Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'PC Gaming & Hardware' started by Plague_Injected, Aug 11, 2011.
we can only hope
Because that would be a lie as well, they know they can't stop piracy. Used sales, however, are another matter.
Screw ID as well. If RAGE requires constant online connectivity to play SP, it will just slide it off of the to buy list.
Not seeing why it has to be connected for the extra features they are talking about.
This has nothing to do with the extra features. It has to do with DRM.
I live in the boondocks and my DSL runs at .9mbps on good days. I dislike always-on. TF2 ruins my bandwidth twice a week with all its updates and I finally got fed up and uninstalled it.
What's so funny is, no gamer actually asked for this always on DRM nonsense.
Yet, a bunch there's a bunch of mouthbreathers on here defending it to the death.
It's been a while since I've seen something so retarded.
Why DO you want always on DRM? It serves nobody's interest, especially for SINGLE PLAYER GAMES, except the publishers.
Why do they want it? To combat piracy in part, to be able to track what you're doing, in part, to set the stage for ingame microtransactions, in part, to decide when they can shut off the servers (EA sports anyone?) in part, to combat hacking (lolololol, they will just get trolled) in part . . .
It's dumb, it serves no real purpose other than to give them control over YOUR experience, yet you guys are here willlingly pulling down your pants and letting them stick their anal probes up your arse.
The follies of sheeple never cease to amuse me, they will use any kind of logic to convince themselves they have a good thing going.
If you wanna disregard what I'm saying, that's more than fine, but consider this, if Kyle and Dan_D, who you guys feel are more authoritive on matters PC & Gaming feel the same way, then rip your heads out of your asses and open your eyes and ask yourself WHY do they feel that way?
I'll just throw this out there.
With this level of control over your gaming experience, you guys might as well migrate to consoles completely, it's essentially the same thing.
Buying SKYRIM not some Diablo 3 or Rage shit.
Also, what'll be awful funny is if game sales aren't what they expect because there'll be a host of people who won't be able to use their product. Then they will blame low sales on the pirates, which is what this is supposed to prevent.
Is it better to lose $2 million in sales to pirates or $20 million in sales to people with crappy internet?
I don't think Rage will have always-online DRM...it's a Bethesda title, and its recent games are using Steamworks for its DRM.
Willits seems to be begging for attention with a lot of the rubbish coming out of his mouth. I am hoping Carmack "corrects" him soon.
I'm sorry I didn't know they were the guys I had to ask if I wanted to have "fun" with a game. Plenty of people has stated why we would rather have it online rather than off. Instead of foaming at the mouth you could read what people say or you could actually take a step back and look at the bigger picture. Blizzard would rather fuck over a small minority (people with no internet) and piss off people like you who post a thousand times a day yet bitch about wanting free time to play offline.
Yes Fail, Blizzard knows who you are and they hate you.
I see nowhere in your post where you stated WHY always on DRM is a good thing. Sounds like you'd rather be placed in shackles rather than enjoy freedom of choice to play a game.
"Ok, internet is out, I wanna play Diablo 3. Oh wait, I can't" Your version
"Ok, internet is out, I can play Diablo 3 since it doesn't have always on DRM" My version.
Read any of my posts in these threads...... In fact go read the entire thread over again. It's almost like you ignore anyone who ever bring up legit reasons and rely on name calling and sexual remarks to get your childish opinion across.
Nice edit, but you have the freedom to not buy the game so I don't understand what the problem is. VOTE WITH YOUR WALLET FAIL, DO IT.
You go show Blizzard how you feel, they care.
The problem is there are no legit reasons to have always on DRM for a single player game.
I'm sorry, but that's just how it is.
lol ok Fail if you say so.
What's the legitimate reasons then? I see how you couldn't even come up any.
I think what Willits is saying is that it will be easier to rush their games out the door and fix them before too many people find out their mistakes. I loved KOTOR2, but the ending was hurting. Everyone knows Lucas Arts wanted to rush that title out. Just not enough time to close the story. Now, if every dev and publisher can quickly make updates, they will be even more sloppy with what gets released. That way they can push out half baked games, and polish them later. Rather than pay for the dev manpower to make a 20 hour game, you can pay for the dev manpower to make a 10 hour game and then use money from the sales to pay for the rest of the 10 hours... er I mean... rest of the 5 hours.
