280 Replies. 14 pages. Viewing page 4.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 ] Older >
 |
| 220. |
Re: Diablo III in February? |
Jan 10, 2012, 19:57 |
Krovven |
|
|
Prez wrote on Jan 9, 2012, 21:50:
I don't t need your permission to be aggravated at Blizzard's actions in this matter
I never suggested you did. From my perspective I see a very fine line between online required and online optional. 5-10 years ago I would have leaned more the other way. In 2012 I lean heavily towards online required not being an issue.
All I did was ask you explain to me, how someone that spends so much time online (as I do) and has invested so much in games on Steam, mostly online, has the stance you are taking. Maybe I missed you stating something earlier in the thread, but in the posts I saw you hadn't actually explained why, and that's all I was asking for. I don't agree, but we don't have to agree.
The majority of folks here hate on just about anything and everything they can. You don't, which is why I asked you, not them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 219. |
Re: Diablo III in February? |
Jan 10, 2012, 19:40 |
jdreyer |
|
|
Must... keep... thread... going....
FWIW, it's a conscious decision by Blizzard to not allow offline SP gameplay, and it sucks. They are sacrificing functionality (ability to play w/o internet) for control. It's stupid, and will cost sales, or at least delay them. I still play D2 on occasion: will I be able to play D3 in 12 years if server authentication is required? If I don't think I can, I will not buy the game, or I will wait until it is cheap before I get it. There's lots of other games to play out there which allow both me to play it offline and to play it in 12 years. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Man is equally incapable of seeing the nothingness from which he emerges and the infinity in which he is engulfed. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 218. |
Re: Diablo III in February? |
Jan 10, 2012, 18:43 |
nin |
|
|
TWO WHOLE POSTS no less. How can I NOT care deeply about what he says?????
Yeah, two post suspect that showed up yesterday...whoop.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RollinThundr Apr 17, 2013, 12:25: Eh really tossing stuff like that in there only to get your panties all bunched up. If you really want to call that trolling sure.
Mr. Tact Apr 17, 2013, 12:33: Pretty sure that's the definition of trolling... |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 217. |
Re: Diablo III in February? |
Jan 10, 2012, 18:22 |
Prez |
|
|
GMann69 wrote on Jan 10, 2012, 18:09:
Prez wrote on Jan 10, 2012, 14:24:
nin wrote on Jan 10, 2012, 09:45:
I think some people are getting hung up on the generic 'single player therefore should be offline' angle.
Wow, imagine that.
LMAO!
EDIT: I had originally written more, but realized the futility and just erased it.
Thank GOD. Because frankly you're just sputtering out troll!!
Oh my God - I feel so sad now. Some internet simpleton jackass hurt my feelings.  TWO WHOLE POSTS no less. How can I NOT care deeply about what he says????? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 216. |
Re: Diablo III in February? |
Jan 10, 2012, 18:14 |
RollinThundr |
|
|
Peeeling wrote on Jan 10, 2012, 16:50:
Undocumented Alien wrote on Jan 10, 2012, 12:16:
And mouse/keyboard controls were until then an INHERENT part of FPS games .
ON A PC. Has THAT been taken away? NO.
Console exclusives? Yes.
So... we should keep doing things the way they've always been done because it was popular at the time - a time at which the 'new' way of doing things wouldn't have been remotely practical. I see.
Are you actually saying SP games are not popular NOW? 
Number 1 on the Steam Top 10 - The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim
Certainly pure single player experiences are no longer the core territory of (big budget) gaming, but that wasn't what I said, no. I said (or rather implied) that invoking tradition for its own sake is a poor argument.
And I repeat, the Diablo fan base that has been playing Diablo for years and years and have used the SP offline OPTION, don't care about "online", what is it that your missing about this?
I'm missing the bit where you were appointed spokesman for all Diablo fans, including me. I get it: you don't care about the 'connected' part of D3's integrated single/multiplayer whole. And if the requirement to be online were an onerous one, I'd take your side. As I keep trying to help you see, this is not a black and white, single/multiplayer issue. All the factors involved lie on a continuum.
Look, we've been through all this once before with graphics cards. To begin with, support for them was patchy and nobody would think of shipping without a software renderer. Now they're a requirement. The interesting period between is analogous to where we are now with connectivity. It's not yet an absolute given that you will have an internet connection 100% of the time, but it's getting close enough that some companies are starting to design around the assumption of connectivity.
