Bankie
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2004
- Messages
- 2,471
I cannot believe how you fanboys rationalize this issue. "Anyone that's thinks that the current widespread issues is a whiner".
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Diablo III is getting killed on Metacritic
- Thread starter MrAgmoore
- Start date
I cannot believe how you fanboys rationalize this issue. "Anyone that's thinks that the current widespread issues is a whiner".
You're doing it wrong.
It's safe to say most people want to experience the game the way its supposed to be experienced. thats why wow has 9 million subscribers and private servers have thousands
nobody said its impossible. I said it does help stop piracy and it does. for reasons that have already been stated
MavericK
Zero Cool
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2004
- Messages
- 31,929
Sorry but this bullshit pisses me off. Who's to say how people should play the game?
So you only used Metacritic as an example but left everything else out....
Fan-boyism at its finest. PS: I don't care about drm or piracy as long as it doesn't affect legitimate users or inhibits my playing whenever I feel like it, online or offline.
I agree, pirating of D3 has been severely diminished.
So you used only Metacritic as an example but left everything else out....
I believe its this exact thread that people call out professional reviews as bogus and paid for. . not sure though
. Personally I read reviews and the ones I've seen have all been positive, theres plenty of articles out there bashing the server downtime not the online drm and its purpose because it serves its purposeI believe its this exact thread that people call out professional reviews as bogus and paid for. . not sure though
The downtime is directly related to DRM because always online is a REQUIREMENT to play the game, even single player.
To make it easier for you...they are using always online as a type of DRM...get it now.
The server issues are a huge black eye for Blizzard, there is no way to defend it or sugar coat it; it is a a fact that they dropped the ball. Blizzard knew how many presale orders there were and unless thay are blind and incompetent they knew how big a deal this game was going to be at launch. In that regards the metacritic scores, regardless on whether someone thinks they are irrelevant, are warranted.
The DRM is what it is; yes it sucks that if your only intention was to play SP you cannot play the game when the authentication servers or your own ISP is down. However, you may as well get used to it. This is the way that gaming is going to go, more and more developers will make the games server side resourced with a client front end. It will happen. The majority of gamers even if they are casual have some form of broadband. Sorry but if you are on some ancient ass dial up or ISDN you probably should find a different hobby.
The DRM is what it is; yes it sucks that if your only intention was to play SP you cannot play the game when the authentication servers or your own ISP is down. However, you may as well get used to it. This is the way that gaming is going to go, more and more developers will make the games server side resourced with a client front end. It will happen. The majority of gamers even if they are casual have some form of broadband. Sorry but if you are on some ancient ass dial up or ISDN you probably should find a different hobby.
BravO)))
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2008
- Messages
- 6,636
You guys need to cool it and stay on topic.
Yeah I agree entirely. Hard to prepare for a launch this large although 3million played the open beta. I'd love to know how many copies sold
_PixelNinja
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2011
- Messages
- 1,460
I disagree with his final paragraphs in which he says that it's okay to purchase the game then complain. Doing so alleviates the weight of the complaint in regards to those who are supposed to be listening -- why should the developers/editors take it into account when they already have your money? The message you'll be sending out is 'I'll by your game anyway'. If one wants to buy Diablo III he/she should do so knowing what he/she is going into and be prepared for the shortcomings.
MavericK
Zero Cool
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2004
- Messages
- 31,929
Yeah, I kind of disagree with that point, too. However, I do think he is right that developers should be listening to the community regardless of how much money they are making. Of course, like you said, there is little motivation to do so, but that just makes the developer look bad and sours the community from buying further titles from them.
The rest of it seemed very relevant, though.
DarkStryke
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2001
- Messages
- 1,391
Saw this quote elsewhere, fits perfectly:
I think in a couple years always online games like these are going to become FTP with in-game micro transactions at the heart. Blizzard is living off the fame of Diablo 1/2 for this launch, which created huge pre-sales. Any other new IP game without that kind of backing and these issues would have bombed at this point while people left in droves...
That is my biggest issue, it's not like this was a Torchlight like game were they were expecting a few thousand day one sales and got a million. Blizzard had to of know how many accounts were going to be raping their auth servers. Random auth errors would have been one thing, errors happen, but the servers being overloaded is amateur at best.
Bankie
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2004
- Messages
- 2,471
Yeah "everyone wants to experience the game the way it's supposed to be experienced". That must be why they lost so many accounts right after Cata dropped. Private servers have much less players for reasons other than that.
The only reason D3 is online only is because ActiBlizz wanted to make money from the RMAH. That's also the reason they said that D3 wasn't a competitive game; people's bullshit detectors would go off if they said it was and let you buy gear. I find it hilarious that it used to be considered cheating to buy gear with money; but when Blizz gets behind it the fanboys think it's great.
_PixelNinja
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2011
- Messages
- 1,460
I definitely think they should listen too, but we know how that works in the real world. I'm not quite sure it sours the community from future purchases though -- gamers have been proven to be quite 'versatile'.
MavericK
Zero Cool
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2004
- Messages
- 31,929
Well, me personally, anyway. Not that I wouldn't ever purchase a title from that company again from one incident, but it would make me think twice about it, and likely not pay full release price for it.
I wonder what will happen, when, and it's not "if" but "when", they import this concept to WoW. You need gold? Buy it from us, not spammers. Need powerful items, rare mounts or pets? Buy it from us... you want more levels, but don't want to play? Get Blizz powerleveling services, "Experienced employees will play it for you".
Chinese farmers will get pissed
I agree with this. Previously I would buy any blizzard game up front by default but since D3 and blizzard not quite being the same as they were I'm done with that.
