Diablo 3 "Always Online" Requirement Helps Fight Hackers, Says Blizzard

OMGIllithan

New member
Mar 28, 2009
51
0
0
balberoy said:
So to say hackers are to blame is the wrong way. And there is absolutly no data that backs up that DRM stops hackers. People who want to buy, buy games. People who wanna hack games hack them. The DRM doesn't matter.
Can we please stop using the excuse that "Well why try and stop (hackers/pirates/you name it), they're just going to do it anyways" argument? I don't understand why its seen as unreasonably for a company to try to protect legit customers from others who for all intents and purposes are hurting the overall community of the game. Your statement is so vague it doesn't make sense.

If you haven't played D2 and seen all of the hacking that happened then you don't have a clue how bad it was. Its not fair for a player to suddenly have their items disappear from their inventory because someone else screwed them.
 

Odlus

New member
Feb 2, 2011
43
0
0
Jumwa said:
Blizzard sends out another rep to lie and contradict the project lead who admitted it was about piracy when the always-on requirement was first revealed.
You mean Jay Wilson, the guy that's being quoted in this very article?

And lol at people acting like Blizzard is suddenly the "most anti-consumer developer" when Blizzard has already been discussing free content patches they'll be putting out after the game's release. I also like people acting like they understand the tech behind Blizzard's unreleased game better than Blizzard does.
 

Sylveria

New member
Nov 15, 2009
1,285
0
0
OMGIllithan said:
IndianaJonny said:
This is not about genre choice or game mechanics, it's about the downright awful combination of denial of access tagged with forcing gamers to play a certain (more costly) way. I have yet to hear one concrete reason as to why this DRM decision is good for the gamer.
It helps protect a developers games so that they can make them more balanced and fair. Also, it will reduce piracy so that developers can me more confident on taking in enough income to produce more great games for all gamers.

Well, that was easy.
How does protecting the developer make the game more balanced and fair? How does it make the game more balanced and fair period? They've introduced RMTing into the game. They've effectively made it pay to win, which is the anti-balanced-and-fair, since anyone with enough disposable income can just walk in and buy all the top end stuff they want. Any actual honest players will be undercut by Chinese prison slaves who spend 20 hours a day farming for equipment.

You make it sound like previous profits have a direct influence on future quality, which right up there with "games are turning our kids into rapists" as far as how ludicrous a statement is regarding the game industry. I assume since you buy into the idea that piracy is is harming developer confidence in making future projects, you can cite some(meaning more than just SSFIV for the PC, especially since Capcom cancels games like it's going out of style) examples where a major developer has gone under or a project has been canceled and they attribute it to harm caused by piracy?

And you also use the term "great games for all gamers." The article stated they don't care about "all gamers." As we've clearly seen in the past months, "all gamers" are not happy with this. They could very easily alter that by admitting to themselves that the unavoidable eventualities of hacking/pirating/gold farming/etc will happen, regardless of what measures they take, creating an offline mode that entirely separated from the online mode, and cease these ultimately futile ploys that only punish honest consumers.
 

Odlus

New member
Feb 2, 2011
43
0
0
questionnairebot said:
Because not everyone does Multi player. We are being told that playing single player is wrong and we should stop. That in itself is a reason to stay away from this game. If i can't enjoy a single player experience then i am not getting a game.
That's fine in of itself and completely expected; if you wanted to play Diablo 3 single player then you absolutely shouldn't get the game if the required online connection is an issue for you. What's hilarious are people that are acting like Blizzard are the scum of the earth now because people will have to be online to play an online game.
 

OMGIllithan

New member
Mar 28, 2009
51
0
0
questionnairebot said:
OMGIllithan said:
Signa said:
I love all the double-speak. In the end, it's not about piracy or cheaters or modders, it's about protecting Blizzard's bottom line. If there is a chance in hell that a player could create a high-level item without waiting for it to drop, Blizzard will lose the money they have their hearts set on.
How does that even make sense? You make it sound as though trying to make a fair and safe community is money grubbing.
He's talking about item Modifications or creation. If someone cracked the server and made a high level item and sold it for half the price the blizzard site sells for in the auction house they would be out that money.
I don't understand... is making a balanced economy a bad thing? I mean, people would have been selling items either way. Does this mean its a better idea for people to get scammed and for the game to be broken? That is what I'm really confused about.
 

LawlessSquirrel

New member
Jun 9, 2010
1,105
0
0
I'd lost my internet connection for about 9 hours today. It's not a big deal, it happens all the time, but that tends to be the time I would love to turn to a good RPG or somesuch to pass the time. I would really rather not get a lesser experience (or none at all) because I can never guarantee a connection will be available.