I've been without internet for a while, with moving and all that nonsense. Been enjoying Divine Divinity in the mean time. It just runs. That's what I like about single player gaming. You don't have to be connected to anything. It just runs. I don't want to wait for the servers to download my profile and saves. Much less the other nonsense of being always on.
Doom 3 was a good game? Maybe in real time shadows, but not much else.
Pretty much. I game on a PC not just because its a far better gaming experience (high resolutions, better graphics and physics), but because I personally like to control everything for myself and not be spoon fed shit from companies. I despise consoles for not giving me options, for not giving me control over my property. PC gaming, I don't need someone to hold my bitty witty wittle hand at every turn.
DRM is all about them controlling things. Piracy will always be here, you will never see it leave. And piracy is NOT hurting the gaming industry. They have no proof of that. Show me where a software company went out of business because of piracy. Game industry is even bigger than it has ever been before, even with piracy being easier all of the time. One only has to look at games like CoD series (Black Ops was reported to be the most pirated game in history, but it still didn't stop it from being the biggest selling game in history either). The industry lies all of the time. They use the DRM excuse for combating piracy, when in fact, it never stops from people cracking the games and playing the game without DRM at all. So it only effects legitimate customers. So ergo: DRM is not about combating piracy, anyone else who says otherwise is just plain blind or an abopogist and hasn't got any facts to back up their claims. And when they do post some resource, its usually a "study" by some consultation firm hired or influenced by the game industry. Sounds a lot like our political situation in the US doesn't it?
I guess these PC games are going to come with a free 3G USB stick for our laptops then. You can't always be connected just because you want to!
I guess that's why I don't see a lot of problems with this type of DRM because I've had mobile broadband for 5 years now, I'm pretty much always connected but I guess that isn't most people. Hell my Verizon 4G LTE modem in certain spots is faster than my Timer Warner Turbo cable modem but unfortunately it's pretty expensive. If it were uncapped I'd seriously think of giving up my cable modem.
ID better stay away from an approach like this and stray away from consoles back to pc (like John Carmack indicated at keynote he intends to do).
Tue enough, it was more like Q3 was their last good game. Even then, one could argue that the mods and the community for Q3 were as much of what made it great as id was. But that was back in late 1999. Since then, they have not really done much of anything on the PC. Even if you count Doom 3, we are still talking 2004 since they have released a damn thing.
I understand nostalgia does funny things to people's perception of reality, but id has not really been any sort of driving force in the industry for a decade or more. Yes, Carmack is a genius, but what has he, or id, done for PC gaming lately?
The id and Carmack lovers will be angry with me now. They will have to let go of his penis, and pull their heads out of his ass to type a retort.
Clearly you are well qualified to make such claims. Clearly you know the comprehensive influence id has on the gaming market. How can anyone compete when you know everything?
He stated his opinion, which you clearly don't like. He never claimed to have a comprehensive knowledge of everything there is in the world.
He simply offered his opinion, which you were clearly incapable of rebutting.
Post something of substance, sir.
This is such flawed logic. Would you be ok if games started charging extra to run at a certain video res, just because it didn't affect you?
Its the principle of the thing. Its wrong. This 'it doesn't affect me so I don' care' reasoning is why so many draconian laws got passed and why companies get away with so much shit.
It's easier to be apathetic than it is outspoken and proactive.
It's easier to allow yourself to be raped than prevent it.
It's easier to conform rather than go against the grain.
It's easier to succumb to the darkness rather than go towards the light.
That's not at all what I said. I clearly pointed out that I know it doesn't effect me and that's why I'm not up in arms about it. I'm simply used to always being connected and I think that's becoming the case for more and more people and why companies are doing this. Just if that's not the case for a person then sure I understand the point.
I'm apathetic because I have an LTE modem? I said in my first post I see the point if one isn't always connected but don't you think over time that more and more people will be and that always connected DRM simply won't matter? The whole cloud computing is based on the premise of always connected and that seems to be the way things are going.
I dislike the idea behind always on DRM even though I have a rock solid connection. Not having a way to play a single player game offline is fucking stupid.
Yes, yes it would be ok. The company making the product has the right to set whatever requirements for use that they want (obviously not including illegal/stupid shit since I know someone's going to post some smart-ass comment).
If a fast food chain was going to get rid of their $1 menu and make it a $5 menu, would you say they can't do it? Would you be crying all over the internet about it?
Haha you made my night. That was deep man... deep. I'm gonna go join the rest of my sheep as someone else counts us while trying to fall asleep.
