Rock, Paper, Shotgun - Why The Problem With Diablo Isn’t Diablo.
We have to demand a standard of quality and dedication from these things. If we try to paint complaints about Diablo III’s loudly reverberating server-side-down bellyflop as entirely immature, wrong, and entitled, we’re basically saying, “Look, everyone else! We’re totally OK with this.” I mean, Diablo III’s almost assuredly sold millions of units by this point. If widespread rage then proves relatively short-lived, I have to imagine that looks like pretty much all upside to, say, Tim Willits or even devs/pubs whose intentions aren’t quite so benevolent or design-focused. Piggy banks are happy, and customers are happy. What more do you need?
Creston wrote on May 18, 2012, 10:40:
Everyone is proving Blizzard right that they WILL put up with all kinds of horseshit.
"Yeah, online single-player is ridiculous, but... it's Diablo!"
"Man, their engine sucks, but... it's Diablo!"
"Always-on DRM is the scourge of gaming, and I'll never support a dev who does that! Oh, it's Diablo!"
When major devs start going this way, thank all of you who bought Diablo 3 for bending over and taking it up the ass from Blizzard, and paving the way for probably a majority of games in the future to be made in this (totally fucking worthless) way. Kudos!
And this is bullshit too :Even so, in the long run, Diablo probably won’t be the big problem here. It’s the next wave of “always connected” games that we need to worry about – the one’s that attempt to follow its lead. So stay angry. Keep demanding an offline option, if nothing else.
Well, we accepted it for Diablo. But when the next game requires us to be always online, then we should get really angry, and tell them we won't accept it!
Unless it's somethingshinywe really want to play. Then it's okay.
Creston