Factors lying on a continuum? The extra effort required to balance the game around purely single player ( the auction house effectively reduces the grind time for items by 1/(number of classes) ). The difficulty of actually staying connected to the servers. The attitude of gamers towards separation of online and offline progress, and towards entirely solo gaming in general, and so on. Things change, and the right decision changes with them. We are, as I said, in the interesting bit between, where not everyone agrees with the new decisions but the momentum is only going one way.
Diablo 1 and 2 had pure offline modes. They also had software renderers and did not, I think, support graphics cards. All these decisions made perfect sense - in context. Clearly Blizzard feels times have moved on to the point where their new decision makes sense.
Think about a few years down the line, when the expansion set comes out. If Blizzard support pure single player now, they have to continue to support it then, or else everyone with a high-level offline D3 character will need to start again. Where will we be, connectivity-wise, in the next few years? How obsolete will a pure offline mode be then?
Right now, I can agree that the decision is controversial - I can hardly dispute that. But that's not the same as thinking it's wrong. Nothing you're saying suggests that requiring a constant connection is going to actually make it difficult for you to play. You seem to be objecting on principle, a principle based on a 'tradition' unquestionably shaped more by the technical realities of the time than actual merit.
I can't give you one
Of course you can't, because there IS NO REASON for it.
Thanks for playing though, good times.
Damn; if I'd known the aim of the game was to quote-mine and declare victory, I'd have beaten you to it 
PS: Sorry about the change of name; I don't have access to the email where my password was sent from this computer. And no, I am not blind to the irony of that.
Diablo 2 had options for 3DFX Glide FYI. Incidentally not every game needs MP to be successful, look at Skyrim, the recent fallout games, Dragon Age: Origins, Deus Ex HR just to name a few. You've rambled on paragraph after paragraph but have still managed to not name one good reason D3 should require a forced always on connection to play solo.
So is that the new mantra? PC Gaming is dying will be replace by PC Single player games are dying? Sorry, still not convinced. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 215. |
Re: Diablo III in February? |
Jan 10, 2012, 18:09 |
GMann69 |
|
|
Prez wrote on Jan 10, 2012, 14:24:
nin wrote on Jan 10, 2012, 09:45:
I think some people are getting hung up on the generic 'single player therefore should be offline' angle.
Wow, imagine that.
LMAO!
EDIT: I had originally written more, but realized the futility and just erased it.
Thank GOD. Because frankly you're just sputtering out troll!! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 214. |
Re: Diablo III in February? |
Jan 10, 2012, 17:56 |
Prez |
|
|
No disrespect Peeling, but in light of that... unflatterring name (or is it not supposed to sound like an amalgam of "peon" and "underling "?) , your walls of text defending (badly) an unpopular and controversial move, and your developer status as indicated by your name highlighted in green, I'm gonna go out on a limb here and guess that you're a low-level employee at Blizzard who has been given the unenviable task of defending this garbage by your benevalent overlords. The "clubbing all detractors over the head with novel-length banal posts that say nothing" seems to be your tactic of choice.
You don't have to asnwer; just nod your head if I'm right.  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 213. |
Re: Diablo III in February? |
Jan 10, 2012, 17:00 |
Undocumented Alien |
|
|
Damn; if I'd known the aim of the game was to quote-mine and declare victory, I'd have beaten you to it
You lost when you typed your first letter a long while back, because even with your last novel of a post, you still don't show ANY real reason my D3 should not support offline SP mode.
When you can think of a good reason, let us know.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 212. |
Re: Diablo III in February? |
Jan 10, 2012, 16:50 |
Peeeling |
|
|
Undocumented Alien wrote on Jan 10, 2012, 12:16:
And mouse/keyboard controls were until then an INHERENT part of FPS games .
ON A PC. Has THAT been taken away? NO.
Console exclusives? Yes.
So... we should keep doing things the way they've always been done because it was popular at the time - a time at which the 'new' way of doing things wouldn't have been remotely practical. I see.
Are you actually saying SP games are not popular NOW?
Number 1 on the Steam Top 10 - The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim
Certainly pure single player experiences are no longer the core territory of (big budget) gaming, but that wasn't what I said, no. I said (or rather implied) that invoking tradition for its own sake is a poor argument.
