Diablo 3 to have always online DRM, cash shop, no mods at all, and kills puppies.

Ramary · 08-01-2011, 08:06 AM

Okay maybe not kill puppies.

1) The game requires a constant internet connection. It cannot be played offline.
2) Mods are �expressly prohibited.�
3) Items in the auction house are bought and sold for real-life money.

Anyone who wanted to buy this game, please just don't. It is the only way to actually send a message to them. You can send Activison or Blizzard all the hate mail in the world if you wanted to, but if you still buy the damn game like a sheep, it does NOTHING. In fact, it makes it even worst, since it sets a standard and more developers and publishers will realize they can get away with it.

Yrcrazypa · 08-01-2011, 08:51 AM

Well, I was already on the fence about this game, leaning towards not buying it. Thanks for making my decision easy Activision! I won't call them Blizzard, Blizzard died when they merged.

Jagos · 08-01-2011, 09:15 AM

This just in:

Pirating of Diablo 3 has gone up 20% due to no mods, and someone needing to create an offline mode.

Professor Smarmiarty · 08-01-2011, 09:29 AM

Re the auction house- there is an ingame currency auction house as well. And you dn't have to use either of them. I've seen a lot of people having a shit about this but I don't understand why. It's important to note the auction house is between players so it's not like there will be things you can't get in other ways in there.
The other ones are valid complaints but what is wrong with havng an auction house.

Azisien · 08-01-2011, 09:32 AM

Quick, Internet, lose your minds about this rather predictable and not as horrifying as you think news!

Since Diablo 3 will probably be an important game in my life, I might as well weigh in on this news in detail though:

1) Always-On DRM is terrible and I struggled for a long time with loving StarCraft 2 but despising how they modelled Battle.net. However, that's just the thing. There's already a precedent set for this policy on Blizzard's online gaming service. How is anyone actually surprised by this? Really, how? The only reason could be that you were paying no attention beforehand.

However, I'll take the stance that I support with Always-On DRM: feel free to pirate the shit out of it to have an offline mode. I happen to know a very small handful of people trapped in the mid-20th century with no Internet access, and I support those people's privilege to play Diablo 3. For me, I intend to spend 95%+ of my time playing multiplayer, so I'll be needing that stable internet connection anwyay.

2) Uh, of course Blizzard isn't supporting bots or mods. First is obvious, second is semantics. Most cooperative/competitive online game developers don't support rampant cheating. Bots have completely, utterly, without possibility of repair ruined Diablo 2. My stance for my sequel would be militant too. As for mods, they're taking about player-side mods I think, not a modding community. You know, map hacks, illegal macros, whatever else people can come up with to make them innately better at the game without a measure of skill. I mean, they probably aren't supporting a game editor like they do for StarCraft 2, and that is a shame, but hardly horrifying news.

Dudes, check out this sweet new "aiming" mod I installed for Call of Duty. My KD ratio is SOOOOOO great now!

3) This is an interesting experiment, if anything. First of all, pretty sure it's been twisted by the media from "may buy with real currency" to "must buy with real currency." The Blizzard explanation sounds like people that WANT to pay real money to twink their characters CAN, but you could always just earn your gear like most people will. For me, I could see myself buying that last piece of Tal Rasha set, instead of running Baal 200 more times and PRAYING that 0.01% item drops.

Really, this is Blizzard accepting the inevitable. They are not really "letting us" buy gear with real money. The Diablo 3 community would set that up with or without Blizzard's consent. This seems similar to legalizing marijuana, instead of trying to combat its sale. It's gonna happen, the question is, how hard are the people in charge going to try and senselessly fight it? I'm curious to see how this pans out.

**Revising Ocelot** · 08-01-2011, 09:37 AM

Starcraft 2 used to require a constant connection too. I believe there's an offline mode, though, but then SC2 doesn't have items that can be botted for offline and then sold for cash.

Considering the amount of people that'll play and thus the huge supply, I doubt items would sell for very much. You'll get the occasional person buying your way to victory, but as far as I know that already happens with Diablo 2 and unofficial sites selling items. I guess Blizzard thinks it's easier to police a legitimised version.

