Bhruic wrote on Aug 12, 2011, 19:28:

Oh, I'm sure he does, and I'm sure there isn't any possibility of directional smoke there to help promote the game. In my mind, of course he is going to say that. Is what he is saying 100% true, and it has nothing to do with the company trying to selfishly justify what they are doing? I don't know, but as a consumer I'm certainly going to question that, and not just take his word at face value, ESPECIALLY if you look at the direction the industry is going with all these greed ridden publishers.

People just so easily accept things these days without questioning anything. People need to realize that these greedy whore publishers need US, we don’t need them.

Um, dude? The guy I quoted works for a completely different company. Which is making a game that some would say is in direct competition with Diablo.

So, yeah, the chances that he just said that to "promote the game"? Not so high.

Oh, I'm sure he does, and I'm sure there isn't any possibility of directional smoke there to help promote the game. In my mind, of course he is going to say that. Is what he is saying 100% true, and it has nothing to do with the company trying to selfishly justify what they are doing? I don't know, but as a consumer I'm certainly going to question that, and not just take his word at face value, ESPECIALLY if you look at the direction the industry is going with all these greed ridden publishers.

People just so easily accept things these days without questioning anything. People need to realize that these greedy whore publishers need US, we don’t need them.

Beamer wrote on Aug 12, 2011, 16:59:

They want consumers to buy more stuff within the game while playing the game and that means running the game in conjunction with a creditcard transaction server.

But you don't need to force them online for that. Enough of them will be online anyway that there's no need to force it. Plus plenty of other games do DLC without forcing you online.

This is about control, that's true, but in a DRM way, not a sell-you way. There's zero need to force people online to sell them DLC. Zero. Like I said in another post, just build the storefront into the main menu and have it connect if the player is online. Which, 9 times out of 10 (if not far more) he will be.

Bhruic wrote on Aug 12, 2011, 14:21:

Again, I completely disagree with this. How does this require persistent online? It doesn't in any way, shape or form. There isn't a single argument that can be made that persistent online even helps this. Sorry, but it makes the argument dumb.

Really? So when Max Schaefer from Runic games said that that was probably the reason for it... let me quote him:

"In this case, a fully secure economy MAY require it."

I'm pretty sure he's in a better position to say than you. So yeah, maybe you want to rethink your "dumb argument" comment.

They want consumers to buy more stuff within the game while playing the game and that means running the game in conjunction with a creditcard transaction server.

Beamer wrote on Aug 12, 2011, 14:01:

avianflu wrote on Aug 12, 2011, 12:53:
The whole point of persistent on line is NOT to stop piracy: it is to allow for real-time micro-tranctions in the auction house and blizzard store.

Want that sword of Damocles for $1.50? Click -- it is now yours.

Again, I completely disagree with this. How does this require persistent online? It doesn't in any way, shape or form. There isn't a single argument that can be made that persistent online even helps this. Sorry, but it makes the argument dumb.

However, DRM can require persistent online.

Sorry, not buying it. If they were to make a completely offline SP mode that never touched the online modes, then I could see. There is no reason I can see not to do this except to thwart piracy.

avianflu wrote on Aug 12, 2011, 14:49:
Hey Beamer -- the D3 game consumer has to be online for the micro-transactions to occur _seamlessly_ in the game. Same thing with the real-money auction house.

I think you are saying Blizzard could hypothetically allow folks to make purchases offline and outside of the game that would later be reflected in the game but that is obviously not what Blizzard _wants_ to do. They want consumers to buy more stuff within the game while playing the game and that means running the game in conjunction with a creditcard transaction server.

Prez wrote on Aug 12, 2011, 14:20:
I should have just posted 'QFT', 'QFMFT', 'THIS', '+1', '+10000' or whatever the cool kids say now.

PHJF wrote on Aug 12, 2011, 13:51:
Delusioned isn't a word.

Again, I completely disagree with this. How does this require persistent online? It doesn't in any way, shape or form. There isn't a single argument that can be made that persistent online even helps this. Sorry, but it makes the argument dumb.

"In this case, a fully secure economy MAY require it."

They're going to sell millions upon millions upon millions of copies. The idea that the average PC gamer is this stalwart Champion of Principles is very cute, and utterly, utterly wrong. Most people will buy it because they don't care one way or another about having to be online (which is fine, to each his own), a large amount of people will buy it because they don't even realize they HAVE to be online, and the rest will buy it "BUT... BUT ITS BLIZZURD!"

avianflu wrote on Aug 12, 2011, 12:53:
The whole point of persistent on line is NOT to stop piracy: it is to allow for real-time micro-tranctions in the auction house and blizzard store.

Want that sword of Damocles for $1.50? Click -- it is now yours.

Avecrien wrote on Aug 12, 2011, 12:04:
It doesn't matter to me what is more convenient for the corporation. I, as a consumer, have a responsibility to push for my needs and wants to be met instead of gobbling up whatevers slapped on my plate. The industry only goes this direction because we allow it. Fatalism and inaction do us no favors.

Competition for my entertainment dollar is at an all time high. It has never been easier for me to protest these decisions with my wallet and happily play the alternatives-or to join with like minded gamers to make sure they know about the alternatives. Or I could sulk about how nothing I do could possibly make a difference and buy what I'm told I'm supposed to.