I guess it's a system requirement as standard, but it's not some hardware side that'll only have a problem once in a long while, it's a problem that will certainly pop up every now and then with nothing I can do about it. I know I'm not alone in this.

But as I keep saying, it's not a deal breaker. I'm sure it'll be a great game that'll be worth buying. It just concerns me a little that Blizzard either won't consider people outside of their narrowing scope or simply don't care enough to support them. It looks like they're changing priorities away from their community little-by-little and focussing more on controlling the product.
 

Sylveria

New member
Nov 15, 2009
1,285
0
0
ciasteczkowyp said:
as I stated previously on forum:
a) Great thing for every honest battle.net player
b) The game won't die after a year or so when 1 billion dupes and cheats pop up
c) Hackerfagz will have a hard time
.
Yeah cause Diablo 2 just disappeared from the world after the first year.
 

LawlessSquirrel

New member
Jun 9, 2010
1,105
0
0
I'd lost my internet connection for about 9 hours today. It's not a big deal, it happens all the time, but that tends to be the time I would love to turn to a good RPG or somesuch to pass the time. I would really rather not get a lesser experience (or none at all) because I can never guarantee a connection will be available.

I guess it's a system requirement as standard, but it's not some hardware side that'll only have a problem once in a long while, it's a problem that will certainly pop up every now and then with nothing I can do about it. I know I'm not alone in this.

But as I keep saying, it's not a deal breaker. I'm sure it'll be a great game that'll be worth buying. It just concerns me a little that Blizzard either won't consider people outside of their narrowing scope or simply don't care enough to support them. It looks like they're changing priorities away from their community little-by-little and focussing more on controlling the product.
 

Fiz_The_Toaster

books, Books, BOOKS
Legacy
Jan 19, 2011
5,498
1
3
Country
United States
SpcyhknBC said:
Blizzard is doing what they think is best for their game, plain and simple. They could be lying through their teeth, or everything they've said is the truth. Sometimes I wonder why game companies try to defend their decisions every time a new group of people complain about a design decision. If you as a consumer don't like a design decision, don't purchase the game.

The fact of the matter is that internet connections are the new game requirement. Very soon they might become the only requirement if game streaming services manage to take a significant chunk of the market. For all the people out there who have shoddy internet connections and can't play the game because of it, maybe you should invest in a better internet connection. If I couldn't play a game because I needed a new graphics card, I'd go back to the store and either buy a new card or return the game. At the moment, you can't always get a better internet provider but sometimes you just have to wait.

I most likely won't be getting D3 not because of the internet requirement, but because I wasn't impressed by SC2, I haven't even finished it because it didn't hook me, and I worry that D3 will be very similar. I loved getting a new game, reading all the manuals and pages of history and then playing through the game to get the rich story. SC2 came with no detailed histories, no new insights. If I want to read game lore now, I just go to the wiki.
This, you make sense.

They're doing it for their game and to make sure that it's up to whatever expectation they have for it. I don't understand why they have to justify every little thing they do just because people in the fan base complain about it, then don't buy it if you don't like what they are doing. Not buying something can speak volumes to companies that pay attention.

I agree about the internet connection, it's becoming a requirement now and getting away with a minimal one is becoming a thing of the past. With newer games it's slowly becoming harder and harder to have a slow connection when DRM is becoming prevelent in games. I personally don't like it, but I can't stop something that's becoming something that's going to be a requirement, only companies that use it can decide whether or not they should continue to use it.

I've waited a long time for this game to come out and there is NOTHING that Blizzard or anyone else can do to stop me from buying it. I love Diablo to pieces so I have no problems with being always online, I don't like it, but I will deal with it.
 

Simeon Ivanov

New member
Jun 2, 2011
824
0
0
Оh yeah, you've made the game so AWESOME, that no hacker would even dream of changing some annoying thing in the game!
 

Weaver

Overcaffeinated
Apr 28, 2008
8,977
0
0
They only care now because hackers would fuck up their precious auction house economy.
 

OMGIllithan

New member
Mar 28, 2009
51
0
0
Sylveria said:
OMGIllithan said:
IndianaJonny said:
This is not about genre choice or game mechanics, it's about the downright awful combination of denial of access tagged with forcing gamers to play a certain (more costly) way. I have yet to hear one concrete reason as to why this DRM decision is good for the gamer.
It helps protect a developers games so that they can make them more balanced and fair. Also, it will reduce piracy so that developers can me more confident on taking in enough income to produce more great games for all gamers.

