Yes you could. Playing in single player you couple press the 'Esc' key on your keyboard (top left) and the game would pause.Twilight_guy said:
Diablo III Has Single Player Online
- Thread starter Shamus Young
- Start date
There is nothing wrong at all with what you are saying. As a matter of fact, it's one of the more level headed arguments in this situation. There are millions of people just like me, who like a single player game with optional multiplayer. I don't have a problem with my internet connection or any such thing. I my ping tends to be in the 80 range. But, I don't care for having a compulsory online component. I love online games. I like WoW, I still play Rift, I love Battlefield 3. But they aren't offering me a single player experience while simultaneously demanding that I be online. My point is, there is no reason to exclude anyone at all. If they did it like Diablo 2, you would simply only make an online character and not bother with an offline character. I would probably make an offline character, then if I had a friend who was playing the game, make an online character at the same time as them.sneakypenguin said:
OT: The whole problem with this misguided approach they have taken is they have divided their audience. They didn't make a game that appeals to everyone who likes Diablo. They didn't make a game that appeals to gamers in general I think. I know people who don't like to be always online, so they won't like this. I know people who don't want to support companies that do this kind of thing, so they won't buy it. Then, there are plenty of people who will love this game and have no problem. But, there could be more people... which is where their business model breaks down. Excluding people to "prevent piracy" or "protect your IP" or "Stop a single complaint from people who played Diablo 2" (that last one is the worst excuse I have ever heard, by the way) is just poor business. This will only increase the likelihood of people pirating it or not buying it. Some people have also been ballsy enough to say they are outright going to pirate it, which is brave. Also, you will probably get warned/banned for that.... so not a very smart move.
Theres many issues with this, but the one i'm going to bring up, is this:
Royalties (and other profits obviously)
Now, blizzard lost alot of money through starcraft because of the LAN function, due to the ToS etc etc it wasn't really all that necessary for tournaments to comply with any rules blizzard may state because the hardware its using is all your own. So alot of the korean tournaments didn't really generate a great deal, if any profit for blizzard despite that being the games only replay value in this day and age.
Next, comes Dota. Fantastic. The only real reason that kept me playing WC3 for as long as i did. I liked the campaigns sure, but did they and the skirmishes have unlimited replay value? no. It got old after the first play through real quick. So dota, and the endless other "melee" maps that came out kept me entertained until the expansion, and the next series of campaigns came out.
Dota, is now a game, infact its 3 games. By different companies.
The man who took up the reins, icefrog coupled with this own team made LoL or Dota 2, whichever one, and 2 groups of fans made up heroes of newerth and whichever one of the titles icefrog & co didnt make.
Now thats a lot of profit to be missing out on, considering the original creation was played on their servers, by their player base that they massed.
In this day and age of patent disputes and endless copyright agreements, blizzard seems to have taken the view of any security conscious administrator. Its locked down, until they say otherwise. DRM is probably just the beginning.
Royalties (and other profits obviously)
Now, blizzard lost alot of money through starcraft because of the LAN function, due to the ToS etc etc it wasn't really all that necessary for tournaments to comply with any rules blizzard may state because the hardware its using is all your own. So alot of the korean tournaments didn't really generate a great deal, if any profit for blizzard despite that being the games only replay value in this day and age.
Next, comes Dota. Fantastic. The only real reason that kept me playing WC3 for as long as i did. I liked the campaigns sure, but did they and the skirmishes have unlimited replay value? no. It got old after the first play through real quick. So dota, and the endless other "melee" maps that came out kept me entertained until the expansion, and the next series of campaigns came out.
Dota, is now a game, infact its 3 games. By different companies.
The man who took up the reins, icefrog coupled with this own team made LoL or Dota 2, whichever one, and 2 groups of fans made up heroes of newerth and whichever one of the titles icefrog & co didnt make.
Now thats a lot of profit to be missing out on, considering the original creation was played on their servers, by their player base that they massed.
In this day and age of patent disputes and endless copyright agreements, blizzard seems to have taken the view of any security conscious administrator. Its locked down, until they say otherwise. DRM is probably just the beginning.
The interesting thing is that this probably isn't even to defeat piracy. It's because Blizzard wants to create an economy whose sole purpose is to generate Blizzard money, and allowing the player any form of control will destroy that.
So yeah. Sucks.
It's not even like everyone (say students) always have access to fast reliable internet
So yeah. Sucks.
It's not even like everyone (say students) always have access to fast reliable internet
So how do companies like Blizzard consider their games to be creative and representative of a artistic medium, deal with the eventuality that because of server costs and money decline, that they will have to shut off access to the game at one point.
In ten years time people might not be able to look at these games and what they are at all. What happens then?
What's the point of creating something for people to enjoy, if you deliberately shut large amounts of people out?
Its just so damn sad. People are actually giving companies the ability to do this and literally letting them bend them over the barrel and thrust.
I mean christ you have people defending Project Ten dollar for petes sake. I don't understand how captialist and corporate values that actively screw over the public are actually being defended by anyone at all who always feel the effects of them.
Do you all want them to make enjoying anything as intrusive and irritating as possible? Do you enjoy being exploited as if you were some kind of cow , never given anything of value but milked for all your worth before being left to rot?