And I repeat, the Diablo fan base that has been playing Diablo for years and years and have used the SP offline OPTION, don't care about "online", what is it that your missing about this?
I'm missing the bit where you were appointed spokesman for all Diablo fans, including me. I get it: you don't care about the 'connected' part of D3's integrated single/multiplayer whole. And if the requirement to be online were an onerous one, I'd take your side. As I keep trying to help you see, this is not a black and white, single/multiplayer issue. All the factors involved lie on a continuum.
Look, we've been through all this once before with graphics cards. To begin with, support for them was patchy and nobody would think of shipping without a software renderer. Now they're a requirement. The interesting period between is analogous to where we are now with connectivity. It's not yet an absolute given that you will have an internet connection 100% of the time, but it's getting close enough that some companies are starting to design around the assumption of connectivity.
Factors lying on a continuum? The extra effort required to balance the game around purely single player ( the auction house effectively reduces the grind time for items by 1/(number of classes) ). The difficulty of actually staying connected to the servers. The attitude of gamers towards separation of online and offline progress, and towards entirely solo gaming in general, and so on. Things change, and the right decision changes with them. We are, as I said, in the interesting bit between, where not everyone agrees with the new decisions but the momentum is only going one way.
Diablo 1 and 2 had pure offline modes. They also had software renderers and did not, I think, support graphics cards. All these decisions made perfect sense - in context. Clearly Blizzard feels times have moved on to the point where their new decision makes sense.
Think about a few years down the line, when the expansion set comes out. If Blizzard support pure single player now, they have to continue to support it then, or else everyone with a high-level offline D3 character will need to start again. Where will we be, connectivity-wise, in the next few years? How obsolete will a pure offline mode be then?
Right now, I can agree that the decision is controversial - I can hardly dispute that. But that's not the same as thinking it's wrong. Nothing you're saying suggests that requiring a constant connection is going to actually make it difficult for you to play. You seem to be objecting on principle, a principle based on a 'tradition' unquestionably shaped more by the technical realities of the time than actual merit.
I can't give you one
Of course you can't, because there IS NO REASON for it.
Thanks for playing though, good times.
Damn; if I'd known the aim of the game was to quote-mine and declare victory, I'd have beaten you to it
PS: Sorry about the change of name; I don't have access to the email where my password was sent from this computer. And no, I am not blind to the irony of that.
This comment was edited on Jan 10, 2012, 16:58. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 211. |
Re: Diablo III in February? |
Jan 10, 2012, 14:47 |
Bhruic |
|
|
Is D3 the same as WoW? No. Is it as inherently multiplayer? No. But it is, as a whole, a connected experience. There is no dedicated single-player content. Most players will play with friends at least some of the time. Most players will use the auction houses. And for that to work, everyone needs to have continuous connection.
This has to be the dumbest reason I've read yet. There's no "dedicated single-player content" in Terraria either, does that mean it should have required a constant connection? There are plenty of games (including Diablo 1 and 2) that didn't differentiate between singleplayer and multiplayer content. That's no excuse for making singleplayer content more difficult to access than it previously was.
And that, of course, is why people have a problem. It's the exact same situation that DRM provided us with - more annoyances for customers, with no added advantages (and more advantages for pirates). If a company is going to inconvenience the customer, they damn well better be giving the customer something back for that inconvenience. Sadly, Blizzard is not. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 210. |
Re: Diablo III in February? |
Jan 10, 2012, 14:24 |
Prez |
|
|
nin wrote on Jan 10, 2012, 09:45:
I think some people are getting hung up on the generic 'single player therefore should be offline' angle.
Wow, imagine that.
LMAO!
EDIT: I had originally written more, but realized the futility and just erased it.
This comment was edited on Jan 10, 2012, 14:33. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 209. |
Re: Diablo III in February? |
Jan 10, 2012, 14:18 |
nin |
|
|
deqer wrote on Jan 10, 2012, 12:58:
Blizzard is doing this so that Blizzard can own you, and they think you'll buy into it because they know you love them and love Diablo.
Enough with the hyperbole. Stop pretending you're on some crusade against big brother.
