Blizzard could have let users create local characters that would be invalid to use at the auction houses or in multiplayer. Nor would a local character be able to transfer items to any other character other than another local character. Blizzard had options but they prefer to limit the customers choices because they believe it will bring them greater profits. I'm all for companies pricing their products as they see fit and making as much profit as they think they can. I'm not for limiting the user's ability to transfer the license to a game they are no longer interested in.

Originally Posted By DennisS (18 MAY 2012 9:06am)

No one is forcing to you to do anything other than have a full time internet connection to play. It doesn' t cost you any additional money, and is not significantly more restrictive than a Steam account.

Well, actually, not only do you (the player) need an always-on internet connection, but Blizzard's authentication servers also need to be up. This is not the case for Steam's offline mode, which allows you to play games without an active connection (and therefore does not require Steam servers be up).

Originally Posted By DennisS (18 MAY 2012 9:06am)

 

 

 

If you're going to have an auction house, you CANNOT allow individuals to keep their characters on their own hard drives. This just invites disaster, in the form of duplicating (duping) items.

 

 

 

Actually, you don't fully understand the point.

Offline single-player can be done without having any interfacing with the online content.  In other words, an  offline-only mode where characters & items stay strictly in the separate game mode.  It's a surprisingly simple concept, probably wouldn't make for a lot of extra work, and one I'm sure the Blizzard suits debated on doing.  It would have zero effect or interaction on the online characters and auction. 

In the end, Blizzard just went with their online DRM for a number of reasons.  Resale restrictions being one, attempting to get people to use (and hopefully get addicted to) their monetary-based auction house is another. 

Originally Posted By Nefaro (18 MAY 2012 10:21am)

Originally Posted By DennisS (18 MAY 2012 9:06am)

 

 

 

If you're going to have an auction house, you CANNOT allow individuals to keep their characters on their own hard drives. This just invites disaster, in the form of duplicating (duping) items.

 

 

 

 

Actually, you don't fully understand the point.

 

Offline single-player can be done without having any interfacing with the online content.  In other words, an  offline-only mode where characters & items stay strictly in the separate game mode.  It's a surprisingly simple concept, probably wouldn't make for a lot of extra work, and one I'm sure the Blizzard suits debated on doing.  It would have zero effect or interaction on the online characters and auction. 

 

In the end, Blizzard just went with their online DRM for a number of reasons.  Resale restrictions being one, attempting to get people to use (and hopefully get addicted to) their monetary-based auction house is another. 

 

 

I was thinking they just don't want people exposed to the product without also being exposed to the real-money auction house, where they will get their cut of the take.  Mercenary as all hell, but you can get away with it if the game is good enough.

Is D3 good enough?  Shrug.  There is some audacious innovation in the game's crafting and skills system, but the gameplay feels to me a little too much like a D2 expansion, and the graphics are kind of shockingly old school.  Fixed camera view with opaque walls, really?  And I haven't seen an RPG that doesn't allow any zoom or unzoom in quite a while.  It ain't 2003 no more.

Originally Posted By glen55 (18 MAY 2012 1:56pm)

 Fixed camera view with opaque walls, really?  And I haven't seen an RPG that doesn't allow any zoom or unzoom in quite a while.  It ain't 2003 no more.

 

Zoom and camera angles have never been part of Diablo. The hi-res mod where you got to see more of the screen on newer computers in D2 even got you banned from Battle.net by Blizzard because they would claim that you got an unfair advantage over players who did not use it. (apart from beaching the EULA).

This is not an MMO nor a classic RPG. It's hack 'n slash and a fixed camera works well. It would even be cumbersome to have to constantly tweak the camera in a frantic hi-paced fight like you get constantly in these type of games.

I must admit though, that one of the first things I did was scroll the mousewheel to try to zoom out.

Originally Posted By Nefaro (18 MAY 2012 10:21am)

Originally Posted By DennisS (18 MAY 2012 9:06am)

 

 

 

If you're going to have an auction house, you CANNOT allow individuals to keep their characters on their own hard drives. This just invites disaster, in the form of duplicating (duping) items.

 

 

 

 

Actually, you don't fully understand the point.

