I must say im split on this issue.
On one hand I agree with Jim, and especielly on the note that "If Blizzard always expects me to stay online when playing their game, they should always be online when I play the game". The server and lag issues so far have been quite unacceptable, and the counter-argument against this seems to be frequently be: "Well duh, of course there was gonna be issues with the servers in the beginning".......which really isnt a friggin counter-argument at all, as its pretty much a certainty that Blizzard could forsee this fact when gamers could do it, and that it just about annihilates any reasonable excuse for them to not be prepared for the release.
That its a greedy tactic to not spend extra money to prep for a heavy release and just let the problems exist as the traffic flattens out and the problem "fixes itself" is becoming painfully obvious. And its very much not okay.
As for DRM as a concept: Yes, Diablo 3 has it and I cant possibly see how someone can reasonably argue wether it has it or not. Its right there, obvious and simple.
However, the part im split about is wether a constant online connection for singleplayer is the sneaky DEVIL(or Diablo, hurrhurr) and ambushes gamers trying to have a fun singleplayer experience. While I can agree that its a bit sucky to have it for singleplayer, the concept and idea of it is not hidden, its not very discreet, so I dont agree with people that react with surprise and then cry out "but I dont waaaannaaaa, I didnt knooooow". The "Its right there on the box"-argument may be a bit dickish and more well-used then "...then I took an arrow to the knee"-quotes, but in its core its still pretty effective in dismantling players that say they were ambushed by this.
In the end however, I agree with Jim's main point: Its a sucky feature, and just because we accept it to play the game(because we're left with little to no option if we actually want to), doesnt mean we shouldnt raise our voice in protest. Just like with the servers: Yes, the issues were predictable, but that doesnt make it okay. It makes it the exact opposite of okay.
So I vote in favor of voting not in favor for this feature. But a trillion people still buys it and you can bet Blizzard are gonna think like every other company on the planet: "Money first!1". It will only be an issue for them if it becomes a serious issue for enough people, and if the people it is an issue for voices their concerns loudly enough, or takes action.
And not to end on a pessimistic note, but the chances for that happening are close to zero.
On one hand I agree with Jim, and especielly on the note that "If Blizzard always expects me to stay online when playing their game, they should always be online when I play the game". The server and lag issues so far have been quite unacceptable, and the counter-argument against this seems to be frequently be: "Well duh, of course there was gonna be issues with the servers in the beginning".......which really isnt a friggin counter-argument at all, as its pretty much a certainty that Blizzard could forsee this fact when gamers could do it, and that it just about annihilates any reasonable excuse for them to not be prepared for the release.
That its a greedy tactic to not spend extra money to prep for a heavy release and just let the problems exist as the traffic flattens out and the problem "fixes itself" is becoming painfully obvious. And its very much not okay.
As for DRM as a concept: Yes, Diablo 3 has it and I cant possibly see how someone can reasonably argue wether it has it or not. Its right there, obvious and simple.
However, the part im split about is wether a constant online connection for singleplayer is the sneaky DEVIL(or Diablo, hurrhurr) and ambushes gamers trying to have a fun singleplayer experience. While I can agree that its a bit sucky to have it for singleplayer, the concept and idea of it is not hidden, its not very discreet, so I dont agree with people that react with surprise and then cry out "but I dont waaaannaaaa, I didnt knooooow". The "Its right there on the box"-argument may be a bit dickish and more well-used then "...then I took an arrow to the knee"-quotes, but in its core its still pretty effective in dismantling players that say they were ambushed by this.
In the end however, I agree with Jim's main point: Its a sucky feature, and just because we accept it to play the game(because we're left with little to no option if we actually want to), doesnt mean we shouldnt raise our voice in protest. Just like with the servers: Yes, the issues were predictable, but that doesnt make it okay. It makes it the exact opposite of okay.
So I vote in favor of voting not in favor for this feature. But a trillion people still buys it and you can bet Blizzard are gonna think like every other company on the planet: "Money first!1". It will only be an issue for them if it becomes a serious issue for enough people, and if the people it is an issue for voices their concerns loudly enough, or takes action.
And not to end on a pessimistic note, but the chances for that happening are close to zero.
