Rattlehead wrote on Aug 1, 2011, 15:18:
Rofl, do you realize how many times you just contradicted yourself. You basically said "Hey, I am questioning if I should steal this"(in your adult life, I assume you pirated everything as a kid then), after you just said Blizzard has removed the desire for you to buy the game. That's a real fucking moral dillema right? A
I don't understand your reasoning here. I have no interest in the game as sold. I do not play multiplayer and I do not support the idea behind this game, a game with a traditional singleplayer aspect being an online service only. Buying the game would make a horrible statement that it is okay to do that. Then the next Fallout or next Mass Effect or whatever else is online only and we have a clusterfuck on our hands (we meaning singleplayer gamers).
There is no real dilemma about buying the game. I'm not buying the game. The dilemma is...
So basically your post can be summed up like this "Because of the DRM I am considering pirating this"
You are the reason why DRM like this exists. If you don't agree with always online connection..fine, but telling yourself whether torrenting this or not is a moral dillema just adds fuel to the DRM fire. Nice going jackass.
Usually DRM does not effect a purchase decision because it doesn't and can't stop me from playing. If those activations dry up or Steam closes down and there is no official alternative then I could just turn to the community, who will always make sure games can still be played. Call them cracks or whatever if you want, the point is I will always be able to play my legally purchased software.
This game though... this is different. Putting down my $60 for Diablo 3 is saying "hey there, I am okay with traditional singleplayer games being turned into online-only services." It's basically the same thing as supporting streaming. The company is always in control and the solo singleplayer gamer has to play online anyway for the sole reason of being under company control. I cannot... CANNOT... support that. It might happen anyway, I am sure millions will buy it, but I cannot in good conscience be one of them.
So since there is no way I am buying the game anyway the moral question turns to the fact that there will be a true offline singleplayer version of the game available. A product that is, for all intents and purposes, not being sold anywhere. When Blizzard are writing me off and saying "we don't want your business" how wrong is it really to write them off too? I mean let's face it the reason to buy singleplayer games in the current climate is to support developers and publishers... when I don't want to support one, or indeed think it would be against my principles to do so... the moral issue with piracy becomes extremely weakened.
All that said I don't think I could really play something I didn't pay for. I doubt I will actually pirate it. The only thing I think I might find acceptable would be to buy a duplicate copy of Diablo 2 and then download and play Diablo 3. Then they get some money out of it, but not money in support of their online only model.