 

Offline single-player can be done without having any interfacing with the online content.  In other words, an  offline-only mode where characters & items stay strictly in the separate game mode.  It's a surprisingly simple concept, probably wouldn't make for a lot of extra work, and one I'm sure the Blizzard suits debated on doing.  It would have zero effect or interaction on the online characters and auction. 

 

In the end, Blizzard just went with their online DRM for a number of reasons.  Resale restrictions being one, attempting to get people to use (and hopefully get addicted to) their monetary-based auction house is another. 

 

 

No, I believe that you are missing the second, and possibly main point. Validating your copy through the battle.net servers also has a nice anti-piracy component to it.

If you could run a copy of diablo 3 offline, with no server or blizzard interaction, you are just begging for a crack copy to be disseminated by the millions.

I have zero issues with the new system as set up. Will it cost blizzard some sales? Sure. Do they care? Probably not.

Well, i was kinda certain this would be false so i decided to check a certain torrent site and typed "diablo" into the search box.

Here is the description for the collectors edition...

TO CRACK FULL INSTRUCTIONS:

1. Download and install torrent

2. On this page move your mouse cursor over green skull image next to the uploader webchella

3. Right click on green skull

4. Choose "Save image as..."

5. Save the image (vip.gif) in Diablo III install folder

6. Change the name of the image to "Diablo III Start.gif"

7. Restart your computer

8. You can now run and play the game! Have fun!!

I haven't seen a game that is impossible to crack yet. Meaning drm is just to annoy paying customers.

So Diablo 3 is cracked by renaming some .GIF file? Really...?

Diablo 3 has been on the warez sites even before it was live on Blizzards. Online verification is very easy to crack-

Yup, reading from the comments it seemed that they only needed to await the release to fake the online verification. Regardless i've seen programs needing dongles cracked. Blizz can't stop it. It just is.

So what would you gain if you do not have access to the D3 server?

It seems like an awful chore to setup an emulator and all just to be able to run the game unofficially.

Loot tables and the like are all on Blizzard's servers not on your PC.

So it will be a rather different experience than the official one I reckon...

Originally Posted By Yskonyn (19 MAY 2012 4:08pm)

So what would you gain if you do not have access to the D3 server?

It seems like an awful chore to setup an emulator and all just to be able to run the game unofficially.

Loot tables and the like are all on Blizzard's servers not on your PC.

So it will be a rather different experience than the official one I reckon...

This is amusing. Sure, you can now run Diablo 3, with no loot. Doesn't that kind of defeat the purpose of the game?

What some people will do, to save a few bucks.

Originally Posted By DennisS (19 MAY 2012 7:39am)

 

 

No, I believe that you are missing the second, and possibly main point. Validating your copy through the battle.net servers also has a nice anti-piracy component to it.

 

If you could run a copy of diablo 3 offline, with no server or blizzard interaction, you are just begging for a crack copy to be disseminated by the millions.

 

I have zero issues with the new system as set up. Will it cost blizzard some sales? Sure. Do they care? Probably not.

That isn't, and should never be, a reason to punish paying customers.  Yet it happens all the time.  And I guarantee the pirates will get it working at some point, anyway.

When you experience lag, and warping, when playing Diablo single-player because their servers are choking - that's about the time you realize how ridiculous it has become.  Not to mention downtime and disconnects.  When they said your characters would be saved on their servers, I was thinking some kind of Cloud service, not some real-time permission monitoring every single step.  It's worse than I originally thought.

They'll do it like they did EQ or Ultima online. Personally the best homemade servers were in Neverwinter Knights. Those communities are still going strong.

Personally i agree though-setting it all up is such a hassle-all to play what is essentially a casual game. But they do it for other reasons. Sort of like spray paint and walls. Some moron...or many...will combine the two.

Oh yes but the difference is that with those games you have all the info in your client's install.

Your client install of Diablo does not have all the data. Many is read from Blizzard's servers.

Sounds like a pretty solid setup, piracy wise, to me, but perhaps some wizkids know how to craft their own working servers, I don't know. If they can, though, I really don't know why you would go through all those hoops.

Then the 'I won't play because of online always' argument doesn't stand anymore I would say. Because it's far easier to just buy the game and play flawlessly than to setup something like the above. 

Oh yes!:  some of the custom worlds created with the world builder in the Neverwinter Nights game were pretty impressive! But that game did come with a fully featured editor which accomodated creating multiplayer worlds. Very cool toolbox.

