Hide the button then! Make it a command line argument hidden power-feature then! If only all problems were this simple!
Diablo III - It's official
- Thread starter N00b
- Start date
Hide the button then! Make it a command line argument hidden power-feature then! If only all problems were this simple!
The lack of offline single player could be the case of them taking the online client/server setup all the way. The client may not have the AI/scripts for generating the random dungeons and monster setups in it at all, and totally relies on the server for that info.
As for WoW's DX11 mode, it seems to use a fair bit of stuff. A quick look at art.mpq from the data folder has:
domain\ds_5_0
geometry\gs_4_0 and gs_5_0
hull\hs_5_0
pixel\arbfp1, fp10, fp20, fp40, ps_1_1, ps_2_0, ps_3_0, ps_4_0, ps_5_0
vertex\arbvp1, arbvp1_cg12, vp40, vs_1_1, vs_2_0, vs_3_0, vs_4_0, vs_5_0
You can tell they try to support just about everything out there.
As for WoW's DX11 mode, it seems to use a fair bit of stuff. A quick look at art.mpq from the data folder has:
domain\ds_5_0
geometry\gs_4_0 and gs_5_0
hull\hs_5_0
pixel\arbfp1, fp10, fp20, fp40, ps_1_1, ps_2_0, ps_3_0, ps_4_0, ps_5_0
vertex\arbvp1, arbvp1_cg12, vp40, vs_1_1, vs_2_0, vs_3_0, vs_4_0, vs_5_0
You can tell they try to support just about everything out there.
Sadly, I think this is rather likely. This is no excuse, mind you: there is no reason whatsoever why this stuff can't be client-side. But it probably means that workarounds will require people to run their own servers based upon stolen server software.
Mostly, I blame Activision, as well as Blizzard employees' willingness to go along with Activision's business culture. The previous statements of Blizzard employees have convinced me that they are fully on-board with screwing over their paying customers while squeezing them for every dollar they are worth. It is this bullshit "consumers are money bags waiting to be exploited" attitude that is, more than anything, why I'm not going to buy Diablo 3. I don't even care if it's a good game any longer.
I think you're being unfair now. D3 represents an enormous investment in development time and resources, that Blizzard has spent a minimum of 80-100M dollars on it probably goes without saying. Not just Activision (who owns only part of the company mind you, even though they take most of the blame for shitty decisions) is going to be concerned with making all that back, and generating a profit on top. After working for that game for upwards of 8 years or maybe more, the devs are going to want to see their efforts succeed also.
The game is free to play, you're not being "squeezed" for anything after you initially buy it. Also, you can choose to not use the real-money auction house if you don't want to. I won't even use the in-game money auction house, I'll equip my toons with the shit that drops when I play, or with whatever I can craft myself.
Again, you're exaggerating. You're NOT being exploited. Christ, you're just winding yourself up here with self-induced indignation.
And they would have no problem doing that whatsoever if they treated their customers well.
I think I'll play games from companies that don't choose for me how and where I am to play games I purchase.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
SB, this isn't directed at you, but at the sentiment you're expressing above.
Assuming you don't mean "it doesn't affect me because I don't care about Diablo 3", how are you going to feel when after vanquishing a particularly hard mob only to see a message that informs you that your game will reload to the start of the level because your internet connection missed a [strike]bit[/strike] beat along the way?
Although I was conscious about this, it wasn't until late last month when Steam screwed up a maintenance update and locked me and several others out of playing our single-player games that I fully realised just how preverse a system that is supported by a constant internet connection can really be. I went 19 days without being able to play games I purchased, that I was in the middle of, that were single-player because of a mistake by the content provider that can always wave in your face an EULA that says they are under no obligation to guarantee the availability of service.
My router (don't know if through my ISP or by firmware alone) resets every 24 hours, regardless of whether I'm in the middle of a videocall with Indonesia discussing a cure for cancer or downloading [strike]pr0n/warez[/strike] linux distros.
When I used to play MP Team games (BF2, ETQW, etc.) I'd forcebly disconnect the router before my play session exactly so I didn't have a reset in the middle of a match when I was about to rain a fiery death on someone's backside.
How about [strike]fools[/strike] people who play through a wireless connection which is proner to loss of packets, resets, whatever? You're playing in an internet cafe (do those still exist?) and suddenly the owner decides to boot everyone off and restart their domain server.
Again, their argument that this is to protect the integrity of online play is completely demolished by the fact they could always give players the choice at character creation of whether to keep a char always online if they wanted.