I don't know about the lack of mods though, I've never played any Diablo games before. How did mods affect D2? If I were to speculate, I'd say that D3 will have an achievements system like SC2 and WoW and don't want people to mod their way to easy 'cheeves.

Loyal · 08-01-2011, 09:38 AM

I have to agree this isn't actually all that horrifying, given the circumstances. I mean, D2 singleplayer was terribly boring and nothing you couldn't replicate online anyway with a passworded game lobby (which IIRC gave you better drop rates anyway).

Nikose Tyris · 08-01-2011, 09:52 AM

One of the thing I liked the most was all the custom items and silly crap you could add into D2. Hell there were new maps and levels added in by fans.

I'm not going to by D3, but that's not for all the things they cut out- I just don't really care for the game style anymore.

Professor Smarmiarty · 08-01-2011, 10:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azisien

3) This is an interesting experiment, if anything. First of all, pretty sure it's been twisted by the media from "may buy with real currency" to "must buy with real currency." The Blizzard explanation sounds like people that WANT to pay real money to twink their characters CAN, but you could always just earn your gear like most people will. For me, I could see myself buying that last piece of Tal Rasha set, instead of running Baal 200 more times and PRAYING that 0.01% item drops.

There are actually two seperate auction houses, one for real money and one for ingame gold only. BOth of them are selling only things that are found int he game by players who then put them up for sale. You don't have to use either auction house, you can use all the random gold you have lying around to buy shit or if you just want to kill stuff without having to grind out the best loot you can spend real monies. It pretty solidly a non-issue.
And like even if they didn't support ongame selling of items it going to happen anyway, this just allows a much safer and more regulated trading service for everyone to use without getting screwed by dodgey traders.

These arguments are pretty much the same for legalising lots of drugs/prostitution etc- going to happen anyway, you'll just waste money and time fighting it and you won't succeed, so allow it, clean it up and regulate it.

A Zarkin' Frood · 08-01-2011, 10:40 AM

All I hear is boo hoo, except from Smarty.

1.) So yeah, I play mostly offline myself, I'd still doubt that there will be a complete lack of a possibility to play offline. That would suck, but shutting offline players out completely seems unlikely.

2.) The only point that is somewhat bugging me is #2, then again, I never cared much for mods.

3.) If anything It'll help me buy a new car. I mean, only idiots would BUY stuff for real money, but if they want to, why not profit off them a little? It was done illegally by third parties in D2 already, this seems to be the best way to fight that. Besides, there's also an auction house using ingame currency and that's something that was actually considered for D2 as well.

08-01-2011, 08:06 AM	#1
Ramary HE OPENS THE DOOR TO HIS DARK PAST Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Some craphole Posts: 770	Diablo 3 to have always online DRM, cash shop, no mods at all, and kills puppies. Okay maybe not kill puppies. 1) The game requires a constant internet connection. It cannot be played offline. 2) Mods are �expressly prohibited.� 3) Items in the auction house are bought and sold for real-life money. Anyone who wanted to buy this game, please just don't. It is the only way to actually send a message to them. You can send Activison or Blizzard all the hate mail in the world if you wanted to, but if you still buy the damn game like a sheep, it does NOTHING. In fact, it makes it even worst, since it sets a standard and more developers and publishers will realize they can get away with it.

08-01-2011, 09:15 AM	#3
Jagos FRONT KICK OF DOOM! Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Howdy pardner... Posts: 6,399	This just in: Pirating of Diablo 3 has gone up 20% due to no mods, and someone needing to create an offline mode. __________________ Copyright musings World ramblings Scifi stories

08-01-2011, 09:37 AM	#6
Revising Ocelot Douchebag Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Probably somewhere in England. Posts: 1,897	Starcraft 2 used to require a constant connection too. I believe there's an offline mode, though, but then SC2 doesn't have items that can be botted for offline and then sold for cash. Considering the amount of people that'll play and thus the huge supply, I doubt items would sell for very much. You'll get the occasional person buying your way to victory, but as far as I know that already happens with Diablo 2 and unofficial sites selling items. I guess Blizzard thinks it's easier to police a legitimised version. I don't know about the lack of mods though, I've never played any Diablo games before. How did mods affect D2? If I were to speculate, I'd say that D3 will have an achievements system like SC2 and WoW and don't want people to mod their way to easy 'cheeves. __________________ magic sucks