GR, do you know of some active NWN mp worlds still running strong?

I am really looking forward to trying this game.

Originally Posted By Yskonyn (20 MAY 2012 3:34am)

Then the 'I won't play because of online always' argument doesn't stand anymore I would say. Because it's far easier to just buy the game and play flawlessly than to setup something like the above. 

 

(bold) This is the root of the problem though....a lot of people cant "play flawlessly", and they just want to play single player mode.

Originally Posted By Nefaro (19 MAY 2012 7:30pm)

Originally Posted By DennisS (19 MAY 2012 7:39am)

 

 

No, I believe that you are missing the second, and possibly main point. Validating your copy through the battle.net servers also has a nice anti-piracy component to it.

 

If you could run a copy of diablo 3 offline, with no server or blizzard interaction, you are just begging for a crack copy to be disseminated by the millions.

 

I have zero issues with the new system as set up. Will it cost blizzard some sales? Sure. Do they care? Probably not.

 

That isn't, and should never be, a reason to punish paying customers.  Yet it happens all the time.  And I guarantee the pirates will get it working at some point, anyway.

 

When you experience lag, and warping, when playing Diablo single-player because their servers are choking - that's about the time you realize how ridiculous it has become.  Not to mention downtime and disconnects.  When they said your characters would be saved on their servers, I was thinking some kind of Cloud service, not some real-time permission monitoring every single step.  It's worse than I originally thought.

 

 

Punish paying customers? If a person elects to plunk down the money, and they agree to the EULA, as they must to even BEGIN playing the game, then there is no punishment.

Is the game what they want? Apparently not. Anyone willingly purchasing the game gets the game, warts and all.

I have ZERO sympathy for a paying customer complaining after the fact about the purchase...unless they weren't bright enough to research the game. Then, their issues are STILL their fault, for not being an educated consumer. Blizzard never hid from their design decisions.

Originally Posted By Forum (20 MAY 2012 5:02am)

I am really looking forward to trying this game.

My wife is a casual gamer...well, maybe more than casual, as she was the banker for our WoW guild..but she and I played diablo multi player last night for 2-3 hours, and had a blast.

Afterwards, she spent over an hour on her banner. She is an Art Teacher, and I think she would have purchased this banner functionality by itself, just to have fun with!!!

 

Punish paying customers? If a person elects to plunk down the money, and they agree to the EULA, as they must to even BEGIN playing the game, then there is no punishment.

  

Please, if they actually worded the EULAs in plain English (or whatever language they are targeting), people may actually read them. When they word the EULAs in lawyer-speak, 26 pages long and over 10,000 words (Dragon Age) it is fairly unreasonable to expect the average consumer to read them. In my opinion the current licensing schemes shouldn't be legal (again, just my opinion). They protect the company at the cost of limiting consumer rights. Furthermore the limits only harm honest customers as we all know cracked versions of games always appear. If board game companies or book publishers could restrict you from selling your item at a garage sale they would. Since it is impossilble to do so, they can't. Same with any other physical good. 

That is the reason I almost always wait for a game to go on sale before purchasing it. If I can't resell the game I'm surely not going to pay full price for it unless I am positive it is a game I will want to keep for a long time. It doesn't bother me if I can't resell a $10 game.

Well eventhough the EULA is laywer talk, we all know what's in there, don't we? That's the point Dennis was making. People should research their game before buying. And I agree, although some DRM's make users jump through hoops they should not have to go through. Like Starforce or the early incarnation of TAGES.

About the 'flawless' play. You miss the point I was trying to make. There will never be flawless play for those who decide to pirate in the case of Diablo 3, because your install does not have all the data to work with. Granted it does work at all, you will probably be playing a light version of the game due to the inability to connect to Blizzard.

It's there that the characters are stored, the loot tables are read from, etc.

Originally Posted By DennisS (20 MAY 2012 8:29am)

Originally Posted By Nefaro (19 MAY 2012 7:30pm)

Originally Posted By DennisS (19 MAY 2012 7:39am)

 

 

No, I believe that you are missing the second, and possibly main point. Validating your copy through the battle.net servers also has a nice anti-piracy component to it.

 

If you could run a copy of diablo 3 offline, with no server or blizzard interaction, you are just begging for a crack copy to be disseminated by the millions.