Well, that was easy.
How does protecting the developer make the game more balanced and fair? How does it make the game more balanced and fair period? They've introduced RMTing into the game. They've effectively made it pay to win, which is the anti-balanced-and-fair, since anyone with enough disposable income can just walk in and buy all the top end stuff they want. Any actual honest players will be undercut by Chinese prison slaves who spend 20 hours a day farming for equipment.
Diablo 2 was full of people selling items for real money, and full of scams. Its just the nature of a game like that. People were going to sell and buy items for real money period. There is nothing blizzard could do to stop it except either make it against the ToS and therefore pursue those who do sell items (which works so well with wow), or adopt a business model where people can purchase items in a safer environment. Its not Blizzard's fault people are willing to pay real money to get ahead in a video game. Also, Chinese farmers will not affect you unless for some reason you're trying to run a market off the Blizzard auction house, which I'd probably recommend against using that as your household income.

Sylveria said:
You make it sound like previous profits have a direct influence on future quality, which right up there with "games are turning our kids into rapists" as far as how ludicrous a statement is regarding the game industry. I assume since you buy into the idea that piracy is is harming developer confidence in making future projects, you can cite some(meaning more than just SSFIV for the PC, especially since Capcom cancels games like it's going out of style) examples where a major developer has gone under or a project has been canceled and they attribute it to harm caused by piracy?
If a developer makes bad games, don't buy them. It's that simple. By that mentality, developers who make bad games won't make enough money to make more games. Regardless, developers have a right to attempt to protect their games from the "Well I wasn't going to buy it anyways" mentality. Wanting compensation for their hard work shouldn't be something thats unreasonable to understand.

Sylveria said:
And you also use the term "great games for all gamers." The article stated they don't care about "all gamers." As we've clearly seen in the past months, "all gamers" are not happy with this. They could very easily alter that by admitting to themselves that the unavoidable eventualities of hacking/pirating/gold farming/etc will happen, regardless of what measures they take, creating an offline mode that entirely separated from the online mode, and cease these ultimately futile ploys that only punish honest consumers.
Yeah, it clearly specified that they don't care for hackers. Also, you don't have to touch the auction house if you don't want to.
 

00slash00

New member
Dec 29, 2009
2,321
0
0
i never had a problem with the always online thing. i agree that you dont get the full experience unless you play online and diablo 2 hackers were annoying as hell. that being said, blizzard just needs to stop talking about diablo 3 for a while because right now there are two groups of people. there are people who have made up their mind about hating diablo 3 and nothing blizzard says will change that and only cement their opinion. then there are people like me who have been excited for diablo 3 for so long that they will buy diablo 3 no matter what blizzard does to it
 

OMGIllithan

New member
Mar 28, 2009
51
0
0
AC10 said:
They only care now because hackers would fuck up their precious auction house economy.
Some people just want to watch the world burn. The anonymity of the internet does that to people. Certain measures were taken to discourage that.
 

balberoy

New member
Aug 19, 2011
47
0
0
What does Blizzard accomplish with this hilarious DRM crap?

Do they protect their game from any form of piracy?
- No they don't!!!

Do they offer anything to you as a customer?
- No the game gets more expensive cause those measures
- No you can't play it without an online connection

What shall it bring you?
- No screwing up Multiplayer
- No MODS!!!

Why did Diablo stay online for so long?
- MODS!!!

Why not add good anti cheat support, or make mods not compatible with the a normal online game?
Or why not check the version when logging in a game, when you wanna play online?
- NO DAMN REASON!!!

They treat us customers like cattle, ready to go to the butcher.
We swallow everything they throw at us, like their god forsaken marketplace, online DRM, mod free games etc... and people swallow everything and want more.

Not anymore I say. I do the only thing I can, and that is not to buy games from those who try to feed me rotten vile things covered in a thin chocolate layer.
 

Gwarr

New member
Mar 24, 2010
281
0
0
Wilson acknowledged that the decision had upset people, but said that it was impossible to please everyone all the time. In fact, he added, every choice that Blizzard made would upset a certain portion of Diablo 3's potential audience, no matter what it was. "Some people don't like fantasy games, so should we have not made Diablo a fantasy game, because some people don't like that? Some people don't like barbarians. Should we not have put a barbarian in the game because some people don't like it?"
Can he REALLY be THIS stupid? No , you ignorant tool( talking to the game director now ) , we want the GAME we pay for . You don't condition me when I can or not play my game . This DRM bullshit+ the real money AH made me hate the company I loved . I wont buy Diablo 3 , I regret playing 6 years of WOW and I'm glad I canceled a couple of months ago and regret buying Starcraft 2 ( Not because it's a bad game , but because it gives money to these soul-less jackasses ) . Really hope to see the day Blizzard goes back to its roots ...you know , the gamers....