Diablo III - It's official

I also don't believe in giving someone a free pass just because they fucked up equally bad on multiple similar occasions in the past, especially not if we're talking about a huge corporation.
I also happen to like single player every once in a while. Many people do.
I agree. Like the saying goes.

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both". --Benjamin Franklin

I loved to play Diablo 2 Single Player using the Players X command -where X was a value from 1 to 8, the number of players to simulate an online party in Battlenet- setting it to 8 so monsters had 8x life, but also gave more experience and items.

I truly loved both the challenge and the fun of it.

Pcchen, I played Diablo 2 Single Player legitimately, it was very satisfying. And there were lots and lots of people like me, I remember this very well.

A guy whose nick is Skidrow said that it needs time, but it will be possible to play Diablo 3 offline soon without any problems. :smile:
 
Because you (or Blizzard) don't see the point in that, does that entitle the publisher to prevent people from cheating if it didn't harm other people's game experience? (i.e. offline mode).
BECAUSE IT FUCKING ENABLES PIRACY, ALRIGHT?!!!

Plain enough? :rolleyes:

Stop repeating yourself already. We've been over this a thousand times by now (and so has the rest of the hardcore gaming section of the internet.) It gets tiresome when some people refuse to listen to fact and just keep harping on and on about the same thing.

You can't have your singleplayer because of the nasty ebil pirates. End of story. Go play a different game if this one doesn't fulfill all your personal criteria (I suggest Torchlight 2, because it looks great.)
 
And how many of these games have multiplayer/internet elements tightly integrated to singleplayer, too (in Diablo 3's case to the point where you can seamlessly switch from "singleplayer" to "multiplayer" and vice versa)
 
Probably not many people here who even played it, but is anyone else shocked by how well Champions of Norrath on the Playstation 2 holds up against this game? It really stands out for me, and looking up youtube movies of both doesn't give me the impression it's a lot of rose-tinted glasses bullshit either.
 
BECAUSE IT FUCKING ENABLES PIRACY, ALRIGHT?!!!

There, you see how that came out plain and honest in the end?

No need for fake flowery like "but then people can cheat and that's not how the aw'mightey Blizzard magically conceived this game for you" or "it's cool because no one would play it single playa anyway because the game zuckz on single playa and rockz on multiplaya", or "'cause now your supa' stats are going into the supa' cloud!", or even "requiring an Internet connection is as valid as requiring a 3D GPU" (as if there were more people with a 50€/month unlimited 3G data plan than people with a PC capable of running Diablo 3, as if there was 3G coverage in the whole world)


I'm glad we all reached a conclusion:

- Blizzard only lets you play the game you pay for when they're up for it (or rather their servers, lol), because of piracy.
- Blizzard took a significant proportion of the players' ownership of the (otherwise single-player) game because of piracy.
Not because of cheating. Not because of stats. Not because of multiplayer. Not even because "asking for always-on connectivity isn't that much of a deal anyway" (which is a blatant lie, of course).

Blizzard is punishing the people who pay them for their games because of the people who don't pay for their games.

End of story.



I'm not making judgements on either one should or should not purchase their games, I just wanted to make this clear.
Because honestly: it's a bit sad to see customers standing up for the artificial limitations that a multi-million dollar company is shoving down their throats as features.
It's one thing to say the game is worth it despite the DRM infection, but it's a totally different thing to justify the DRM infection with whatever pretty story Blizzard decided to make up during a coffee break.





And how many of these games have multiplayer/internet elements tightly integrated to singleplayer, too (in Diablo 3's case to the point where you can seamlessly switch from "singleplayer" to "multiplayer" and vice versa)

I thought the discussion was about Ubisoft's games that are infected with always-on DRM?

Anyways, Borderlands does have seamless switch between single-player and coop multiplayer, and it plays just fine in offline mode.
You can start a character in offline single player, then play with others in a LAN and then continue the game online with te same characters.
I've never heard of any form of cheating in that game either.
And it sold 4.5 million copies worldwide.
 
There is definitely item creation and whatnot in Borderlands, but it's not a big problem there due to the culture that popped up.

Someone earlier in the thread said that Diablo 2/3 are treasure finding games. I'd say no, that's just one component of it. Screwing around with your skills to make weirdo builds, unusual but effective builds, figuring out how to take down enemies, and yes, finding stronger gear to kill stronger enemies.

