everything will be ‘Online’ in some form or another,.”

          Brrr… Big Brother is coming for you…
          It all smells as comunism to me.

          By the way: the only reason to do things “in the cloud”, is to be mobile.
          Data and software in the cloud means you don’t have to have them on your computer.
          But it also means you can have a lighter computer, which is a plus for mobile systems which have to be literarly light, but also low on power consumption.
          But people who are not working mobile are in a completely different situation and can do without all that cloudiness.

          “How ever,.. in 50 – 100 yrs I can see wireless becoming the way everything stays ‘connected’.”

          I wonder what ME and YOU will be connected WITH….
          I’m telling you: they’re selling us communism by using the word freedom.

    • jss21382
    • 8 years ago

    Am i the only one that finds this to be a non issue?

      • sweatshopking
      • 8 years ago

      yep. it’s a totally retarded move that will inconvenience a lot of people. if you have a desktop, and never move or have internet issues, then you’re fine. otherwise, you’re F’d

      • MrBojangles
      • 8 years ago

      No i agree, it’s really not that big of a deal.It’s 2011 for christ sakes, you don’t have to dial on anymore. Baring an outage or failure to pay your bills, there’s a 99% chance anyone with a system capable of running this game.Will also already have a constant internet connection anyways. So unless there just really really worried bout it slowing down there porn and torrents downloading in the back ground, I really don’t see what the issue is.

      I Left the 1% for that handful of gamers out there. that could afford hundreds of dollars for a gaming rig, but are some how still to poor to have internet.

        • CaptTomato
        • 8 years ago

        DRM has never been about fighting piracy, that’s publisher’s “PR lip service”. It has always been about wrestling “control” away from the end-users and killing the used game market. Piracy is the perfect scapegoat for publishers to pull off their subscription based scheme.

        3rd time this has been posted…props to original poster.

          • MrBojangles
          • 8 years ago

          ….???

        • Skrying
        • 8 years ago

        Having Internet service does not guarantee quality service. There are numerous places in the US where expensive service packages still come with flaky quality. However, this is largely missing the point.

        Require a constant Internet connection for single player only portions holds no benefit to the customer and only serves as a potential punishment to paying customers in cases where Internet service can be a problem. So, you’re accepting additional limitations on something you’ve paid for but have nothing to show for it. This is bad consumerism. You’re suppose to hold companies accountable when they making decisions that are entirely negative for you. Continuing to buy games from publishers and developers pushing such requirements only gives them further incentive to see what requirements they can place that are again solely negative for the customer and positive for the company.

        Going without this game and instead buying another game puts the message across that you won’t buy products that carry these limitations. People want to act like this is not a big deal but this is clearly just further progression of DRM schemes.

        I would also like for you to consider the long term effects of this decision from Blizzard. If true that all information, even that of single player only characters, is being stored on Blizzard servers than how does this effect the game 5 or 10 years down the line? People are still playing Diablo II. I for one am no longer confident that Blizzard would patch Diablo III before pulling the plug. Clearly they’re becoming more short-term profit motivated and whose to say support for the game will be strong once it’s past of making money to maintain the servers.

        It’s all bad. I see zero reason to support it. I can do without a game knowing it benefits my hobby in the long term.

    • qhartman
    • 8 years ago

    Yeah, this sucks. One of my favorite pass-times on planes and trains is playing games on my laptop. In the past that has included Diablo and Starcraft.

    Requiring an Internet connection for single-player gaming is stupid. Their “prevent cheating” line they’ve trotted out elsewhere is BS. What do I care if someone else cheats in their single-player game?

    Like the others, I will probably still buy the game, and still enjoy it, but everytime I want to play single player and can’t because of some Internet issue, I’m queuing up a hate mail to Blizzard.

      • bittermann
      • 8 years ago

      One of Gearbox’s reps stated (In FB or twitter?) if you want to play on a train or airplane then buy a different game….yeah, they actually went there.

        • Meadows
        • 8 years ago

        [url<]http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2011/08/diablo-3-rundown.ars[/url<] Ars reported the same originally, but then quickly edited their own article with no word of it ever happening. At the time, they said it was the Blizzard executive who said such a thing, essentially telling players to play other developers' games.

      • indeego
      • 8 years ago

      [i<]pastime.[/i<] I'll upthumb you if you change it.

