Poll:How many of you are with the "always online" policy for D3 and how many against?

[Cerb]

Even if he did know you were black, what the heck does being called 'boy' have to do with being black?

I expected him to look like an aging white rocker with a gut, that loves cocaine, but it was used to address grown black men, to reinforce the idea that they were inferiors to grown white men.

 

[titan131]

I expected him to look like an aging white rocker with a gut, that loves cocaine, but it was used to address grown black men, to reinforce the idea that they were inferiors to grown white men.

Oh right... learn something new everyday

 

[darkewaffle]

Please enlighten us on how merely having an offline mode impacts you? I am honestly interested. The number of multi-player games will not go down (significantly) with the inclusion of an offline mode. Merely those who don't want an online experience won't be hitting your servers. I see that as a bonus.

Duping and other cheating will happen regardless of online or offline. It may not be the same thing, but it will happen. Period. So not having an off line mode doesn't impact you there. So how else? Because your stance absolutely impacts my gaming experience. So please help me understand your side of the argument.

Most (maybe not yours, but most) arguments I have seen are analogous to the reason why telemarketers don't want a do not call list. If they can't call you, they can't sell you that product you wouldn't ever buy anyway. If I am playing single player and you pop into my game, you aren't welcome.

Because when you make the game capable of playing as a standalone offline title, the game needs the files that control the game to be present locally. It needs the files that control item generation, character progression, monster generation, drop tables, stat ratios, skill formulae, map creation, enemy AI; the whole lot. On the other hand, as a client/server environment all the client needs is essentially the tools to render what the server tells it is happening; so the majority of the local content is graphical and auditory.

When those files are present however, they are then broken down, broken into, decompiled, and scoured by smart crackers looking for a loophole to exploit. When those files are not present, they don't have that advantage because they're flying blind.

It's essentially the same reason criminals buy decommissioned ATMs. Because it's much easier to exploit something when you can break it open, look inside, find out how it works, see what it does well, see where it's weak, and test all your ideas on your own time in a controlled environment without the target ever knowing about it. That's what offline mode is to a game like D3.

 

[surfsatwerk]

I expected him to look like an aging white rocker with a gut, that loves cocaine, but it was used to address grown black men, to reinforce the idea that they were inferiors to grown white men.

You were right in your assumptions, but I saw a teaching moment and took advantage of the opportunity.

 

[shortylickens]

How the fuck did we get involved in race relations?

 

[surfsatwerk]

How the fuck did we get involved in race relations?

Because the thread demanded it!

 

[thespyder]

Because when you make the game capable of playing as a standalone offline title, the game needs the files that control the game to be present locally. It needs the files that control item generation, character progression, monster generation, drop tables, stat ratios, skill formulae, map creation, enemy AI; the whole lot. On the other hand, as a client/server environment all the client needs is essentially the tools to render what the server tells it is happening; so the majority of the local content is graphical and auditory.

When those files are present however, they are then broken down, broken into, decompiled, and scoured by smart crackers looking for a loophole to exploit. When those files are not present, they don't have that advantage because they're flying blind.

It's essentially the same reason criminals buy decommissioned ATMs. Because it's much easier to exploit something when you can break it open, look inside, find out how it works, see what it does well, see where it's weak, and test all your ideas on your own time in a controlled environment without the target ever knowing about it. That's what offline mode is to a game like D3.

So, in essence, hacking.

So let me see this.

On the one hand, the current scenario means that players can't utilize something they paid for when servers are down (even in single player mode). They can't play when they don't have a steady internet connection (even in single player mode). They can suffer from lag which might impact their ability to play due to a required online mode. They may very well not be able to play in a couple of years at all, despite paying money for the game, because Blizzard no longer considers it viable to maintain servers. Players in single player mode impact other players because of traffic on servers which shouldn't be necessary as it is single player mode. And they are subject to cheats and hacking, which will happen regardless of DRM schemes.

On the other hand, with an off line mode, players are subject to cheats and hacking.

Ok. I see the difference. And absolutely, the always online is much more beneficial. Thanks for the clarification.

Any game you "buy" is just rented. You never own anything...

It depends on your definition of 'Own'. If you mean 'Can modify', I agree. We can't. But if you mean can play the game in 10 years time without paying any extra (like I do with Baldur's gate and Diablo 2), I would say there is a difference. If I rent something, I have to return it at some point. If I 'Own' it, the disk is mine for as long as i keep it in operating condition and have the hardware to utilize it.

 

[HardcoreRobot]

if it prevents hacking, ill support it. i intend to only play MP online regardless, so if BNET is down the game is useless to me even if its not required.

the only concern i have with all these digital platforms is far off in the future, if they will continue to support their products. its very likely they will want to stop running servers and paying for bandwidth before the playerbase dries up. Essentially they have to keep these servers running until the end of time...

 

[gothamhunter]

It depends on your definition of 'Own'. If you mean 'Can't modify', I agree. but if you mean can't play the game in 10 years time without paying any extra (like I do with Baldur's gate and Diablo 2), I would say there is a difference. If I rent something, I have to return it at some point. If I 'Own' it, the disk is mine for as long as i keep it in operating condition and have the hardware to utilize it.