08-01-2011, 10:40 AM	#10
A Zarkin' Frood formerly known as Prince. Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Right here, with you >:) Posts: 2,396	All I hear is boo hoo, except from Smarty. 1.) So yeah, I play mostly offline myself, I'd still doubt that there will be a complete lack of a possibility to play offline. That would suck, but shutting offline players out completely seems unlikely. 2.) The only point that is somewhat bugging me is #2, then again, I never cared much for mods. 3.) If anything It'll help me buy a new car. I mean, only idiots would BUY stuff for real money, but if they want to, why not profit off them a little? It was done illegally by third parties in D2 already, this seems to be the best way to fight that. Besides, there's also an auction house using ingame currency and that's something that was actually considered for D2 as well. __________________ >:( C-:

08-01-2011, 08:51 AM	#2
Yrcrazypa Not your babies daddy Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 491	Well, I was already on the fence about this game, leaning towards not buying it. Thanks for making my decision easy Activision! I won't call them Blizzard, Blizzard died when they merged. __________________ Killer of threads.

08-01-2011, 09:29 AM	#4
Professor Smarmiarty Sent to the cornfield Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: K-space Posts: 9,758	Re the auction house- there is an ingame currency auction house as well. And you dn't have to use either of them. I've seen a lot of people having a shit about this but I don't understand why. It's important to note the auction house is between players so it's not like there will be things you can't get in other ways in there. The other ones are valid complaints but what is wrong with havng an auction house.

08-01-2011, 09:32 AM	#5
Azisien wat Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 7,177	Quick, Internet, lose your minds about this rather predictable and not as horrifying as you think news! Since Diablo 3 will probably be an important game in my life, I might as well weigh in on this news in detail though: 1) Always-On DRM is terrible and I struggled for a long time with loving StarCraft 2 but despising how they modelled Battle.net. However, that's just the thing. There's already a precedent set for this policy on Blizzard's online gaming service. How is anyone actually surprised by this? Really, how? The only reason could be that you were paying no attention beforehand. However, I'll take the stance that I support with Always-On DRM: feel free to pirate the shit out of it to have an offline mode. I happen to know a very small handful of people trapped in the mid-20th century with no Internet access, and I support those people's privilege to play Diablo 3. For me, I intend to spend 95%+ of my time playing multiplayer, so I'll be needing that stable internet connection anwyay. 2) Uh, of course Blizzard isn't supporting bots or mods. First is obvious, second is semantics. Most cooperative/competitive online game developers don't support rampant cheating. Bots have completely, utterly, without possibility of repair ruined Diablo 2. My stance for my sequel would be militant too. As for mods, they're taking about player-side mods I think, not a modding community. You know, map hacks, illegal macros, whatever else people can come up with to make them innately better at the game without a measure of skill. I mean, they probably aren't supporting a game editor like they do for StarCraft 2, and that is a shame, but hardly horrifying news. Dudes, check out this sweet new "aiming" mod I installed for Call of Duty. My KD ratio is SOOOOOO great now! 3) This is an interesting experiment, if anything. First of all, pretty sure it's been twisted by the media from "may buy with real currency" to "must buy with real currency." The Blizzard explanation sounds like people that WANT to pay real money to twink their characters CAN, but you could always just earn your gear like most people will. For me, I could see myself buying that last piece of Tal Rasha set, instead of running Baal 200 more times and PRAYING that 0.01% item drops. Really, this is Blizzard accepting the inevitable. They are not really "letting us" buy gear with real money. The Diablo 3 community would set that up with or without Blizzard's consent. This seems similar to legalizing marijuana, instead of trying to combat its sale. It's gonna happen, the question is, how hard are the people in charge going to try and senselessly fight it? I'm curious to see how this pans out.