    • emorgoch
    • 8 years ago

    Here’s the problem with the online only model: I could have a “hacked” character to mess around with. Play single player and use an editor to max out cause I don’t feel like spending hundreds of hours grinding, but still take him online to play with my friends. I could also downoad and play moded games. There were some really interesting things people did to the game that definitly increased its longevity for me.

    Going the online only route, why don’t that just slap a $15 a month charge on it and call it World of Diablo, because without the ability to do the above, that’s all it’s going to be.

      • sweatshopking
      • 8 years ago

      which what they wanted anyway. you’ll see them getting money from you. I’ll stick to games from developers i trust, like s2 games, with hon, or path of exile, or torchlight, or cdproject. guys that aren’t corporate whores.

    • Meadows
    • 8 years ago

    Morons. What did they expect, honestly?

      • someuid
      • 8 years ago

      For the sheeple to say “baahhahayeah” and the non-sheeple to check in to a Mental Reprogramming Facility.

        • sweatshopking
        • 8 years ago

        works for apple, and valve, why not blizzard?

          • destroy.all.monsters
          • 8 years ago

          Republicans too.

            • ludi
            • 8 years ago

            My mental reprogramming software made you say that.

          • Meadows
          • 8 years ago

          Apple doesn’t dabble in videogames, and Valve gave an “Offline Mode” to Steam to let you play singleplayer games when your internet connection is broken or unavailable, so you can hardly group them together in this.

            • sweatshopking
            • 8 years ago

            apple has the largest gaming market on the planet. because they don’t In house produce means nothing.

            that’s not what i was talking about anyway. I was talking about “sheeples” happily going along with BS

    • campdude
    • 8 years ago

    I don’t buy games that require active internet connection.
    Especially if it cant run in single player mode with no internet.

      • odizzido
      • 8 years ago

      If you think of them as game rentals instead of buying them then once the price drops to something that is acceptable for rental prices I find it okay to pay money.

      Active internet rentals are about $2 for me….one online check per install rentals are around 5.

      I am in no hurry to give them money. I only just rented Mass Effect on steam for 5.

    • cfroese
    • 8 years ago

    So how is my flaky internet connection suppose to provide a more stable gaming experience? If it must be connected all the time, then I won’t be able to play most of the time given the dropped connections.

    Has it seriously never occurred to them that those people who want a single player game, actually want a single player game that requires zero internet connectivity? Perhaps it’s time to add Blizzard to the list of game studios to avoid.

      • sweatshopking
      • 8 years ago

      it won’t. you don’t need to email them those questions, cause i answered them.

      • HisDivineOrder
      • 8 years ago

      This has not occurred to them. They think everyone is always connected to the internet at all times. If you’re not, well go play something else. I guess?

      Personally, I think their old strategy of having SP and MP with those SP characters or Online-only characters that were monitored online was the better strategy. You just have someone select at the beginning whether they want the character they’re making to be unmonitored and be ineligible for paid auctions and transactions.

      Boom. Done.

      Instead, they’re making things unnecessarily painful by making them unnecessarily inane.

        • someuid
        • 8 years ago

        The choice to make it a single player char only and be restricted from online play and the markets is spot on. I’m suprised they didn’t consider this and make it an option.

        Of course, when you get to the size of a company like Blizzard/Activision, gamers don’t run the company. Business executives take over. They like everything nice and simple, controlable and profitable. Choice is not an option for the consumer. It’s their way or the highway.

        F*^%^&g corporate dictators they are.

      • BobbinThreadbare
      • 8 years ago

      Blizzard is the same company as Activision. You should have added them a long time ago.

    • tfp
    • 8 years ago

    I’ll still get it because I like the prior games but it does suck.

      • squeeb
      • 8 years ago

      Yea pretty much. I’m still buying it regardless.

        • indeego
        • 8 years ago

        We all are and we all hang our heads in shame.

        Honestly the only thing that bugs me about DRM is the scanning for processes on my machine. When Process Explorer was flagged as malicious I knew I hated DRM with a passion.

          • Voldenuit
          • 8 years ago

          I’m not buying D3 because of this. I didn’t buy SC2 because of Battle.net, either.

          Torchlight 2, here I come.

            • indeego
            • 8 years ago

            I’ll get TL2 and Diablo III. Both should be great button mashers to let off steam (so to speak).

            I won’t bother with the social/online aspect of either game (never do, none of my friends have same game taste/availability as myself.)

            I’ll beat both, try a playthough again and get bored, uninstall and forget about it until the next sequel.

            I’m online constantly anyway, it’s not like I have a purpose to play a game when disconnected from the Internet.

          • paulWTAMU
          • 8 years ago

          I’m not buying it.

            • tfp
            • 8 years ago

            Good for you?

      • derFunkenstein
      • 8 years ago

      Same here. I mean, I’ve survived a year of Starcraft II being always online, I guess I’ll get over it with D3 as well. If the game is strong enough, I’ll buy it.

        • BloodSoul
        • 8 years ago

        They should just develop a separate entirely offline single player experience from the same source, it wouldn’t take that long and they could sell it separately, for those who are really adamant about only wanting to play by themselves without the internet.

          • derFunkenstein
          • 8 years ago

          they should sell it as DLC!

      • wierdo
      • 8 years ago

      I’m buying too of course, it should be a fun game considering Blizzard’s history. But I’m gonna get it for around five bucks on clearance.

      It’s a luxury product, I can wait and that’s my usual price range on products with such limitations. I don’t get the urgent need for “instant gratification” on movies and video games really, but to each his own I guess.

      • Skrying
      • 8 years ago

      Every time you buy a game with that has a DRM implementation like the one in Diablo III you’re aiding in the problem. How about skipping over this game for the long term improvement of PC gaming? Is that really such a hard thing to do?

        • tfp
        • 8 years ago

        How about no and I don’t really care enough… This isn’t exactly a moral or ethical issue.

        If you don’t like it don’t buy it.

          • destroy.all.monsters
          • 8 years ago

          When one has no morals or ethics one never sees them.

      • jackaroon
      • 8 years ago

      Couldn’t you at least lie about it? It’s like you’re asking to be treated more poorly. “You can keep taking things away, I’ll keep paying for whatever is left.”

        • tfp
        • 8 years ago

        Oh are they? What have they taken away from me with they game exactly? If the reviews come out saying POS and it’s a step down from D2/D2:LOD then I will not buy it. I don’t see how I’m loosing anything over all.

        If the game is good enough I’ll deal with the online req, if not I will not buy it. would find a vast majority of the games out right now to not be worth the hassle, with D3 that will probably be different. If Lucas Arts redid Tie Fighter/X-wing and had an online req that wasn’t a monthly fee I would get that as well…

          • sweatshopking
          • 8 years ago

          losing*

          • Master Kenobi
          • 8 years ago

          I wish LucasArts would redo X-Wing vs Tie Fighter on a modern platform. That would be quite excellent.

      • l33t-g4m3r
      • 8 years ago

      sell out. You’re wasting your money. I’ve realized diablo3 was a waste since the WOW graphics fiasco. Blizzard is no longer the same company, the original people have moved on, and they’re operating from name brand nostalgia. There are plenty of other RPG’s that you could play instead.

        • tfp
        • 8 years ago

        *Yawn*

          • l33t-g4m3r
          • 8 years ago

          You perfectly summarized Diablo3 right there.

            • tfp
            • 8 years ago

            Sure and you know that because you have already played the game?

      • destroy.all.monsters
      • 8 years ago

      Then you get what you deserve.

        • tfp
        • 8 years ago

        And what will that be?

          • Anonymous Coward
          • 8 years ago

          Yet another part of your life that totally, irreversibly vanishes when some company decides it is not profitable any more?

            • tfp
            • 8 years ago

            Haha yeah such a huge part of my life is playing 10 year old games thanks for reminding me.

            • Anonymous Coward
            • 8 years ago

            Some of us value where we have been and what we have done. I take photos, for example. My stack of old game CDs is another part of my history, I do value them, and I like to know that I can take them out again when I like. I imagine that I’ll play D1 and D2 with my kids some day, on the LAN. I have at least two copies of D2. In fact I have multiple copies of SC and WC3 as well, but I haven’t touched SC2 and will likely not touch D3. I want to spend my time on things that last.

            Each of us lives our lives how we like, but it sounds to me like you are living minute to minute, which seems quite shallow, quite empty.

