Page 2 of 11 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 106

Thread: Forced online play

  1. #11
    The Piper Necuno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    10,306

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wyzak View Post
    I've seen you post several times and it's almost like you believe that in a few years time we will have 10ms latency to the US and EU.
    Please link where I said we will have 10ms like in eu or us.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wyzak View Post
    The reality is that communication is very close to its maximum speed that it will ever be able to reach. The new WACS cable has a fibre2fibre point2point latency of 138ms. It is on the best route between ZA and the UK. That is the lowest that your latency will ever be able to get between ZA and UK.
    See above.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wyzak View Post
    Will you be content if all games from now on require always on Internet only and your latency can only ever go as low as 150ms? I wouldn't be, and as such I hope that every company that tries to enforce this ends up with a lot of egg on their face.
    Relevance please? 80% of my games is just online.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wyzak View Post
    Sadly recent experience has shown that not all companies care enough to provide local servers
    RSA is hardly a star in the universe, much less a drop in the drinking water of USA.
    // Previously known as Blind Faith or Pr⊕phet
    // Sign up to Greenman Gaming and get $2 FREE in-store credit.

  2. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pr⊕phet View Post
    RSA is hardly a star in the universe, much less a drop in the drinking water of USA.
    Absolutely, clearly some believe that we need some special sort of treatment. If we can sell a gazillion copies of the game, then we have a big voice.....failing that it remains a squeak
    Last edited by Fivel; 21-05-2012 at 07:50 PM.

  3. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fivel View Post
    Absolutely, clearly some believe that we need some special sort of treatment. If we can sell a gazillion copies of the game, then we have a big voice.....failing that it remains a squeak
    So because we don't have a big voice we should just keep quiet? Nice!

    Please link where I said we will have 10ms like in eu or us.
    You are the one who is continuously blaming all of our Internet related issues on our government and local infrastructure. So tell me, what latency are you expecting? What difference will it make to your d3 latency if our local network is on par with South Koreas?

    Relevance please? 80% of my games is just online.
    Are you playing all of them on international servers? Or are you playing on local servers?



    IMO it will ruin the gaming industry in SA if we are forced to play online and the companies refuse to host local servers.

    Just have a look at the amount of people complaining about the latency on sites like http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/di...ems=100&page=1 or even the comments on http://mygaming.co.za/news/features/...w-roundup.html

    Do you think all of the people complaining are in countries outside of the US and EU?
    Last edited by Wyzak; 22-05-2012 at 09:23 AM. Reason: fixed typo, added mygaming url

  4. #14

    Default

    I agree that a local server for D3 would be amazing but who in this country cares enough to spend that kind of money?

  5. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wyzak View Post
    So because we don't have a big voice we should just keep quiet? Nice!
    Not at all, but also understanding the realities of big business would also be nice, sadly while I would love to believe that Blizzard cares about the xxx (you fill in the number here) of SA players, they don't. Protecting their considerable investment via online play is more likely to be higher on their agenda.

  6. #16

    Default

    The reality is forcing people to play online has nothing to do with delivering a better game or service and everything to do with money and piracy.

    The piracy reason is obvious, what is also obvious is that is has not stopped piracy. Pirates 1 - Blizzard 0 - Gamers 0. Blizzard still loses to pirates, gamers still lose progress due to being kicked out of the game, etc etc. And even first world countries experience connection issues! Its not just us.

    The money reason is of course related to the auction house. Blizzard makes money from every sale, as we all know, which is also why modding is not allowed. Imagine if I made my own mod that gave me all of the uber equipment in the game - Blizzard would lose money. So they dont allow it. Same with any sort of cheating in single player.

    The fact of the matter is, Blizzard deprived of us of choice for the sake of their own profits. It was not for our own good. Allowing offline or online play, as most companies do, is the better solution. But Blizzard is too greedy for that. So instead its online or nothing.

    Well in my case it really is nothing, I have not bought D3, will not buy D3, and will be buying Torchlight 2 instead. I am voting with my wallet and hope the rest of you who are unhappy about the always on connection and lack of LAN play will do the same, although I think its already too late.

  7. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thepoofbear View Post
    I agree that a local server for D3 would be amazing but who in this country cares enough to spend that kind of money?
    Numerous ISPs (MWEB, WA, etc) have offered their servers and bandwidth for hosting the game and have been in contact with Blizzard. But Blizzard didn't budge.

  8. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fivel View Post
    Not at all, but also understanding the realities of big business would also be nice, sadly while I would love to believe that Blizzard cares about the xxx (you fill in the number here) of SA players, they don't. Protecting their considerable investment via online play is more likely to be higher on their agenda.
    A significant portion of their money will have to go to keep those dedicated servers running. There aren't subscriptions for Diablo, so they will have to make their money elsewhere (on a sustainable basis). Which is probably why they came up with the RMAH idea. At least that will provide a continuous income for them which will go some length to paying for the servers.

    Let's face facts here, Blizzard may go to great lengths to combat piracy. But it's not like they are struggling financially... Instead of grudgingly accepting some pirated copies they have now gone and pissed off a significant amount of paying customers and also made some people look elsewhere. Time will tell if that was a good idea or if it will bite them in the ass.

  9. #19

    Default

    Well they are suffering piracy anyway, so all this money spent on "Battle.net 2.0" was wasted. Plus it has caused them lost sales.

  10. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ancalagon View Post
    Well in my case it really is nothing, I have not bought D3, will not buy D3, and will be buying Torchlight 2 instead. I am voting with my wallet and hope the rest of you who are unhappy about the always on connection and lack of LAN play will do the same, although I think its already too late.
    Couldn't agree with you more. I have also decided that I won't be buying D3, and I have already bought Torchlight II en mass(8 copies and counting now).

    I wonder how Blizzard can justify selling D3 with all of its issues for R450 when you can pick up Torchlight II (with Torchlight I thrown in for free, and none of the D3 issues) for $20, or $15 (if you buy the 4-pack).

    I will PM my email address to you and we can join up in Torchlight some time

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •