Blizzard Defends Always-Online For Diablo III: Reaper of Souls

[Oskuro]

I'm a little tired of the "my computer is connected to the internet 99% of the time so it isn't such an issue" argument.

It's not about the consumer's computer being connected, it's about the publisher's servers being available, and, furthermore, it is about the undeserved power this setup gives to publishers.

For the former: All online services will be shut down eventually, thus destroying the game and making it unplayable for people who payed for it.

For the later: Publishers have now the power to punish players harshly for whatever offenses they see fit (as has happened already) denying them access to the game they payed for.


So yes, my computer is connected to the net 99% of the time, but I still don't want my rights as a consumer to be trampled in the name of whatever excuse they come up with this time.

You want games to be a service? Fine, charge me a monthly rate and give me the game for free as part of that service. But you're charging a price tag for the game itself, thus it is a product, thus it must be treated as such.

Anything else is dishonest bullshit from an industry terrified of its consumers eventually growing a spine and *****-slapping publishers with their wallets.

 

[JediMB]

I spent about 80% of my time with Diablo II in the singleplayer or local LAN modes. If I wanted to play with my friends online, with those same offline characters, there was always the "Open" Battle.Net option. I was never "mad" about not being able to mix offline and online characters, and I certainly wouldn't appreciate server lag in singleplayer or LAN games.

 

[vun]

I was hoping they'd remove the always-on crap when the auction house went, but so much for that...

Heck, I was even slightly excited for Reaper of Souls, but nope.
Not that internet connection is much of an issue to me, as I have good and stable connection, but I don't want to have to rely on having a stable connection just to play a singleplayer game on my own, that's BS.

So yeah, I might get it on console, but I'm done with D3 on PC until they do a 180 and remove this junk. Until then I'll stick to D2.

 

[Snotnarok]

Wow this response is just simplistically broken, people complained there was online and offline characters? Yeah, they probably did but went ahead and made an online character to play with a friend. Now, that's not even an option, now you just deal with a shitty online client that limits the amount of enemies on screen with stupid online problems, on top of people either not being able to play the game because of lack of net connection.
This is the weakest deal with it I've heard from a company. Sim City had a less shitty reason and it was a bold faced lie.

Whatever, I have a great solution, I stick to playing Torchlight 2 instead of buying whatever garbage BS Blizzard can kick out.

 

[MatsVS]

Yeah, this is annoying, and potentially deal-breaking if the company is unable to uphold their end of the bargain, i.e. maintaining dependable servers 24 hours a day. As for users needing an active internet connection, it's a non-issue. The fact of the matter is that not every game is made for every person. Blizzard advertised this game as an online game, and if you're not in a situation where that is feasible for you, then there are several other games that cater to your needs.

 

[spartandude]

I was hoping they'd remove the always-on crap when the auction house went, but so much for that...

Heck, I was even slightly excited for Reaper of Souls, but nope.
Not that internet connection is much of an issue to me, as I have good and stable connection, but I don't want to have to rely on having a stable connection just to play a singleplayer game on my own, that's BS.

So yeah, I might get it on console, but I'm done with D3 on PC until they do a 180 and remove this junk. Until then I'll stick to D2.

Or better yet get Torchlight 2, its pretty much and updated and more modern version of Diablo 2 made by the people who did Diablo 2 and its pretty cheap.

 

[aaron552]

You could just make a system that checks if the character has been tempered with, that then allows for transfers between the two modes.

And I suppose you have some sort of solution for this? Afaik, this isn't possible without any form of network connection. For the game to be able to detect tampering there would need to be either a backup somewhere for a comparison or an event log to make sure it all adds up. Problem with that though is that you can just go and edit those as well.

It's called a "digital signature". If a file isn't signed by the digital signature of the game executable, the file is corrupted or hacked.

 

[Sotanaht]

Yeah, this is annoying, and potentially deal-breaking if the company is unable to uphold their end of the bargain, i.e. maintaining dependable servers 24 hours a day. As for users needing an active internet connection, it's a non-issue. The fact of the matter is that not every game is made for every person. Blizzard advertised this game as an online game, and if you're not in a situation where that is feasible for you, then there are several other games that cater to your needs.

They can't provide that service. Even IF the launch goes without a hitch, those servers are still coming down for half a day or more every week for maintenance, which is already dropping them below a 95% uptime which is absolutely horrible (99.5 should be the goal, 99.95 if this were actually something serious rather than "just" a game people are paying for). That's just scheduled maintenance, throw in emergency maintenance and other server outages and problems that don't quite take the game offline but still make it unplayable (IE massive lag spikes) and that uptime just keeps going down down down.

You could just make a system that checks if the character has been tempered with, that then allows for transfers between the two modes.

And I suppose you have some sort of solution for this? Afaik, this isn't possible without any form of network connection. For the game to be able to detect tampering there would need to be either a backup somewhere for a comparison or an event log to make sure it all adds up. Problem with that though is that you can just go and edit those as well.

It's called a "digital signature". If a file isn't signed by the digital signature of the game executable, the file is corrupted or hacked.

Digital signatures work via asymmetric encryption. That basically means that the game executable would have to contain a private key to be able to provide that signature, which means you are relying on that executible's private key to NOT be hacked, which is basically impossible to prevent. You would want to encrypt the key, but it can't be used by your system to create the signature without being decrypted during that process, at which point it is vulnerable. This is why any game can be cracked after release but steam pre-downloads cannot, they become vulnerable only after the game is able to be run to start with.

 

[vun]

I was hoping they'd remove the always-on crap when the auction house went, but so much for that...

Heck, I was even slightly excited for Reaper of Souls, but nope.
Not that internet connection is much of an issue to me, as I have good and stable connection, but I don't want to have to rely on having a stable connection just to play a singleplayer game on my own, that's BS.

So yeah, I might get it on console, but I'm done with D3 on PC until they do a 180 and remove this junk. Until then I'll stick to D2.

Or better yet get Torchlight 2, its pretty much and updated and more modern version of Diablo 2 made by the people who did Diablo 2 and its pretty cheap.

I've played quite a lot of Torchlight as well as a bit of Torchlight 2, but while they're good they don't really do it for me. Hard to put my finger on why that is though.

 

[MatsVS]

They can't provide that service. Even IF the launch goes without a hitch, those servers are still coming down for half a day or more every week for maintenance, which is already dropping them below a 95% uptime which is absolutely horrible (99.5 should be the goal, 99.95 if this were actually something serious rather than "just" a game people are paying for). That's just scheduled maintenance, throw in emergency maintenance and other server outages and problems that don't quite take the game offline but still make it unplayable (IE massive lag spikes) and that uptime just keeps going down down down.

A very good point and indeed a very compelling argument against this practice.

 

[Strazdas]

They can't provide that service. Even IF the launch goes without a hitch, those servers are still coming down for half a day or more every week for maintenance, which is already dropping them below a 95% uptime which is absolutely horrible (99.5 should be the goal, 99.95 if this were actually something serious rather than "just" a game people are paying for). That's just scheduled maintenance, throw in emergency maintenance and other server outages and problems that don't quite take the game offline but still make it unplayable (IE massive lag spikes) and that uptime just keeps going down down down.

Why would they go down so much? Most MMOs go about with 10-15 minute downtimes per day. that would amount to.... 1.5 hours in a week?
Granted, there are downtime for half a day when a new expansion is rolling in, and sometimes there is a hour ro two of maintenance (like once a couple month). Smaller patches roll out within those 10-15 minutes. You downtime is highly underestimated.
Lag spikes are almost always caused by local ISPs throttling traffic to hosting ISP and really cannot be deal with server-wise other than calling in and asking them to stop being dicks.

Digital signatures work via asymmetric encryption. That basically means that the game executable would have to contain a private key to be able to provide that signature, which means you are relying on that executible's private key to NOT be hacked, which is basically impossible to prevent. You would want to encrypt the key, but it can't be used by your system to create the signature without being decrypted during that process, at which point it is vulnerable. This is why any game can be cracked after release but steam pre-downloads cannot, they become vulnerable only after the game is able to be run to start with.

do calcualtion online. servers can handle mahematics now. and it wont matter of the files are hacked or not, the gameplay is still dictated by server-side calcualtion. yes, it may look way different on the hacked guys screen, but the gameplay wont be ruined for others by it.

Also, steam pre-downloads do get cracked. not always, but they do. though that involves the fact that steam actually downloads everything preemptively.

 

[RJ 17]

"If someone has no Internet access, then yeah, Diablo III is not the game for them,"

Ahhhh, the good ol' XBone argument of "If you don't have an internet connection, we don't want your business." Are we sure Kevin Martens isn't Don Mattrick in disguise?

Personally, I just really can't see people raging over the fact that an offline mode existed for Diablo 2. "Oh no!!! I can't bring my offline character online! What ever shall I do?! I mean...it's like I'll have to create an online character so I can play with my friend who just got the game!" Really? They're equating the hassle of starting up a new character for online mode as being as hated as the fact that if you lose your connection for whatever reason you can't play the game at all? Wow, that's one hell of a stretch there, Kevin.

 

[tzimize]

What a load of shit.

If I was playing with my brother or whatever, and he was playing with a cheated character I would either

a: Be ok with it and maybe have a cheated one myself
or
b: punch him in the head and tell him to play one of his "real" toons

This is just the worst of bullshit blizzard. You're doing it to control your customer base. THATS IT. Trying to lie about it just makes you look like even bigger douches.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

Well I guess this isn't the game for me then. Shame they put DRM over customers, ah well. And before someone says it's not about DRM, the guy just admitted it's about preventing hacking with DRM. He's admitted it, DRM isn't just about piracy. It's about control of the game.

yepp 100% this, Blizzard can go fuck themselves with this logic

 

[Tucker154]

That's good and all, except when your like me and has an internet connection that fluctuates and randomly goes offline, so even if I'm playing offline/ over a LAN, I can't actually play the damn game without having to log back in 5 times a session. Or having to wait for server repairs. I'm sorry, but I really don't think we are at a point in time that Always-online games are right. There is still to many issues with connectivity, from my experience of it at least.