          • destroy.all.monsters
          • 8 years ago

          Ever more invasive drm. Inability to play games you bought at all because the publishers don’t want to continue putting money into an “older” game even if it’s less than 24 months old (by making it server bound, always on drm, etc. ad nauseum). New happy invasive features we haven’t even seen yet but will come as long as gamers are willing to climb aboard the cattle cars for their Blizzard/COD/whatever fix.

          We’ve already seen elimination of lan gaming and of dedicated servers and here you are saying “blahblahblah I don’t care”.

          Not that I care about you in the slightest but yours is an inherently selfish and short sighted position [i<]that screws others as well as yourself[/i<]. Plus you've acted like an asshole throughout the thread. I get it - you're spoiled and think the earth revolves around you and you don't care how the outcome is for others. Noted.

            • tfp
            • 8 years ago

            +1 for you and your plight. I get it DRM isn’t great and I agree. All I started off saying was I didn’t like it but I’ll get the game. However if you and others expect to respond to me like I’m some sort of idiot because I don’t completely agree with you or I’m not taking the same “action”, and I should just change my tune to be more like you, you might as well just take a long walk off of a short peer.

            • l33t-g4m3r
            • 8 years ago

            Each his own. I raised your -1 because you’re a reasonable dude. Let us know what you think of the game afterwards.

    • [+Duracell-]
    • 8 years ago

    I don’t see what the big deal is. It’s going to work the same was as it did in Diablo 2: You can play online, with either single player or multiplayer co-op, or offline with only single-player options, but you can’t use offline characters online. That takes care of 99.9% of the scenarios out there.

      • Skrying
      • 8 years ago

      No. Even when playing single-player only characters you’re still required to stay connected. It can’t be played offline.

      [url<]http://www.pcgamer.com/2011/08/01/diablo-3-cannot-be-played-offline/[/url<]

        • DeadOfKnight
        • 8 years ago

        Which is why it’s so disappointing. Online should be better without all the bots and hacks, but the single player mode is dead.

    • Skrying
    • 8 years ago

    Sad to see so much pure bullshit coming from Blizzard.

    If they’re honestly surprised by this reaction then it is a clear sign that no one in the company regularly reads gaming news. Every instance where a single player game or portion of a game required Internet access it has been blasted by the gaming community. There hasn’t been a single exception and it has been an extremely common topic.

    Acting as if this is not motivated for DRM reasons shows a major lack of respect to their customers. It’s a 100% a lie and everyone knows it. Using nonsense like “safer experience” is insulting.

    Gaming is going down the toilet. Developers and publishers of major releases are using shameless tactics to increase revenue and the gamers can’t be bothered enough to not buy DLC or games with such ridiculous DRM schemes to punish said companies.

      • CaptTomato
      • 8 years ago

      “”regularly reads gaming news”””

      oh they read them, that’s why they release such horseshit press statements such as these.
      Gaming is going down the toilet for those with half a brain, but consider that COD black ops has sold 25million copies, and I suspect that most of the AAA titles do over a million units….so casual gaming is in full swing, as such, the casual market will cop almost anything it seems.

      • lilbuddhaman
      • 8 years ago

      The gaming industry now is what the movie industry was 20ish years ago. A downward slide towards absolute trash with the occasional shining stars of genius, the occasional independent classic, and the juggernauts that are good for only a brainless, short bit of entertainment.

        • odizzido
        • 8 years ago

        I would hate if that were true because I almost never watch movies these days because they all suck. At least north american movies.

          • Corrado
          • 8 years ago

          You should watch this. Especially the part when they goto the movies.

          [url<]http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/388734/i-have-cynicism[/url<]

            • odizzido
            • 8 years ago

            I can’t watch what you linked me with a canadian IP. It’s southpark anyways which is terrible.

      • someuid
      • 8 years ago

      Insulting is right. I can’t believe they spew this crap with a straight face.

      • Airgumby
      • 8 years ago

      The problem is the people buying. Majority of the population are stupid people. Hell, I’m probably one as most are classified as. The developers and the media know this so they just feed it to us and we just sit their with our mouths wide open! Once DLC became common as a way to increase revenue, this was eventually going to be the norm.

      The reactions by the developers are absolutely moronic! They know full well why they are doing it and to give us a generic response is a slap in the face. Oh well… What can we honestly do? Vote with the wallet? Sure… But then they will say piracy is over taking the game, or some other scape goat reason.. Blah Blah Blah!!! It’s a never ending cycle these days. Sad to say.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This