I'm a bit late getting to this, don't have the time to visit everyday like I used to. But again, it doesn't affect me. I've been playing MMO's of some sort that require online connections anytime you play since 1988 (text based MUDs and even text based action games like Infinity Complex). I'm aware of the potential issues, but they don't affect me and likely don't affect the majority of potential D3 "buyers." Depending on how much information is stored server side, it may potentially affect non-buyers however.
As for the single player. I really wouldn't mind if they did something like Hellgate: London. The offline single player was a different codebase. Got it's patches later and sometimes never received the updates that came after the game was released. I'd be quite happy if they did something like that with D3 for the people that want to play a bit when travelling.
I myself am curious if it'll be playable on a slate PC. And playing it on a plane while certainly appealing, won't have me raging if I can't.
There is no such thing as a server which lacks the ability to pay for items with real money. EQ1 had no way to "officially" buy things with real money. Yet people bought things with real money all the time.
The only question is whether a person has to go through a questionable foreign website in order to do so or if they can do it more safely through an official and supported method.
Again, note, that there is NO online game existing anywhere that does not have the ability for players to buy items with real money. If you think there is, you are seriously fooling youself.
There are lots of potentially good reasons to keep some things server side. There's the potential to dynamically change the players experience from month to month if they wished. The ability to seemlessly release new content to everyone if they wished.
Bug fixes for potential exploits, crashes, erratic behavior (by the program), etc. can be implemented for EVERYONE and not just the "tech" savvy people. Even someone who doesn't know anything more than how to turn on a computer and surf the internet will be able to have a bugfixed version of the game.
If certain things are server side only, some of those bugfixes won't even require the user to download a patch or any data whatsoever. Meaning the game could be patched overnight and the user would never know it as they would never have to download anything. All fixes being server side only. Something MMO's have been doing for years.
There's other potential conveniences if they offer any sort of customizeable interface or controls for example. Those could also be stored serverside. I like that in Rift, for example, if I go to a friends house to play it and don't bring my own computer, all of my custom key bindings are there. It saves me having to configure it every single freaking time I reinstall the game, or install the game on a new computer, or play at a friends house, or whatever.
And that's not even touching on the subject of data integrity. I certainly wouldn't mind if they could prevent even something as simple as item duping. And limited the extent if an exploit were found that allowed someone to dupe items. This is one situation where I really do like everyone to have a level playing field.
Regards,
SB
Automatic updates are a pretty common feature these days. Any well-designed game will make these updates quick and easy.
You may have noticed that MMO's patch their clients with extreme regularity. Sometimes as often as once a week, sometimes as little as once a month, but generally far more often than single-player games.
This is a potential benefit, but not a huge one. If you have complicated key bindings, you can always just copy the config file. But my bet is that with a game like Diablo 3, the need for custom key bindings will be extremely minimal.
Having an offline mode wouldn't exactly harm attempts to prevent item duping.
I agree it's pretty funny (I like how he cleaves Diablo in two with one swing
), but I don't find it particulary true.You won't be able to buy uber weapons straight up, they must drop from a monster first, which means mastercard won't really buy you an advantage. ...Which means there'll be other ways to acquire the same loot, of course.
I have a hard time seeing how that won't lead to massive market distortions for the store. That's the whole reason why MMO's these days bind gear.
One might assume that the best gear will be really, REALLY rare. Thus, most people who find that stuff are primarily going to want to equip their own toons with it, and by the time the market starts getting saturated, Blizzard undoubtedly plans to have an expansion (or even three, judging by that alledged leaked product roadmap that made the rounds some months ago) ready that will obsolete all of the old stuff.
itsmydamnation
Veteran
Yeah, that's basically the way that MMO marketplaces worked before gear binding. It led to massive distortions. For example, older gear that was very powerful became unbelievably cheap, while new gear that was only marginally better was tremendously expensive.
This is where binding comes in: in the real world, things wear out and lose their value. In an MMO, the equivalent to this is binding.
Fortunately though, Diablo is just a game and not reality. That "the marketplace" may become "distorted" isn't really a problem from that point of view.
Also, <dons speculative hat> Blizzard may have additional mechanics developed regarding this aspect of the game that they've simply not presented any details of yet, who knows? *shrug* <removes hat>
Also, <dons speculative hat> Blizzard may have additional mechanics developed regarding this aspect of the game that they've simply not presented any details of yet, who knows? *shrug* <removes hat>