 

I have zero issues with the new system as set up. Will it cost blizzard some sales? Sure. Do they care? Probably not.

 

That isn't, and should never be, a reason to punish paying customers.  Yet it happens all the time.  And I guarantee the pirates will get it working at some point, anyway.

 

When you experience lag, and warping, when playing Diablo single-player because their servers are choking - that's about the time you realize how ridiculous it has become.  Not to mention downtime and disconnects.  When they said your characters would be saved on their servers, I was thinking some kind of Cloud service, not some real-time permission monitoring every single step.  It's worse than I originally thought.

 

 

 

Punish paying customers? If a person elects to plunk down the money, and they agree to the EULA, as they must to even BEGIN playing the game, then there is no punishment.

 

Is the game what they want? Apparently not. Anyone willingly purchasing the game gets the game, warts and all.

 

I have ZERO sympathy for a paying customer complaining after the fact about the purchase...unless they weren't bright enough to research the game. Then, their issues are STILL their fault, for not being an educated consumer. Blizzard never hid from their design decisions.

 

Just because someone paid for something, doesn't mean they're required to like all the extra added BS attached to it.   Case in point:  check the Diablo 3 forum regularly. 

I knew exactly what I was getting, as did many, so I'll deal with it.  But I wholly agree with people requesting a separate single-player mode.  Telling customers to shaddap probably wouldn't earn much good will, either.

Well...

Wasn't it crystal clear that you would not get a seperate singleplayer mode. And that the game would need a constant connection to Battle.net? Yes it was.

So no need to whine about it afterwards.

Originally Posted By Yskonyn (20 MAY 2012 10:45am)

Well eventhough the EULA is laywer talk, we all know what's in there, don't we? That's the point Dennis was making. People should research their game before buying. And I agree, although some DRM's make users jump through hoops they should not have to go through. Like Starforce or the early incarnation of TAGES.

 

About the 'flawless' play. You miss the point I was trying to make. There will never be flawless play for those who decide to pirate in the case of Diablo 3, because your install does not have all the data to work with. Granted it does work at all, you will probably be playing a light version of the game due to the inability to connect to Blizzard.

It's there that the characters are stored, the loot tables are read from, etc.

Thanks for your comments.

By the EULA, I am not suggesting taking a semester course in analyzing the contents...more, a simple acknowledgement of the game mechanics. No one should be surprised at the requirement for either a full-time internet connection, or a battle.net account.

Vote with your wallet. If you choose not to play, then there will be less lag for the rest of us. No muss, no fuss.

EULAS are only read after the fact...that being the purchase. Legally I seriously doubt they could stand up in court on several fronts-the most being you cannot read it until after purchase-the second the claim it is a liciense when every other point in the EULA indicates transfer of responsability to not only the buyer but the middleman (seller) which is used for the no refund scam. it is as a  'no implied warranty' but also bounds the buyer to all other responsabilties (theft, loss, damage). That in itself indicated a transfer of ownership-not even including the nature of the sale.

It doesn't resemble an actual licience EULA (as an example an anti-virus EULA) in any sense, shape or form. For this reason many courts do rule the EULA is invalid and therefore first sale doctrine rights apply. That means the buyer owns it and the seller has no say so whatsoever about the program after purchase--which legally makes the whole must be online scheme also a farce -

until one of these cases makes it to the supreme court we will keep seeing these complaints in gaming threads. Just because it hasn't happened yet does not indicate in any way Blizzard is in the right nor any other developer using such practices as well as reseller like Steam aslso requiring online validation with ALL not allowing the game to be resold.

Also your assuming a lot by stating the always must be online to play single player is "crystal clear ' to the buyer. that's utter nonesense. It's clear to you because you read gaming forums...it's not at all clear to MOM who purchased the game as a gift for her son and the only thing stated on the box was a very broad and vague line, "internet connection required" which could mean just about anything. Download a patch? intial registration and activation? For Multiplayer only? General statements like that don't hold up in legal terms.

The game is NOT an MMO nor is it being advertised nor sold as one so that is also a weak defense.

And as already has been mentioned even the ones who did know did not expect these hassles as they have experience with WOW and Diablo 2 and battlenet. That's the experience we all expected and none of us got.