Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:
Redding, CA 06/22
Tampa, FL 06/26
Tampa, FL 10/04

Regularly scheduled events

Report this Comment
Use this form to report the selected comment to the moderators. Reporting should generally be used only if the comment breaks forum rules.

31. Re: Op Ed May 28, 2012, 22:33 Jerykk
 
Prez wrote on May 28, 2012, 22:27:
While I agree with your sentiment, I don't think it's all that relevant to Diablo 3. Diablo 3 isn't a pioneer in anything. It's the third in a series of polished, if unremarkable, hack 'n slash action RPGs. One could argue that Diablo 1 was historically significant but Diablo 3? I guess people could argue that Diablo 3 marks the first proof that customers are willing to overlook any kind of DRM as long as the game is part of the right brand.

Taken as a singular instance you are correct. But Longino points to "Diablo 3-style DRM" in his statement, speaking of the practice in general, not just one game. Once this DRM becomes pervasive enough, huge chunks of gaming culture become endangered.

True, but that's assuming that this becomes a standard practice. Diablo 3 got away with it because it's Diablo 3. Very few other brands hold such strength in the PC market. Ubisoft tried it with multiple brands and utterly failed, causing them to eventually revoke the online-only requirement. I'd be surprised if any non-Blizzard game could get away with the same DRM scheme, especially after the issues that people encountered (and are still encountering) since D3's launch.

This comment was edited on May 28, 2012, 22:41.
 
Avatar 20715
 
 
Subject
  
Optional
Message
 
Login Email   Password Remember Me
If you don't already have a Blue's News user account, you can sign up here.
Forgotten your password? Click here.
 




footer

.. ..

Blue's News logo