I like the way he writes like a 7 year old - "They OWN you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RollinThundr Apr 17, 2013, 12:25: Eh really tossing stuff like that in there only to get your panties all bunched up. If you really want to call that trolling sure.
Mr. Tact Apr 17, 2013, 12:33: Pretty sure that's the definition of trolling... |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 208. |
Re: Diablo III in February? |
Jan 10, 2012, 14:15 |
Yifes |
|
|
deqer wrote on Jan 10, 2012, 12:58:
Blizzard is doing this so that Blizzard can own you, and they think you'll buy into it because they know you love them and love Diablo.
Enough with the hyperbole. Stop pretending you're on some crusade against big brother. Yeah they track you in game but stop being a drama queen about how Blizzard is out to control your life; leave that to Google and Facebook and every other internet company out there.
I can see why some people are adamant about how gaming is a product and I should be able to do what I want, when I want to my product, but gaming in general is heading towards online integration. You'll see that with the next console generation too. Like it or not, gaming is evolving into a service, not a product, and if you can't adapt to that, then it's going to more and more limit your choices and quality of life as a gamer.
This comment was edited on Jan 10, 2012, 14:22. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 207. |
Re: Diablo III in February? |
Jan 10, 2012, 13:45 |
Mr. Tact |
|
|
Well said, deger. It is about tracking and control. And they do think they can do it because of the credit they've built up. I was leaning towards buying it even though I truly dislike constant connection requirement. My interest is in the single player only; maybe a LAN game or two if I could, which I can't.
I can't say I won't give in and buy it. I think I'll try to hold off and hope against all hope that a patch comes out allowing off-line play. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Truth is brutal. Prepare for pain. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 206. |
Re: Diablo III in February? |
Jan 10, 2012, 13:15 |
Undocumented Alien |
|
|
Blizzard is doing this so that Blizzard can own you, and they think you'll buy into it because they know you love them and love Diablo.
This is probably the ONLY proper answer to the question. Just simply comes down to greed.
Pirates will just take this as a challenge, and you'll see cracked D3 flying around the web in no time.
I won't pirate D3, but if there existed a way to play offline via a legit Blizz patch down the road, or an "external" source, I'd probably end up buying D3 then.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 205. |
Re: Diablo III in February? |
Jan 10, 2012, 12:58 |
deqer |
|
|
I can't give you one, Of course not, because there is no valid reason. All the reasons you've been giving here are meaningless because it's has already been done before with D1, and D2.
Blizzard is doing this so that Blizzard can own you, and they think you'll buy into it because they know you love them and love Diablo.
Blizzard is doing it because they want to Track everything you do. This tracking would benefit the company in a way that would actually work against you because the company would use their tracking to further their agenda on tweaking their products to milk even more money from the cow customers.
Blizzard is just simply trying to feed us the excuse of security, and blah blah, but those excuses just aren't going to fly with a lot of people.
You honestly can't expect all gamers to be happy about purchasing a game that they don't really own. If they really owned it, they could play it offline, and they could play it for as many hours as they want, and do it without anyone--and the company--knowing about it, because frankly it's none of their business.
But, it's their game, right? Their Game, Their Rules. Right? Yeah, well, I can live without Diablo 3 then. I can live without Blizzard then. Plenty of other stuff going on in life, that I am willing to ditch my favourite gaming company because they've shown me know who they really are.
Blizzard is cool for being a company that develops their own engines, and overall doing good quality work. But, I'm sorry Blizzard, if you think that people are going to swallow everything you do now because of your credit, think again. I feel sorry for the brainwashed nerds that have and always will swallow anything you shove down their throats.
Pirates will just take this as a challenge, and you'll see cracked D3 flying around the web in no time. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 204. |
Re: Diablo III in February? |
Jan 10, 2012, 12:22 |
Verno |
|
|
The line by line is getting really tedious so I'm just going to summarize. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect some middle of the road functionality, every single design decision can't be solely influenced by whether or not some shitty user is going to do evil because that's a foregone conclusion. Someone is going to find a way to hack Diablo 3 regardless, people were already hacking away on the beta. Likewise I don't expect Blizzard to necessarily make it easier for them but if I'm going to have all of the potential negatives that come with an MMO experience then I'd expect them to at least make up for some of that in design.