 

[Candidus]

"We didn't make that game. That's the straight-up answer. We did not make that game, and we're not going to turn this game into that game."

And yet, the console versions exist...

OOoooooOOohhh~, touchy Kevin! Why didn't he just hiss like a cat instead?

Not much else to say here; his answer is destroyed with just a finger pointed at the Playstation.

Standard Blizzard employee from the Diablo team. Arrogant, ignorant sack of shit.

 

[Frostbyte666]

well I think those who complained about diablo 2 and not being able to take their offline characters and play them online are idiots who didn't read the manual since that was 1 thing that I had checked and thought fair enough. Hence I had 2 main characters, an offline and online version of. Still this news just makes me feel like blizzard are upping their customer contempt scheme and reminds me not to bother with diablo 3 or any of their other products (some research into what they actually own may be required) since I don't like what they've become. Especially galling since the console versions don't require online.

 

[shrekfan246]

I was hoping they'd remove the always-on crap when the auction house went, but so much for that...

Heck, I was even slightly excited for Reaper of Souls, but nope.
Not that internet connection is much of an issue to me, as I have good and stable connection, but I don't want to have to rely on having a stable connection just to play a singleplayer game on my own, that's BS.

So yeah, I might get it on console, but I'm done with D3 on PC until they do a 180 and remove this junk. Until then I'll stick to D2.

Or better yet get Torchlight 2, its pretty much and updated and more modern version of Diablo 2 made by the people who did Diablo 2 and its pretty cheap.

I've played quite a lot of Torchlight as well as a bit of Torchlight 2, but while they're good they don't really do it for me. Hard to put my finger on why that is though.

For me it's the art style.

I like the cartoony style of Torchlight and think it's extremely pleasing and beautiful, but it doesn't really tug my 'gaming' strings like the cartoony darkness of Diablo III or the grimdark darkness of Diablo II, Path of Exile, or Grim Dawn.

OT: Gorram it, Blizzard. Haven't you ever heard "If you haven't got something nice to say, don't say anything at all"? Because what you just said, you would've been better off staying quiet. And I like Diablo III and am considering buying the expansion, online DRM be damned. But when another version of your game exists and is exactly the one you're saying "we aren't going to make" and you're telling your entire PC playerbase to shut up and deal with it, just... just... all I can do is sigh.

 

[rcs619]

Alright i haven't read the article yet but i'd like to make some predictions.
1. its gonna be bullshit
2. no Tyreal nip-slips
3. Bliz your DRM is bad and you should feel bad

edit: I hate how this is justified by its not the game we made and we don't want to turn it into that game. DRM features are no more apart of the game than the menu screen and you know it.

ALSO i do remember the online and offline modes from D2 and being angry that i couldn't play with friends with my offline characters this makes sense and would be a totally valid point had LAN play not existed and you aren't fooling anyone

They're just doubling down, by the look of things. They're already in so deep on their DRM scheme that they feel it would be better for PR to double down and tow the line than it would be to suddenly reverse everything they've been doing since release and admit that they were wrong, and their methods flawed. It's the same reason I don't think Sim City is ever going to go offline, they're just in too deep in terms of their reputation. Personally, I think it would be completely the opposite, and they'd win a ton of gamer goodwill if they did remove the DRM, but soulless corporations (the guys making the real decisions, not the devs) don't quite think like regular people do.

I think the "people were mad that they'd have to make two different characters" thing is the silliest defense they could have come up with though. Do they realize what kind of people play Diablo? I *really* don't think they're the kind of gamers who are going to be upset by the little bit more grinding and loot-gathering it'd take to get a second toon up and running. Grinding, loot-collecting and character building is literally 80% of the game. They should have just gritted their teeth and stuck to the hacking and piracy excuses. They could kind of make an argument along those lines, even if it would still be quite flawed.

 

[Frankster]

But, Martens again puts his foot down, stating that people don't remember "how mad they were" that Diablo II had both an online and offline mode.

"I don't think people necessarily remember how mad they themselves were that they had an offline mode and online mode in Diablo II. This will probably be controversial for me to say. People will be like, "I wasn't mad!" But I was there at the time, and then I studied this for a living."

"It sucks when your friend or brother is online and he wants to join this game, but you realize you're an offline character and he's an online character, and there's no way to transfer over because offline characters can be hacked and hex-edited to hell and back, right?" continued Martens, explaining that the company still feels that forcing Diablo III to be online was the right choice.

My BS detector is ringing a bit here.

But then I do not "study games for a living" so I could be wrong, anyone else wanna weight in on this? Were people back in 2001 really incensed and foaming at the mouth that there was both an online and offline mode in d2?