That is what makes this genre so effective, and what makes reducing down to just the treasure aspect so false for so many people. Just because it's all about the treasure to you doesn't mean it's all about the treasure to someone else.
 
Beat the game on normal today.

Ended the game as a level 33 wizard doing 557dps. I hear things get difficult in nightmare and beyond. Normal was very easy to complete.

Just started on nightmare.

Also, is there a pro or con to using followers? I ran through normal without any NpC help unless forced upon by the game. I didn't want to lose out on exp or gold.

How does exp sharing work with co op? If a buddy and I run through it together, are we at a disadvantage?
 
I couldn't beat
Izual
with my wizard. He froze me and then beat the snot out of me every time; two swings is enough. First one takes off 80% of my health, so the next is always fatal. Once I got him down to 10%, and then he killed me.

Personally I've found act 3 and 4 very taxing and stressful for both my demon hunter and mage, it all hinges on if you get any decent gear I suppose, maybe I've been unlucky with drops or something but I feel very fragile, and I haven't been able to reach the endboss. Regular mobs hit terribly hard in act 4, and anything with ranged attacks 2-shots me. Not been very fun.

Right now I and my barb mate are working through the middle third of act 2, he's got over 4000 life right now and still feels pain on some monster packs.

When we get into act 4 I will try my wizard again, he's also level 33 right now. Without the templar along I wouldn't have gotten anywhere in act 3, much less 4... :LOL: His heals are extremely useful and I rely on him all the time. Not to kill (because his damage output is pitiful), but to keep me alive when boss packs swamp me and such.

There's no experience sharing in multiplayer from what I understand, nor are you penalized for having a mercenary along either. Well, I could be wrong of course, but I'm pretty sure this is the case. In multiplayer you can't have a mercenary, and monster health goes up by 60% per player in normal and even more in higher difficulties (maxing out at +110% health and +10% damage per player in inferno...)

There, you see how that came out plain and honest in the end?
"In the end"? I've never said otherwise. Of course the enforced online play is a measure to combat piracy, just like having to log in to battle.net in Starcraft II on startup is.
 
I couldn't beat
Izual
with my wizard. He froze me and then beat the snot out of me every time; two swings is enough. First one takes off 80% of my health, so the next is always fatal. Once I got him down to 10%, and then he killed me.

Personally I've found act 3 and 4 very taxing and stressful for both my demon hunter and mage, it all hinges on if you get any decent gear I suppose, maybe I've been unlucky with drops or something but I feel very fragile, and I haven't been able to reach the endboss. Regular mobs hit terribly hard in act 4, and anything with ranged attacks 2-shots me. Not been very fun.

Right now I and my barb mate are working through the middle third of act 2, he's got over 4000 life right now and still feels pain on some monster packs.

When we get into act 4 I will try my wizard again, he's also level 33 right now. Without the templar along I wouldn't have gotten anywhere in act 3, much less 4... :LOL: His heals are extremely useful and I rely on him all the time. Not to kill (because his damage output is pitiful), but to keep me alive when boss packs swamp me and such.

There's no experience sharing in multiplayer from what I understand, nor are you penalized for having a mercenary along either. Well, I could be wrong of course, but I'm pretty sure this is the case. In multiplayer you can't have a mercenary, and monster health goes up by 60% per player in normal and even more in higher difficulties (maxing out at +110% health and +10% damage per player in inferno...)


"In the end"? I've never said otherwise. Of course the enforced online play is a measure to combat piracy, just like having to log in to battle.net in Starcraft II on startup is.

That's weird that you're having so much difficulty.

My build was focused on intel and stacking attack speed. Make sure you have a life steal percentage on your weapon. I found 2 handed staff's to be much better, stat wise, than wands + free hand items. Don't focus on your vitality/HP.

My skills are, penetrating blast and arcane orb. Hokeys were set to, lightning hydra, force wave with high damage, diamond armor, and arcane weapon thing.

First thing in combat, position the hydra. Don't just spam spells. Use orb and magic missile while on the move. If you get surrounded, turn on Diamond shield followed by force wave. Keep an eye on your cooldowns and arcane refills.

The whole game was a walkthrough with this strategy. btw, I did use the blacksmith a lot. Same with the jeweler when I got access to him. About 50% of my gear was from the blacksmith, the rest from loot.
 
