Jimquisition: EA & Ubisoft: A Cycle of Perpetration and Apology

[Thanatos2k]

If you really care - then don't let offline characters use the auction house. Not difficult.

I already explain why this won't work unless you can prevent these offline characters trading with online characters.

So do that too. Not difficult.

In a cooperative match the enemy difficult is increased based on the number of players. So if one player is much weaker than the others in their team it will make fighting much harder for the rest of the team.

It doesn't make it harder. It just doesn't make it easier. You are completely able to beat the game using only stuff that you find on your own. By design this is true.

You also ignored that these players will have a disadvantage while brawling (player vs player combat).

Has PvP even been implemented yet? I remember Blizzard promising it soon after release and then 7 months after release they were still making excuses about why they couldn't do it. Another pack of lies by the Diablo 3 team.

PvP is optional anyways and not part of the core game, so again who cares?

They cared enough to try and stop it in Diablo 3 by requiring that the player was always online.

Do you know why? Because IT MADE THEM MONEY NOW. That's why they suddenly care, because they wouldn't be able to extract money from dumb people as easily if they allowed it.

Again, it's always about the money.

Hatred of DRM isn't hatred of the auction house. Either provide evidence that people stop playing Diablo 3 because of the auction house or admit that you're wrong.

You asked for evidence that most people stopped playing the game. I gave it to you. Now you're throwing a tantrum. Stop it.

While this shows that the number of players dropped, however it prove any evidence regarding why they dropped. So your claim that this drop was due to the auction house, rather than the lack of late game content, is still unproven.

There's lots of reasons people quit. The auction house was just one big reason among them. This is UNDENIABLE.

Try reading what I wrote. A PC patch replaces existing information on a PC's hard drive, so the overall increase in memory/disk space is minimal. A console patch has to add more information to a console's hard drive because it can't overwrite the information on the disk. Thus a PC patch will always be smaller than a console patch.

Not always. Tons of PC games add patch files on the side that get loaded dynamically. This is a much safer way of patching after all because it allows the user to roll back trivially.

Additionally, patches are usually a handful of megabytes (read: negligible space) unless they contain new content, which would increase the amount of space added by the patch by around the same amount on console or PC regardless of whether it's replacing files. So yeah, you're spouting nonsense.

And PC games that have to always be played online don't have all the information on the hard disk, they have some information on the hard disk and some on a server. Did you really believe that everyone downloads all of World of Warcraft onto their PC when they install this game?

What does this have to do with anything? This is exactly the same on the console for a multiplayer game.

Hard disk space is a type of memory (RAM isn't the only type of memory a computer uses). Hard disk space is related to patching because you can't release a console patch if it will take up too much space on the console's hard drive (mainly because people won't download it).

Try researching computers next time.

I'm a programmer - I think I know when you're full of it. The size of the patch has nothing to do with the ability to patch something, the method of which you patch something, and the ease of which you patch something, all of which are now identical between consoles and PC. And with the newer consoles having plenty of disk space this is completely irrelevant, like most of your arguments. You're flailing wildly. You are flat out wrong but clearly you'll never admit it, so don't bother replying again. I certainly won't be.

 

[CaitSeith]

That last part with the dog pretty much represents how those videogames companies want their consumers to be.