This is very true. And this story shows it. Note that the headline reads "Blizzard Cleans Up GAME's Mess", not Activision Blizzard. Activision couldn't be involved in a classy PR move, now could they?SenseOfTumour said:The Blizz hate is rather out of control, when it comes down to it, Blizzard have always made quality games, most of the ire on here comes from when they merged with Activision, and I think most of the blame can be laid at Mr Kotick's door, preferably in a paper bag, with some poop in it, on fire.
"This credit will be applied to the payment method used for the digital purchase."CardinalPiggles said:So if you paid for the game with a bank card, they put £40 directly back into your account? Or do you get a sort of store credit thing?
If it's the former then wow, just wow, that is pretty decent of them.
If if's the latter then well, I am not surprised much at all, 'here you can now give us more money, enjoy'.
Because having to be online to play a game by myself that I paid $100 essentially makes my investment worthless. They're not providing me with a product anymore, they're giving me permission to use their product. It shows a blatant disregard for their fanbase without internet connections, it's cocky assuming that their system will definitely work for everybody, and it means when those servers get switched off, my disc I paid for becomes as worthless as a coaster. I don't want to support a company that think that's good design.tony2077 said:how is being online to play this game so evilAndy of Comix Inc said:He wants them to fix their totalitarian DRM. Blizzard does understand that LANs exist, right? I mean Starcraft II basically single-handedly killed the LAN party, not to mention the ramifications it had on the tournament scene. Diablo 3 is doing the same. Why does Ubisoft get grated for this but Blizzard gets away with it?tony2077 said:you want them to fix your crappy connection?Keslen said:Now if only they'd fix that issue where your single player game crashes if your internet connection dies.
I think I've found YOUR problem. You're confusing a single player game with a very robust and well implemented multi-player mode (Diablo) with a semi-MMO (Guild Wars). Diablo has never been a multi-player game primarily, the focus was always the single player game. And there are some of us who don't feel like our single player game should be dependent on an internet connection to a remote server.Funkamander said:I think I've found your problem. You're confusing a single-player game with an online game that can be played on your own.Keslen said:Now if only they'd fix that issue where your single player game crashes if your internet connection dies.
Do you get mad when Guild Wars 1 boots you off the servers when your connection dies? No? Because it's an online game that you can play on your own if you want?
It doesn't matter how good your connection is. If their connection is flaky, everyone's crap out of luck [http://pc.gamespy.com/pc/diablo-iii/1224659p1.html].tony2077 said:you want them to fix your crappy connection?Keslen said:Now if only they'd fix that issue where your single player game crashes if your internet connection dies.
It's not pay to win though...buying from an in-game NPC is more pay to win then this. They just changed the currency. For it to be pay to win, the items have to be spawned into the game with money: These items are still crafted/found/w'e by players, but rather then sell them for virtual promissory notes, they are selling them for paper promissory notes.eventhorizon525 said:Guess I just find effectively pay-to-win options disappointing to say the least, since it basically cuts out the feeling of achievement you get from finding/unlocking everything on your own. And while yes people like me don't have to use the money shop, it will effect us none the less, and make the trading scene more frustrating. If you can tie real money value to an item (legitimately), people are going to more often compare items based on those prices, and there is going to be less wiggle room than the more barter or alternative currency method originally employed.
However I can't argue that this isn't the best choice to do from Blizzard's perspective, it does reenforce some (imo) unfortunate trends in gaming.
captcha: easy as cake; well yes, I do think people being able to buy the best items ruins the fun of the game.
Don't forget that Ubisoft's servers went down for a few days locking everyone who had supported the game out from playing it. The same could easily happen for Diablo 3 if Anon wants to DDOS them.Bat Vader said:Not everyone has a great internet connection and people should not be punished because of it. The same exact thing happened when Assassins Creed 2 was released. People had to be connected to the internet to play the game. I believe AC2 was patched later on though so people could play it without having to always be connected to the internet.tony2077 said:how is being online to play this game so evilAndy of Comix Inc said:He wants them to fix their totalitarian DRM. Blizzard does understand that LANs exist, right? I mean Starcraft II basically single-handedly killed the LAN party, not to mention the ramifications it had on the tournament scene. Diablo 3 is doing the same. Why does Ubisoft get grated for this but Blizzard gets away with it?tony2077 said:you want them to fix your crappy connection?Keslen said:Now if only they'd fix that issue where your single player game crashes if your internet connection dies.
If someone wants to play the campaign by themselves by making their session private why should they still have to be connected to the internet? Hopefully Blizzard patches in an offline mode in the future.
Thank you for a more competent post that makes a good point rather than uses any D3 news to bash Blizz for the way they protect their IP.John Funk said:The RMAH from the beginning has been the thing I have the *least* problems with. D2 had RMT out the yin-yang on shady third party sites, and Blizzard couldn't really do much to stop it.eventhorizon525 said:Which is actually what most people complaining about D3 have an issue with; the whole RMAH. Given that the previous installments were very friendly toward the single player option offline, and were quite harsh in blocking any sort of virtual goods/real money exchange, this sudden reversal is unwelcome.Amnestic said:I've not played Diablo 3 at all, but as I understand it you're constantly connected to the auction house - an online feature. You're never playing all by yourself. Doesn't really matter what you 'intend', you're still technically playing with others by design.
So, they did the sensible thing and cut out the third party black market directly. It was going to happen anyway, why not make it legitimate?