Beat the game on normal today.

Ended the game as a level 33 wizard doing 557dps. I hear things get difficult in nightmare and beyond. Normal was very easy to complete.

Just started on nightmare.

Also, is there a pro or con to using followers? I ran through normal without any NpC help unless forced upon by the game. I didn't want to lose out on exp or gold.

How does exp sharing work with co op? If a buddy and I run through it together, are we at a disadvantage?
I don't think followers steal xp but I'm not sure, if they do its minor and their buffs more than make up for it by increasing the speed of your progression.

Co-op leveling is actually probably faster unless there's a large gap in levels, although killing elite/champion packs can often be more difficult than doing it solo. But provided you're not all after the same loot and willing to share you'll gear up much more quickly.

I found nightmare a challenge at first but by act II I had added some gear and nightmare wasn't a lot harder than normal. Hell was fairly challenging and on inferno dying 3x to the same champion pack and graveyard rushing them isn't uncommon (although I'm only in actII).
 
Are you suggesting a significant number of customers haven't been inconvenienced by Diablo III server issues? I would suggest that anyone who has played for more than 2 hours has been inconvenienced at least once.

I said a significant number of Diablo 3 customers don't really want to play Diablo 3 in offline mode (at least for significant amount of time). So even if it has an offline mode, they are not going to fare any better compare to current situation. Is that clear for you?
 
I agree. Like the saying goes.

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both". --Benjamin Franklin

Except that Blizzard isn't the government. It's a business.

Pcchen, I played Diablo 2 Single Player legitimately, it was very satisfying. And there were lots and lots of people like me, I remember this very well.

A guy whose nick is Skidrow said that it needs time, but it will be possible to play Diablo 3 offline soon without any problems. :smile:

If you actually read what I said, you'll understand that I do know some people who like to play single player mode, offline, for whatever reason. It's just that Blizzard don't believe it's big enough for them to make an offline mode.

Some may ask, does it really take that much resources to make an offline mode? Diablo 2 has one, no? However, consider this: with current online mode, most decisions are done by the servers. That means many small changes can be done just on the server, there's no need to patch the client software. For example, if some items drop too frequently, too powerful, or some skills need adjustment, it can be done on the server, seamlessly. With an offline mode, this is just impossible. The client has to be patched, and that's extra work. And trust me, if some how they have to delay offline mode patch (i.e. later than online mode patch), there will be similar uproars.

Furthermore, online mode means they can monitor all skill and item usage, so when someone yelling "[a certain class] is OP!" or "[a certain skill] is OP!" Blizzard actually will have statistics to know whether these are true, and can adjust accordingly. They can't do that if the majority of players play offline.
 
Except that Blizzard isn't the government. It's a business.

I care about the pleasure I derive from the games, not the companies' profits. And everyone else should too, unless they are somehow involved with the pubs/devs. Everything else is just admitting is that they are fanboys and corporate apologists. Why should I support something that will hurt my enjoyment?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I care about the pleasure I derive from the games, not the companies' profits. And everyone else should too, unless they are somehow involved with the pubs/devs. Everything else is just admitting is that they are fanboys and corporate apologists. Why should I support something that will hurt my enjoyment?

Since Blizzard isn't the government, no one is forcing you to buy their games. If you can't live without offline mode, don't buy Diablo 3. It's just that simple. There are so many good games around, even in the same genre, e.g. Torchlight 2. Of course, you may want to complain that Blizzard ignores you, but that's about it. You know, the fact that Diablo 3 is online only was announced maybe a year ago. It's not a surprise move.

What I'm saying is, I think, at least most people I know (and probably the majority of Diablo 3 players) who play Diablo 3, want to play online. So they don't really care about offline mode, and offline mode is not going to help them. So stop saying something like "Blizzard should just add an offline mode then there will be no server problem!" because that's simply not true. (this is not directed at you)
 
Which bandwidth wise is a joke compared to what many many online services use.
It was enough to throw total internet bandwidth use up by 14%, focused directly at Blizz server locations
I thought the discussion was about Ubisoft's games that are infected with always-on DRM?
How often do you hear people calling MMO signing in to servers "always-on DRM"? Since they're exactly like Diablo, Diablo also relies on Battle.net connection for many essential functions of the game.
Anyways, Borderlands does have seamless switch between single-player and coop multiplayer, and it plays just fine in offline mode.
You can start a character in offline single player, then play with others in a LAN and then continue the game online with te same characters.
I've never heard of any form of cheating in that game either.
And it sold 4.5 million copies worldwide.
I'm not familiar with Borderlands really, does it involve Diablo-like character development with new items etc?
 
