Forced online play

[Wyzak]

I'm sorry but it's just not as black and white as you try to make it out in your comparison Roosta.

Just looking at Steam's cons for example:

Negatives:
Requires online authentication
Server dependency
Updates prevent game time
Boxed edition usually require patch before play
Community not integrated into game play (Personally I've had a far better experience with Bnet 2.0 games than with Steam games/BattleLog)
Hacking and exploits
Lag in multiplayer
Cannot resell

Server dependancy only when in online mode. When in online mode only when playing on an externally hosted server. There are thousands of servers to choose from.
Updates prevent game time - Only when updating the game that you are currently playing and only until steam adds the functionality which will be soon.
There is absolutely no reason - zero - nil - nada why the community can not be integrated into game play in exactly the same manner as Bnet 2.0. The community is already vastly integrated in most of the new Steam games.
Hacking and exploits is really of no concern because those who get caught loss their Steam accounts and not just the single game which they were hacking on.
Lag in multiplayer - FAR too big a topic to list as a single con. Latency when playing on LAN < 5ms. Latency to local servers is 20-50ms and very few people will have any problems with that. Latency to international servers same as D3's.

 

[Wyzak]

Did know that WoW/D3 patches your client while you play and that many patches are actually server side which hardly affects the clients?

I don't care about that because my PC is online all of the time, and I don't have that much time to actually play. It will however negatively affect your already bad latency if it downloads while you are playing. It will also slow down your HDD which will cause you to lose fps.

Clearly it is a problem and it affects everyone.

I'm sorry but no it doesn't. If you and your friends all bought the game you should be able to enjoy it without any restrictions. It is not correct that other people can enjoy all of the games aspects without having paid for it. But if you have paid for it you should not have to experience ANY restrictions.

 

[Glordit]

Clearly you didnt read my post.

What is the benefit of making it forced online only? Not "oh well thats the way it is, I will bow down and accept the will of my masters", you should be asking WHY? What do I get out of it?

Remember, as a consumer, you can guide what products are made by choosing to buy or not buy something. So in other words, if you dont like the online only thing, but buy it because of brand loyalty, you are saying you will put up with it. So I'm asking you, why do you put up with it? Why do you like it?

RoosTa at least had a good reason for it, I still disagree but he has his reasons. Can you actually provide a reason why online only is a good thing, and not just say "because Blizzard says so", because thats pretty tired.

I get nothing out of it I just wanted a game to play.

I never said I like it, nor did I Say I don't, and Because I wanted the game I bought it, everything else I couldn't care less about.

 

[Wyzak]

I get nothing out of it I just wanted a game to play.

I never said I like it, nor did I Say I don't, and Because I wanted the game I bought it, everything else I couldn't care less about.

Let me ask you this. If there were 2 copies of the game. One with online-only and one with offline-and-online. Would you have bought the online-only version because you love online-only so much?

If you would have bought the offline-and-online version like me, Ancalagon and countless others then please stop defending online-only. DRM that affects paying customers is indefensible.

 

[Ancalagon]

Clearly it is a problem and it affects everyone.

Fivel and I were debating this point above. I dont believe it is our problem, anymore than the risk of theft which a bottle store faces is my problem. That the publishers make you believe it is your problem is an example of externalization - the publishers have led you to believe that piracy is your problem, so you must deal with the consequences (ie DRM).

But this is not true elsewhere in business. The only exception is that businesses will pass costs onto their consumers, which is fine. The bottle store might have an insurance policy, and the markup on its liquor will cover that, which you end up paying for. Thats fine.

But DRM? No, sorry, thats something else entirely, and I dont accept that I, as a paying customer, should be the one to deal with it. I dont mind non intrusive DRM, but stuff like D3 is way past what I'm willing to accept.

Another example of externalization is the campaign which the publishers have made to turn copyright violations into criminal, instead of civil, crimes. Thus, the US DOJ goes after filesharers, instead of the publishers just suing them instead. They get the US government to do their work for them - basically, they pass the cost onto the US government.

The modern publishing and content industry is notoriously bad at updating their business models, but I have to hand it to them, they are great at getting other people to do their work for them. And getting paying customers to accept anal probes in exchange for handing over money.

 

[Glordit]

I get nothing out of it I just wanted a game to play.

I never said I like it, nor did I Say I don't, and Because I wanted the game I bought it, everything else I couldn't care less about.

Let me ask you this. If there were 2 copies of the game. One with online-only and one with offline-and-online. Would you have bought the online-only version because you love online-only so much?