In ten years time people might not be able to look at these games and what they are at all. What happens then?
What's the point of creating something for people to enjoy, if you deliberately shut large amounts of people out?
Its just so damn sad. People are actually giving companies the ability to do this and literally letting them bend them over the barrel and thrust.
I mean christ you have people defending Project Ten dollar for petes sake. I don't understand how captialist and corporate values that actively screw over the public are actually being defended by anyone at all who always feel the effects of them.
Do you all want them to make enjoying anything as intrusive and irritating as possible? Do you enjoy being exploited as if you were some kind of cow , never given anything of value but milked for all your worth before being left to rot?
yep. they want absolute control over their "intellectual property" in order to milk the existing fanbase (which is huge) for more money. and because bnet 2.0 is the only game in town, they won't do more than is necessary to provide a halfway playable service. the customer aka fucktard licensee can either bend over or forget about their starcraft/diablo fix.BrotherRool said:
The whole "no pause" thing baffles me. If it's a single player session, why the hell wouldn't they have a pause function? Obviously a multi-player session wouldn't, but single player? Seriously, who put the stupid juice in the devs coffee?
And I really, really don't like the whole name/password thing. I know it seems small and petty, but last time I checked, I'm giving them money, not the other way around. That means I shouldn't have to be hassled to save them hassle, it works the other way around in the consumer-provider interaction.
When did Blizzard get so moronic? Was it before or after Activsion bought them?
And I really, really don't like the whole name/password thing. I know it seems small and petty, but last time I checked, I'm giving them money, not the other way around. That means I shouldn't have to be hassled to save them hassle, it works the other way around in the consumer-provider interaction.
When did Blizzard get so moronic? Was it before or after Activsion bought them?
Pssh, existing fanbase? This game is going to grow, I bet they're aiming this as a cross between Team Fortress 2 and WoW as far as money generation goes. And giving the player any form of control damages the pressure auction house economy that's going to do it for them. People will complain but it's not going to stop many from buying the game. Blizzard know what they're doingThat PC Guy said:
Here are some ideas how Blizzard could fix some problems:
Singleplayer/Multiplayer characers -> Players could play it offline, but the singleplayer characters would be at the same time multiplayer characters.
Constant Online -> Remove it and replace it with some sort of online pass, where players would have to log in to battle.net and insert a code before they could install/play the game(although it wouldn't help those without internet).
Auction House -> No real money, use only ingame gold(it then would have some other use than resurrecting your stupid hireling).
No Mods -> Create separete Mod-section.
No Pausing -> Would work only if you were playing singleplayer(just like in Diablo II).
Did I forget something?
Singleplayer/Multiplayer characers -> Players could play it offline, but the singleplayer characters would be at the same time multiplayer characters.
Constant Online -> Remove it and replace it with some sort of online pass, where players would have to log in to battle.net and insert a code before they could install/play the game(although it wouldn't help those without internet).
Auction House -> No real money, use only ingame gold(it then would have some other use than resurrecting your stupid hireling).
No Mods -> Create separete Mod-section.
No Pausing -> Would work only if you were playing singleplayer(just like in Diablo II).
Did I forget something?
The more and more I hear about Diablo 3, the more and more I want Torchlight 2.
Seriously. They arent even TRYING anymore with this game. Are they making a shitty game because they know it will sell anyway? OR DO THEY LEGITIMATELY THINK ITS A GOOD IDEA? I honestly would love to sit down with Blizzard and say "Seriously?. You're better than that." Im glad they released the beta, and I hope they fix the game based on beta output.
Always online, while I dont have a problem with it, makes no sence for Diablo 3. Its based on Single Player. Being able to buy power from other players with real life gold? That ruined the Arenas for me. Little things matter - the lack of a pause button is just compliling into a ball of shit. I dont care about the story anymore, Ill wiki/YouTube it. Doesnt seem like it will be worth it
Seriously. They arent even TRYING anymore with this game. Are they making a shitty game because they know it will sell anyway? OR DO THEY LEGITIMATELY THINK ITS A GOOD IDEA? I honestly would love to sit down with Blizzard and say "Seriously?. You're better than that." Im glad they released the beta, and I hope they fix the game based on beta output.
Always online, while I dont have a problem with it, makes no sence for Diablo 3. Its based on Single Player. Being able to buy power from other players with real life gold? That ruined the Arenas for me. Little things matter - the lack of a pause button is just compliling into a ball of shit. I dont care about the story anymore, Ill wiki/YouTube it. Doesnt seem like it will be worth it
Patapon 1 and 2 were some of the worst offenders for the lack of a pause button. A game based around a rhythm mechanic that requires precise button timing on a handheld system meant to be played on the go.mjc0961 said:
The third one has a button combo that will pause the game but you have to unlock it first...
OT: I'm still undecided about Diablo III. Like Starcraft 2 I'll only play single player so I think I'll wait 6 months after the game comes out to see if Blizzard releases patches to accommodate people playing solo(like an actual solo mode that has a pause function. If only one person is in a "solo locked" world, a pause function won't come into conflict with anyone else).