I've spent several hours on this, too. It's really pretty good. More content than D2, with a hint of a plot. It does have enough dungeon crawl feel without being just a grinder.
So you're saying since we have shit anyway might as well have localised shit instead of general shit which further breaks immersion by seeing billboards/ads you see every day anyway? Mmk, lol. I dont see how this is an advantage for the gamer.
My point was (and maybe I was a little over the top about it), gaming developers should be making the games they want to make and then getting me interested in the world they create. CDProjekt is a great example of that, they clearly made a game they were enthusiastic about (I'm using CDProjekt a lot as an example of the right thing to do because I've been impressed with their practices lately).
My question is, why do gaming companies need to monitor every single user for information, and by monitoring every single user for information what use will that be to them? In my mind the answer to that question does not lead to more games I want to play, as Steam already offers hours played statistics and there's very few games in the top 10 list I actually give 2 shits about. The fact is, what the wider community spends the most hours doing is not what I want to see copied any further than it already is.
I dont want to see publishers telling developers "Make this game because its what our servers tell us the majority of people are playing". They already do that without having to gather any extra information from consumers than what they already have.
What I DO want to see is developers telling publishers "We're making this game because we are enthusiastic about it, we're going to put all our efforts into it and we want gamers to experience the world we are creating". THATS what makes a good game.
Yep, I read it, I comprehended it Your example was sequential content patches... if a publisher wishes to do this I see no reason why it requires "always on" to be implemented.
Honestly I feel when you made that list you just scratched your head thinking of "possible" advantages to having always online without really thinking through why they're advantages, or if they are advantages why they can't be done just as easily in an offline mode.
Always online to me just seems like a reason to lock down content by moving it server side, enforce DRM and break up games to allow them to release them more easily as a series of microtransactions rather than complete games at release (its easier to make gamers swallow sequentially paying for a game when they're already forced to be online). I see very few advantages for the gamer and lots of ways publishers can try and exploit it.
They could audit your PC and you wouldn't even know it. I say fuck them, I also won't buy any games with always online for SP either. Ubisoft SH5 was the first and last such game.
"Our fans are always connected."
^This is BS to try and con all gamers into thinking always online is great so you should buy their game. The fans like it so you should too.
Yeah pretty much. This is the thing, I fully understand Carmack's history and ID software. FFS, Doom was one of the first games I played on the first PC's I bought, a 486 60MHZ complete with 4 MEGS of ram. Along with Tie Fighter and X-Wing. But I am of the "what have you done for me lately" side as well, ID hasn't really done much in the last 8 years or so and thats a shame really. They got the talent and the brains, but that won't stop me from ridiculing them for wanting always on DRM or anything else that has no benefit to gamers. Carmack was wrong before (RAGE to be focused first on consoles) and he admitted he was wrong. But how long will it take ID to come around and realize that alienating their PC customers was a very bad move?
Best time to make sure unneeded changes do not go through is right at the start, you don't wait for them to slowly slide their cocks inside before you realize your being fucked. When you see them pull their pants down, that's the best time for you to throw your foot straight between their legs!
Sorry,that just doesn't cut it. I'll give iD props for creating the FPS genre,hell,it's about the only type of gaming I do. But the days of Doom and Quake are long,long,gone. The last game that had any connection to iD that was worth playing was RTCW.
If you look at the current industry, wouldn't say Tim Sweeney be more influential considering the success and impact of unreal relative to id tech? Yet you never hear anything about him comparatively.
The solution to this is easy: Don't buy games that require this.
Simple as that. Yes, even if the game is Diablo 3. There are tons of good games out there, you can miss out on one or two of them. If people will actually do this, actually stick to their guns and not buy always-on DRM games they'll go away in a hurry. Publishers will notice the massive drop in sales and stop doing it.
Really, consumers DO have the power here. However it requires not whining about it online and sticking to your guns. It really isn't that hard to do. I wanted both Assassin's Creed 2 and Settlers 7, but I own neither because of the DRM. It is no big deal, I have so many other games I don't even have time to play them all.
If games just stick with it, don't make lame excuses, and actually boycott games that pull this shit, it'll be ended before you know it.
So if this pissess you off, then don't buy games that do it. don't make excuses, don't say "It doesn't matter if I do it." Stick to your guns. If you aren't willing to do that, then no whining, at all. You are giving it your approval by buying in.
Decide where you stand, and stand by your decision.
At least as qualified as you are to claim the opposite.