If you would have bought the offline-and-online version like me, Ancalagon and countless others then please stop defending online-only. DRM that affects paying customers is indefensible.

Im not defending anything.

You knew D3 had a always online DRM model, before buying right?

To answer your question. I Would have bought the one that gives me the ability to play online, with friends and any one else.

 

[Ancalagon]

You knew D3 had a always online DRM model, before buying right?

So you never thought to ask yourself whether you agree with always online DRM?

 

[Wyzak]

Im not defending anything.

You knew D3 had a always online DRM model, before buying right?

Yes I knew it and I didn't buy D3 because of it.

I'm not a lemming or a sheep.

 

[Glordit]

You knew D3 had a always online DRM model, before buying right?

So you never thought to ask yourself whether you agree with always online DRM?

Honnestly dont care about the DRM. I care about the game.

 

[Wyzak]

Honnestly dont care about the DRM. I care about the game.

If you care about the game you should know how much better it would have been if you were able to play with 0ms latency (SP or when hosting MP) and with 20-50ms latency (MP within SA).

 

[RoosTa]

If you would have bought the offline-and-online version like me, Ancalagon and countless others then please stop defending online-only. DRM that affects paying customers is indefensible.

So far you have not provided any other advantages for offline-only, other than the fact its exempt of "DRM".

I find your views quite selfish, while some people actually want to build up and be part of a community, you'd rather let us live in the past. Maybe not all games need to be online-only, but there are many games that do benefit. There is a place for it and no one is forcing you to buy those games.

Fivel and I were debating this point above. I dont believe it is our problem, anymore than the risk of theft which a bottle store faces is my problem. That the publishers make you believe it is your problem is an example of externalization - the publishers have led you to believe that piracy is your problem, so you must deal with the consequences (ie DRM).

Now this is going completely off topic and I'm rather reluctant to give my input, but I feel I need to answer this;

Crime is our problem. It's why we have insurance, It's why we have high walls with electric fences, its why we have locks on our doors. We have people allocated to deal with the problem (aka police), but in the end they can't stop ALL the crime in the world and it is our duty to educate your kids as to why crime is bad and educate ourselves to not become a victim.

There is a saying from Ronin: You are either part of the problem, part of the solution or part of the landscape.
You can stand on your little pedestal and bitch about DRM all day long, but unless the problem is solved, it will remain. Again, no one is being forced to buy these products.

I'm a firm believer that online only enhances our gaming experience and I don't think anyone has given a good reason why online-only is not the future (other than donning tinfoil hats and harping on about how bad "DRM" is). So therefor its clear your issues lie with Uncle Sam and how they plan to dominate the world using the information they collected about you and not with what services get provided for the money paid.

 

[Wyzak]

I care about the Diablo franchise that's why I hate what happened to me last night and it is directly because of DRM.

I had really bad lag last night. Was playing on an unshaped account like I do most of the time and the game just kept on feeling stuttery the whole time. I would type a chat message to the party and they would respond to it, but I couldn't see my own message in the chat. I would also walk past an area just to have gold appear out of thin air next to me. We had difficulty zoning into the boss fights several times when it kept on saying one of your party members had already started the encounter when all of us were still standing outside.

I only had an hour and a half to play and it was quite annoying for that whole time.

 

[Wyzak]

So far you have not provided any other advantages for offline-only, other than the fact its exempt of "DRM".

I find your views quite selfish, while some people actually want to build up and be part of a community, you'd rather let us live in the past. Maybe not all games need to be online-only, but there are many games that do benefit. There is a place for it and no one is forcing you to buy those games.

No Roosta, I don't want to live in the past. I enjoy some of the features of the new b.net. However you have failed to explain why DRM is required to form a nice gaming community? What difference does it make if I'm hosting the game myself or if they host it on their servers? They could offer the EXACT same experience while allowing me to host my own game.

The DRM is inconveniencing people who legitimately bought the game. There is no excuse for that.

 

[Glordit]

I care about the Diablo franchise that's why I hate what happened to me last night and it is directly because of DRM.

I had really bad lag last night. Was playing on an unshaped account like I do most of the time and the game just kept on feeling stuttery the whole time. I would type a chat message to the party and they would respond to it, but I couldn't see my own message in the chat. I would also walk past an area just to have gold appear out of thin air next to me. We had difficulty zoning into the boss fights several times when it kept on saying one of your party members had already started the encounter when all of us were still standing outside.

I only had an hour and a half to play and it was quite annoying for that whole time.

Blame the isp, quality of the line, exchange connecting to? even if we had 40mbs DSL we would still get lag due to those reasons and have a ping of 100+ due to the distance the data must travel and back.