I wonder what will happen, when, and it's not "if" but "when", they import this concept to WoW. You need gold? Buy it from us, not spammers. Need powerful items, rare mounts or pets? Buy it from us... you want more levels, but don't want to play? Get Blizz powerleveling services, "Experienced employees will play it for you".
Chinese farmers will get pissed
Honestly? I'm surprised this hasn't happened a long time ago. A good portion of the MMO crowd would gladly buy gold (which is why the gold farmers exist), gear, pay for levels etc. I'm surprised some MMO dev hasn't stepped up and made that an option.
_PixelNinja
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2011
- Messages
- 1,460
I share that train of thought. The best example would be Ubisoft -- I have not bought a game from them in ages. The only game I would purchase at this present time would be Rayman Origins because they have dropped the draconian DRM. But that's just me and it's not representative of gamers' attitude as a whole.
Not entirely true - they just wanted the entire pie, instead of only a portion of it. Implementing an RMAH for the online-only crowd while still allowing for an offline component is more than feasible, but hardly worth it for ActiBlizz. Think about it for a moment - why would they intentionally segregate the user base from their latest cash-grabbing scheme? Allowing for separate online/offline components not only means extra $ spent in development, but also fewer $ to be had from the RMAH, all while opening the floodgates for potential lost sales due to piracy.
From a business standpoint, this is a complete no-brainer. The few lost-sales from people not willing to purchase the game because of the online-only schema will be a drop in the bucket compared to the long-term revenue earned from the RMAH.
Don't get me wrong - I'm not defending Blizzard here, just explaining why this is actually a good idea from the business end of things. From the consumer side, it can certainly suck for a lot of people. My own opinion is that I really would love for there to be an offline component, but I'm not going to sit here and bitch about it like everyone else. I knew what I was getting into a LONG TIME AGO when they released this information. And you know what? I still love the game, and feel that the juice is worth the squeeze.
Yea, it of course has nothing to do with all the dupes and hacks in D2 destroying the economy. No, couldn't be that.
MavericK
Zero Cool
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2004
- Messages
- 31,929
Well, that is why we, as consumers and not businesses, are complaining about it.
So make SP and MP separate. Again, they could have done this but they did not. They did it just fine in D2; I never had to log onto anything to play SP.
If there was a failure in MP duping it was because it was not contained like D3 is. I have zero problem with D3 MP being entirely contained on their servers, that does not bother me at all (although LAN play would be very nice). SP is the problem here.
TwistedAegis
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2009
- Messages
- 8,958
Right? Clearly the only reason they would do it was because they're evil and out to get us.
D3 [H] Edition: Comes packaged with your very own Diablo 3 logo tinfoil hat.
No, they didn't do it just fine in D2, that is what led to the massive duping and hacked items.
MavericK
Zero Cool
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2004
- Messages
- 31,929
I was editing my post when you wrote this, but I was referring to SP.
TwistedAegis
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2009
- Messages
- 8,958
I get what you're saying, it's just that there would most likely be little to no return on investment to creating an entirely seperate loot/mob engine that was different from MP. And then you would be worried about potentially needing to balance two seperate systems...it just wouldn't work.
NoOther
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- May 14, 2008
- Messages
- 6,468
Not to mention that if they separate the systems then some users will complain that they want to use their SP chars in multiplayer and not have to completely level up and reacquire all their gear again... How many 'more' people will complain about that?
The problem is, no matter what they do, they are damned if they do and damned if they don't. So the best option for them is to go with the method that has the most potential upside from a business perspective.
To be honest, I find it completely ironic and amusing that you have people that don't even play the game complaining about it. I have had zero, count it, zero problems with their current system. There was one medium blip and then a really minor blip on the first day, but other than that, I have played flawlessly and the always on option has in no way hindered my enjoyment.
Every time a game comes out with this option I see a ton of people complaining about it, but it always seems to be the people who aren't going to play it anyway. They use the excuse that they won't because of DRM, but honestly, I just think its because they are cheap and want to be grumpy. Time moves on, situations evolve, roll with it.
MavericK
Zero Cool
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2004
- Messages
- 31,929
_PixelNinja
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2011
- Messages
- 1,460
I might be wrong but I don't think it's a sentiment of surprise, but more one of disappointment in that it has handicapped a lot of players. People were expecting, considering Blizzard's experience with WoW, that the online component would have worked out smoother than it did thus far. That being said I would tend to agree -- the issues were to be expected.
Last edited:
Bankie
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2004
- Messages
- 2,471
D2 had an economy? Why not just fix the exploits that allowed dupes? It's not like there's much difference between a few players duping and thousands posting the same items in the RMAH. The 'economy' is still going to work the same way.
With the RMAH D3 has endorsed 'cheating' and become a pay to win game anyway. I would think it would be easy for people to see.
Tempest_Prime
I choke on balls regularly
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2005
- Messages
- 376
What is this metacritic you speak of? Whatever happened to looking at the back of the game box, shrugging, and giving a game a fair shake if it didn't look completely dumb?
Bankie
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2004
- Messages
- 2,471
What is this metacritic you speak of? Whatever happened to looking at the back of the game box, shrugging, and giving a game a fair shake if it didn't look completely dumb?
Do they still sell games in boxes?
thats why its not an esport. who cares if people buy items it doesnt effect you. the game is for playing not for competing. they did fix duping, items are now server side
Did you even play D2? Of course it had an economy. The currency was SOJs. Did the economy suck? Yea, thanks to the countless dupes and fakes. As long as hex editors exist, it will be impossible to prevent dupes from existing.
The only way to fix the exploit, like what you claim you want them to do, is to move to a client/server system, which is what they did.