Whether traditional single player games is an outdated model is a different discussion but I don't think sales point towards that conclusion, most companies incorporate this type of online functionality as anti-piracy/used game protection methods than anything else. Considering the massive benefit it seems to have in design and towards the industry bottom line I don't think people are being unreasonable in suggesting that other considerations don't need to be dropped by the wayside.
Anyway that's all I've got to offer, good discussion everyone. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Playing: Faster Than Light, Tales of Graces F, Fire Emblem 3DS
Watching: Ghost in the Shell, Hannibal, Oblivion |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 203. |
Re: Diablo III in February? |
Jan 10, 2012, 12:16 |
Undocumented Alien |
|
|
And mouse/keyboard controls were until then an INHERENT part of FPS games .
ON A PC. Has THAT been taken away? NO. Consoles have never used a mouse, never. You can certainly buy a 3rd party mouse for the PS3, it's available. You see, OPTIONS, OH MY!
So... we should keep doing things the way they've always been done because it was popular at the time - a time at which the 'new' way of doing things wouldn't have been remotely practical. I see.
Are you actually saying SP games are not popular NOW?
Number 1 on the Steam Top 10 - The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim
happy with the archaic separation of online and offline progress
And I repeat, the Diablo fan base that has been playing Diablo for years and years and have used the SP offline OPTION, don't care about "online", what is it that your missing about this? As far as it being archaic, well, thanks for your "opinion".
I can't give you one
Of course you can't, because there IS NO REASON for it.
Thanks for playing though, good times. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 202. |
Re: Diablo III in February? |
Jan 10, 2012, 12:06 |
Peeling |
|
|
Undocumented Alien wrote on Jan 10, 2012, 11:50:
It's not unreasonable to envision people wanting a lot of things.
Yes, it's mind-boggling that loyal fans of the Diablo franchise would expect a feature such as SP offline mode when it was included in both Diablo and Diablo 2. Oh, the humanity! 
I wasn't being sarcastic. It IS easy to envision people wanting that feature. I'm one of them. We're just in different subgroups: you're willing to put up with one compromise, me another.
For every person you make happy, you'll make another miserable because they chose the wrong option on creation and find they can't drop their established character into a friend's game, or sell that fantastic Barbarian loot their Monk picked up on the AH.
Right, because this was a huge issue with Diablo and Diablo 2?
It's yet to be demonstrated that THIS is a huge issue for D3.
At the time, requiring an always on connection to D1 and D2 would have been absurd. No issue would have been huge enough to mandate it. Now it's not such a big deal, so smaller issues like maintaining the connected experience weigh more heavily.
Sorry "Peeling", still waiting for a legit reason for this legacy feature to be dropped.
Because it's no longer as important as it used to be. Like supplying a software renderer for people without graphics cards. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 201. |
Re: Diablo III in February? |
Jan 10, 2012, 12:00 |
Peeling |
|
|
Undocumented Alien wrote on Jan 10, 2012, 11:30:
This is not a new phenomenon. If I want to play a game on the XBox, I have to use a controller, even though playing a FPS with one feels like driving a forklift after a bottle of tequila. I'm not allowed to use a mouse and keyboard.
Thanks for this, it actually proves our point. Consoles have ALWAYS used a controller regardless of the type of game being played on that console. They haven't made console folks move to the keyboard and mouse layout because controllers are an INHERENT part of consoles.
And mouse/keyboard controls were until then an INHERENT part of FPS games. I can't see how evolving hardware trumping the traditions of a game or genre supports your point at all.
LIKEWISE, the Diablo franchise has always provided a true offline SP mode.
Because people have been playing SP mode games now for decades they generally understand that the character can't be transferred to the online experience. You know what, THEY DON'T CARE, that's WHY they went the SP route to begin with! For some reason D2 thrived with this idealogy, amazing.
So... we should keep doing things the way they've always been done because it was popular at the time - a time at which the 'new' way of doing things wouldn't have been remotely practical. I see.
Neither is requiring a connection
Still waiting for a VALID reason for requiring this connection for a game that has always provided a pure offline SP mode.
I can't give you one, because you apparently perceive the connectivity requirement as incredibly onerous and claim to be happy with the archaic separation of online and offline progress. You are the perfect storm, as it were. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
280 Replies. 14 pages. Viewing page 4.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 ] Older >
|
|
Twitter 