I mean that you do not own the game - you own the hardware that it's on, but you do not own the game itself - it's licensed to you. At any point a publisher could say that they're effectivly killing all licenses and you're no longer allowed to play their game, even if you own the hardware it's on. Doing so would be against the law. Would a publisher do this - probably not, but the possibility is there.

 

[Chiropteran]

The poll is horribly biased. Obviously anyone given the choice would pick the first option.

The real poll should be:

Which do you prefer:

1- Online required Diablo 3 free of hacks, cheats, exploits.

2- Offline playable Diablo 3, with a broken AH due to item dupes, cheats of all kinds, best items in the game being sold for nothing.


In a vacuum, yeah it would be cool to play Diablo 3 offline if it wouldn't change anything else. But an offline playable Diablo 3 would change EVERYTHING else about the game.

 

[thespyder]

I mean that you do not own the game - you own the hardware that it's on, but you do not own the game itself - it's licensed to you. At any point a publisher could say that they're effectivly killing all licenses and you're no longer allowed to play their game, even if you own the hardware it's on. Doing so would be against the law. Would a publisher do this - probably not, but the possibility is there.

I think that's a mighty fine line you are drawing there. Particularly when you put as your defense an action that, by your own admission, probably will never happen.

More importantly, I think it is the problem with the entertainment business today. The producers think that they can 'Own' intellectual property and then 'License' it out to all of the users. While I get that the artist should get a fair wage for their labors, I think any after market sales should not be subject to control or levy. In essence, if I sell something to you, what you do with it is your business and I have no part of it.

Where it breaks down is in the ability to copy the media. This makes the product ephemeral and significantly more difficult to control. And that is where 'Licensing' comes into play. If i can buy one copy and then sell a hundred from it, there is a problem. But if I buy one copy and use or sell that one copy, that should be my business.

Game developers, movie makers, music distributors all, suffer from this dilemma, but they also seem to be taking more than their fair share of liberty. I just wish there was a better way to work it to everyone's satisfaction.

but I take your point in that D3 seems much more like a rental than D2 did. I bought my copy of D2 back in the day and feel a real sense of ownership there. I can play it whenever and forever so long as the disk doesn't crack and the hardware exists. I very much fear that won't be the case with D3. Once Blizzard no longer thinks it is viable, they may very well pull the plug. And I anticipate it long about the time D4 comes out (and you KNOW it will).

 

[thespyder]

The poll is horribly biased. Obviously anyone given the choice would pick the first option.

The real poll should be:

Which do you prefer:

1- Online required Diablo 3 free of hacks, cheats, exploits.

2- Offline playable Diablo 3, with a broken AH due to item dupes, cheats of all kinds, best items in the game being sold for nothing.


In a vacuum, yeah it would be cool to play Diablo 3 offline if it wouldn't change anything else. But an offline playable Diablo 3 would change EVERYTHING else about the game.

Except your perfect world would need to extend to your options as well. Online only Diablo 3 is not free of hacks, cheats and exploits today. And it will only get worse. So the Always online (which isn't really meant as DRM anyway) impacts gamers now, but with little to no benefit to anyone but Blizzard.

 

[Gheris]

Except your perfect world would need to extend to your options as well. Online only Diablo 3 is not free of hacks, cheats and exploits today. And it will only get worse. So the Always online (which isn't really meant as DRM anyway) impacts gamers now, but with little to no benefit to anyone but Blizzard.

Spyder is on the money here. We already know that cheats and hacks exist. As time progresses more and more exploits will be found. I wonder how Blizzard will address this, uh oh....servers down for maintenance. So now because of hacks you might not be able to play. This will in turn affect all of the players in that server region. Always online for a single player game was a bad idea in my opinion.

 

[Aikouka]

We already know that cheats and hacks exist.

Care to elaborate on these well-known cheats and hacks that we supposedly already know?

 

[DrunkenSano]

Always online for a single player game was a bad idea in my opinion.

Diablo 3 isn't a single player game. Even in interviews, Blizzard stated that it is not a single player game. It's the people who wants to play it like a single player game is voicing complaints when they knew full well Diablo 3 is an always online game. If they didn't want it to be always online, they shouldn't have bought it.

It's like buying Guild Wars 2 and complaining they can't play it off-line. Or World of Warcraft. Or any other game that had already explicitly stated it requires an internet connection to play.

 

[surfsatwerk]

Diablo 3 isn't a single player game. Even in interviews, Blizzard stated that it is not a single player game. It's the people who wants to play it like a single player game is voicing complaints when they knew full well Diablo 3 is an always online game. If they didn't want it to be always online, they shouldn't have bought it.

It's like buying Guild Wars 2 and complaining they can't play it off-line. Or World of Warcraft. Or any other game that had already explicitly stated it requires an internet connection to play.

I agree with you 100%. I just think it's stupid Blizz made it that way.

 

[zinfamous]

Diablo 3 isn't a single player game. Even in interviews, Blizzard stated that it is not a single player game. It's the people who wants to play it like a single player game is voicing complaints when they knew full well Diablo 3 is an always online game. If they didn't want it to be always online, they shouldn't have bought it.