How often do you hear people calling MMO signing in to servers "always-on DRM"?
Never.


Since they're exactly like Diablo, Diablo also relies on Battle.net connection for many essential functions of the game.

No. Diablo is not a MMO. It relies on battle.net connection to control piracy.
Claiming that anything else in the game requires an always-on internet connection is pure BS.
Except for the RMAH of course, where people will be offering Blizzard some more free money.



I'm not familiar with Borderlands really, does it involve Diablo-like character development with new items etc?
Yes, it does.
In fact, it's quite a bit more RPG-ish because you can actually control the level-up tree.
Except for the weapon specialization.
How well you use a certain kind of weapon (pistol, rifle, rocket launcher, etc) depends on how much damage you've dealt with that kind.
It makes sense, though. I won't become a sniper specialist by killing lots of people with a machine gun.
 
No. Diablo is not a MMO. It relies on battle.net connection to control piracy.
Claiming that anything else in the game requires an always-on internet connection is pure BS.
Except for the RMAH of course, where people will be offering Blizzard some more free money.

Then, tell me how are you going to prevent item duping without always-on internet connection. Don't tell me that "item duping is not a serious problem," just tell me how are you going to do that.
 
Then, tell me how are you going to prevent item duping without always-on internet connection. Don't tell me that "item duping is not a serious problem," just tell me how are you going to do that.

Okay, I won't tell you it's not a serious problem.
I'll tell you it's not a problem at all.

Why should anyone be worried if someone on the other side of the world is creating a digital duplicate of a stupid item in a videogame? This is not a MMO.

No one should be worried.. except for Blizzard, where the item duping would ruin their plans on cashing in some extra money through the RMAH.


Again: much like piracy prevention, this is not a feature aimed at customers, it's aimed at Activision-Blizzard alone.
 
Okay, I won't tell you it's not a serious problem.
I'll tell you it's not a problem at all.

Why should anyone be worried if someone on the other side of the world is creating a digital duplicate of a stupid item in a videogame? This is not a MMO.

No one should be worried.. except for Blizzard, where the item duping would ruin their plans on cashing in some extra money through the RMAH.


Again: much like piracy prevention, this is not a feature aimed at customers, it's aimed at Activision-Blizzard alone.

Alternatively, why should anyone be concerned about someone on the other side of the world who wants to create a digital duplicate of a stupid item in a videogame? I'd prefer to do without the delays of creating an extra offline-mode single player, with the associated extra bugs, testing, patch delays etc. just because someone doesn't want to play the game properly, and doesn't have the 5 minute attention span required to get the item they want.
 
Okay, I won't tell you it's not a serious problem.
I'll tell you it's not a problem at all.

Why should anyone be worried if someone on the other side of the world is creating a digital duplicate of a stupid item in a videogame? This is not a MMO.

I am not sure if you are serious. But let's assume you are.

As I said before, Diablo 3 (and the series in general) is a treasure hunting game. That's its essence. Without the treasure hunting part, Diablo 3 will be no more than just a click-fest, i.e. not very interesting. What's interesting is that you don't know what item may drop next time, and maybe that item will be a perfect fit for your character. That's why all items in Diablo 3 are randomly generated.

Now, if everyone can simply dup their items, then the treasure hunting part will die very quickly, and no one will want to play Diablo 3 anymore. Of course, some may say "but you don't have to cheat!" But that doesn't really work. Diablo 3's highest difficulty is very difficult, and if there's a cheat, people will be using it, a lot. It won't be just "someone on the other side of the world." It'll be everyone around you. Do you think that's "fun"?

Then some people may say, that's because Diablo's game play is too shallow! There's no point running the same boss over and over again! Exactly. If you just play Diablo series that way, then there's really no point. But from what we've seen, starting from Diablo, to Diablo 2, a lot people like playing this treasure hunting game. They like to kill the same boss over and over again, just for the loot. That's why Blizzard made Diablo 3, and they want to make sure that those problems in their earlier games go away.
 
Back
Top