Well, I won't say it created piracy, but it sure isn't doing anything to stop it.ManThatYouFear said:"ONLINE DRM CREATED PRIACY"
^^ i wonder how many people will say this before threads end.
It didn't create piracy but it's going to drive more potential customers into the arms of the pirates.ManThatYouFear said:"ONLINE DRM CREATED PRIACY"
^^ i wonder how many people will say this before threads end.
Link please. 70% not able to play is absolutely made up statistic unless you substantiate it.NameIsRobertPaulson said:None of my friends have been able to play more than 2 hours since release. Reported amount of users that have been unable to play the $60 game they purchase? According to Yahoo and their report this morning, more than 70%.
Again this same misconception that bad press keeps propagating.Grey Day for Elcia said:So, so, so, so glad I decided against buying Diablo 1 and 2 the other day. Drop the DRM bullshit and I'll consider ever giving you a cent, Blizz. Until then, you'll get nothing but bad recommendations from me to anyone I know.
Only, pirates managed to crack the beta and play without the servers thanks to some emulation work.PingoBlack said:DRM in server ran games is not an optional requirement, it is pretty much mandatory.
D3 was unplayable for the first 24 hours for the majority of people.Abedeus said:Did you play the game?Sylveria said:Shitty, rushed game made by soulless corporate drones who have no concern about the quality of the game they make or consumer satisfaction is shitty.
Personally I can't wait till they release Diablo III Gold which, for a nominal monthly fee, will allow you access to a higher quality server with better drop rates and exp multipliers as well as two new classes only available to Gold membership holders.
No?
Then shut up and don't say it's shitty without having played it. Rushed? It took 10 years to release, and was announced in... 2008 or 2009? That's not rushed.
I remember problems Half Life 2 had after release. Game was unplayable not for the first few hours, like D3, but DAYS.
Agreed, which is precisely why they should have let people play off-line.SenseOfTumour said:As much as I don't have sympathy for big business, there's no real sense in building double the number of servers for the launch, when, given a week or so it'll have calmed down to 'normal levels'.
It wasnt even remotely 24 hours. The servers were up for Asia and EU less than 3 hours after launch and stayed up for the rest of the day. The Americas servers took a bit longer, but once they were up they were up the rest of the day.Frostbite3789 said:D3 was unplayable for the first 24 hours for the majority of people.Abedeus said:Did you play the game?Sylveria said:Shitty, rushed game made by soulless corporate drones who have no concern about the quality of the game they make or consumer satisfaction is shitty.
Personally I can't wait till they release Diablo III Gold which, for a nominal monthly fee, will allow you access to a higher quality server with better drop rates and exp multipliers as well as two new classes only available to Gold membership holders.
No?
Then shut up and don't say it's shitty without having played it. Rushed? It took 10 years to release, and was announced in... 2008 or 2009? That's not rushed.
I remember problems Half Life 2 had after release. Game was unplayable not for the first few hours, like D3, but DAYS.
Except the part where Battlenet NA itself went down about midday (a bit earlier) and was not back up again until 11:45pm Blizzard time. 15 minutes short of the 24 hour mark.shintakie10 said:Snip
You don't seem to understand my point. Cracking and emulation are just not the same thing.Grey Day for Elcia said:Only, pirates managed to crack the beta and play without the servers thanks to some emulation work.
You're free to do as you like. Me? I'm not giving a cent to people who want me to log in to their servers and remain online at all times to play my single player game.