 

[Wyzak]

I'm a firm believer that online only enhances our gaming experience and I don't think anyone has given a good reason why online-only is not the future (other than donning tinfoil hats and harping on about how bad "DRM" is). So therefor its clear your issues lie with Uncle Sam and how they plan to dominate the world using the information they collected about you and not with what services get provided for the money paid.

You live in a fairy-tale land if you don't realize that they could have offered the exact same experience to you without the ridiculous DRM. Blizzard's PR team really got you good if you actually believe that the DRM is necessary to provide the experience that you are enjoying.

Why are you accepting all of the negatives associated with DRM when you legitimately bought the game?

 

[Wyzak]

Blame the isp, quality of the line, exchange connecting to? even if we had 40mbs DSL we would still get lag due to those reasons and have a ping of 100+ due to the distance the data must travel and back.

I wasn't the only one experiencing the lag. I am well aware of the constraints of modern day communication and it is one of the reasons why I am so opposed to this type of DRM. I enjoy gaming, and I would like to continue doing so in the future. The DRM experience is a bad apple that has the possibility of ruining the future of gaming.

 

[StaggerLee]

Perhaps I can offer an intermediate viewpoint. I haven't followed every single post on this thread, so if this has been said before, I apologise.

I don't have a problem with the always-online component of any game per se (I don't have a problem with games like Battlefield 3 which require a persistent internet connection to play single- or multiplayer), however, I have a problem with the fact that we are not provided with the same experience as other players because of Blizzard's policies regarding their server distribution.

Blizzard refuse to provide servers anywhere outside their three main locales (USA, Europe and Asia). As a result of the way that the always-online component has been implemented, anyone living far enough from the servers will have inherent problems with the lag. This has resulted in massive latencies during peak times of day, and even in the best-case scenario, we can expect latencies of around 200ms, which can cause problems at higher difficulties.

If Blizzard want to force online only mode onto us, then they need to provide us with the facilities to enjoy the gaming experience just as much as those people in the USA, Europe and Asia do. The Australians have the same problem. It makes no sense to argue that we are insisting on an outdated system, simply because we want to experience the game as it should be experienced. EA allows local service providers to host servers, so why is it impossible for Blizzard to do the same?

I don't think this implies that I want to live in a world where online-only isn't the future, I am all to happy to live in that world as long as I have a (fairly) reliable internet connection. It only implies that when I live in that world, that I get what I pay for, and unplayable, sub-standard ping is not what I paid for.

 

[Glordit]

Blame the isp, quality of the line, exchange connecting to? even if we had 40mbs DSL we would still get lag due to those reasons and have a ping of 100+ due to the distance the data must travel and back.

I wasn't the only one experiencing the lag. I am well aware of the constraints of modern day communication and it is one of the reasons why I am so opposed to this type of DRM. I enjoy gaming, and I would like to continue doing so in the future. The DRM experience is a bad apple that has the possibility of ruining the future of gaming.

The problem is this.
The game was made for a European, Amerian and Asian market, bliz does not care about countries with bandwith constraints. Even if we never got the game in S.A bliz would have still made millions of sales, as prophet *edited* said in the start of the thread. Its going to happen and, we cant change it. Devs do what they need to, to keep their product safe and profitible.

 

[StaggerLee]

The problem is this.
The game was made for a European, Amerian and Asian market, bliz does not care about countries with bandwith constraints. Even if we never got the game in S.A bliz would have still made millions of sales, as prophet *edited* said in the start of the thread. Its going to happen and, we cant change it. Devs do what they need to, to keep their product safe and profitible.

I'm not sure how what you are saying is a defense of Blizzard's position. They should care about their paying customers whether they are in the USA, South Africa or anywhere where there is decent infrastructure to support the game. It's ridiculous to say the service provider/product manufacturer is doing what it must to protect its own interests - it's also in their interests to protect our interests! We are paying customers and they distribute the game here and expect us to pay a premium price for it -the same price they pay in Europe. Sales is not about what only works for the salesman - that notion is preposterous. We have the infrastructure here to support local servers and a persistent connection to said servers, so why can't they allow our local internet service providers to host servers?

 

[RoosTa]

No Roosta, I don't want to live in the past. I enjoy some of the features of the new b.net. However you have failed to explain why DRM is required to form a nice gaming community? What difference does it make if I'm hosting the game myself or if they host it on their servers? They could offer the EXACT same experience while allowing me to host my own game

You are so fixated on the "DRM" part that you keep missing the "ONLINE" part. No point in discussing this further with you.