It's like buying Guild Wars 2 and complaining they can't play it off-line. Or World of Warcraft. Or any other game that had already explicitly stated it requires an internet connection to play.

To be fair, it is a game that is/was, traditionally, a single-player game. DII was the same...with multiplayer options.

This type of game caters to a very different crowd. Many of them probably aren't interested--AT ALL-in WoW or any type of online game. They just want to mindlessly hack at things, level, and pick up shiny objects. That's it--that is all they ask.

The gaming world has been unkind to these people for many years, and this was the one golden moment for them, when Blizz was expected to finally return to their roots, and give them what they were clamoring for. Despite what was said about the game before it was available, I think it is reasonable to accept that these fans expected to still be able to play this game the way they wanted.

They are unaccustomed to server downtime issues--again, they don't care about online gaming, so this is not something they expect. I imagine "always online" was simply interpreted as "security necessity," and they were able to shrug it off as a simple, "fine, as long as I can hack and slash to my heart's content, no reason to bitch about annoying DRM practices and such."

Once one realizes that this game is now inextricably tied to another game, an online-only game, whose whims and foibles determine, absurdly, the ability to play this other game, one should be able to understand this type of frustration from a crowd that has no desire to play this other game, due in large part to the annoyances inherent in playing such a game, annoyances which they rightfully (whether it be through ignorance or not) assumed would be avoided.

To demand that a crowd that dislikes online games and MMO playstyle adapt to the "new world order" of MMO frustrations (server mechanics) in a game that is not expected to be an MMO is being a bit shortsighted.

 

[thespyder]

Diablo 3 isn't a single player game. Even in interviews, Blizzard stated that it is not a single player game. It's the people who wants to play it like a single player game is voicing complaints when they knew full well Diablo 3 is an always online game. If they didn't want it to be always online, they shouldn't have bought it.

It's like buying Guild Wars 2 and complaining they can't play it off-line. Or World of Warcraft. Or any other game that had already explicitly stated it requires an internet connection to play.

Everything I was able to find online officially from Blizzard states that the game's "Primary focus" is co-op multi-player. However, that is by no means the same thing as saying 'It isn't a single player game'.

And the continued insistence in comparing it to Guild Wars 2 is simply a desperate attempt to tie it to that type of game. It is just as valid (and possibly more so) a comparison to compare it to Neverwinter nights 2 or Titan Quest or Torchlight. Neverwinter Nights 2 was even developed with a "Primary focus" on co-op multi-play, yet has a very strong single player following.

The point is, there is no basis to say that always online is a requirement for any other reason than Blizzard wants it to be. And considering that a large number of players (both fans of the classic D2 and new fans) are playing it single player, more or less proves that Blizzard designed it to be single player friendly.

 

[DrunkenSano]

Last year, there was a major announcement by Blizzard's Alex Mayberry that explicitly stated that Diablo 3 cannot be played without an internet connection. And it wasn't a quiet interview that no one heard, it was heavily discussed by people watching for news on the game.

 

[akahoovy]

Against. Have been playing solo, as I have no desire to have a compromised account, whatever the methods may be, and lag solo BLOWS. I wish I hadn't bought the game.

 

[MentalIlness]

No offline single player for me ? Then no money from me !

 

[BudAshes]

If it actually meant that no one could hack it I would be in. Since it's obviously not true I'm 100000% against it.

 

[DrunkenSano]

Against. Have been playing solo, as I have no desire to have a compromised account, whatever the methods may be, and lag solo BLOWS. I wish I hadn't bought the game.

Blizzard gives a refund within 30 days of purchase, though I'm not sure if it is for digital copies only. Someone on the forums already spoken to the customer service and got a refund.

 

[smackababy]

Because when you make the game capable of playing as a standalone offline title, the game needs the files that control the game to be present locally. It needs the files that control item generation, character progression, monster generation, drop tables, stat ratios, skill formulae, map creation, enemy AI; the whole lot. On the other hand, as a client/server environment all the client needs is essentially the tools to render what the server tells it is happening; so the majority of the local content is graphical and auditory.

When those files are present however, they are then broken down, broken into, decompiled, and scoured by smart crackers looking for a loophole to exploit. When those files are not present, they don't have that advantage because they're flying blind.

It's essentially the same reason criminals buy decommissioned ATMs. Because it's much easier to exploit something when you can break it open, look inside, find out how it works, see what it does well, see where it's weak, and test all your ideas on your own time in a controlled environment without the target ever knowing about it. That's what offline mode is to a game like D3.

There is a way around this, however, it would involve them creating two completely different methods for loot generation. One only for offline, stored on the client, and one for multiplayer stored on the server.

Also, the only "cheats and hacks" I've heard of are bots which probably use Direct X Injections and are really hard to prevent.

 

[Gheris]

Blizzard gives a refund within 30 days of purchase, though I'm not sure if it is for digital copies only. Someone on the forums already spoken to the customer service and got a refund.

Thanks DrunkenSano, I was not aware of this.