The real state of Diablo III is that is has DRM forcing you to be online even to play single player. As a result, my almost two decade long love affair with Blizzard games has come to an end.
This is basically my thought on it as well. Loved Diablo and Diablo II, but my wireless is a little flaky because of my apartment's layout so the only multiplayer that works well is on the LAN. I'd be ok with an online activation. I'd tolerate it checking in once a week or once a month. But I don't want to have to spend a half hour fudging around with the wireless signal every time I want to play an offline game.
But I don't want to have to spend a half hour fudging around with the wireless signal every time I want to play an offline game.
Not even that, what happens in 5-10 years when you want to dig up the game and play it again? Will the servers still be online? Will there be a "required" patch which doesn't work well with your system or nerfs your favorite character?
Not even that, what happens in 5-10 years when you want to dig up the game and play it again?
Will the servers still be online? Will there be a "required" patch which doesn't work well with your system or nerfs your favorite character?
Blizzard is actually the one company that I feel I can trust to keep the servers running for a lon gperiod of time, becuase they tend to stick with and support their games. They seem to have a corporate mindset that looks and plans in the long term, as opposed to most other publishers that just look to the next game and leave just a token force to maintain a previous game. That being said, I really enjoyed Diablo II, but after being disappointed with SC2, I do not expect to buy D3 any time soon.
On a whim, I dug out my old Diablo II and Lord of Darkness disks. Registering my game on their BattleNet site was easy, and was given new "in game" keys for downloading the client, with patches. Sure, the graphics don't look so good, but I can play. And the online servers are still there, allowing people to play the full-featured game, with all the benefits of the network. If being connected on-line is going to be required to play for Diablo III, Blizzard has shown that they will make sure that the game is available.
Maybe being online isn't a problem. But, having multiple computers online, all connecting to battlenet while they really just need to talk to each other might be. Bandwidth may be a bottleneck.
Blizzard has millions of simultaneous WoW users on Battlenet. They already scaled Battlenet from its original Diablo/StarCraft matchmaking service to support a huge MMO. When the Cataclysm expansion for WoW launched, millions of users were activating and logging in to play. The service worked without a hitch.
*Now* they're going to have a bandwidth problem? Ha ha, right.
Bandwidth is generally not an issue. Online games use very little of it, and there's no reason to believe Diablo 3 will be different. What you do need is low latency, and even then it's only really important for FPS type games.
Unfortunately, that's not a good assumption. Look at it this way: Once D3 is out, Blizzard won't want you spending time playing D2.
D2 support becomes a drag on the D3 revenue stream, instead of good advertising for it. It's really hard to defend against that argument in a board room, and to shareholders ("due diligence" [wikipedia.org]), especially if D3 is less than a spectacular success. You shouldn't expect at all that D2 will be supported in 2 or 5 years.
D2 is a decade old. It still received a patch 2-3 years ago that added new content. I wasn't really paying attention but I was astonished they still support it.
True, the online multiplayer only restriction is a bummer for retro gaming in 10-20 years. And it will really bite me then. GOG will be an unsustainable business model. Could I play Dungeon Keeper 2 if it had been made today in 2022? Propably not.
That being said, for the time being I'm not too miffed about the online only restriction of D3. bnet
On a whim, I dug up my old D2 discs, still works, haha, gee good old D2...
40 hours later, surrounded by empty cans of caffeinated beverages, trying with all my wits to get some 14 year old to trade a perf 3 OS DS for my spare SOJ and Mal so I can friggin get on with my hellfire grind...have to go to work in 3 hours...
I think that rather than plan to keep the servers up forever, I could see them release a patch that would allow LAN play if it were true that they had to close down for some reason" or, failing that, to at least patch it to remove the must be online part.
Blizzard has by and large done alright by me - I don't like the drm they are using now but they are the one studio that releases and supports their games well enough for me to put up with it.
I think that rather than plan to keep the servers up forever, I could see them release a patch that would allow LAN play if it were true that they had to close down for some reason" or, failing that, to at least patch it to remove the must be online part.
What if they go bankrupt? Blizzard are a strong company now, but 10 years is a long time and plenty of great companies have fallen before. Then they wouldn't have the resources to throw at that sort of thing- you'd be stuck with things in the state they are when the bailiffs move in.
What if they're purchased by someone less trustworthy. What if Oracle decided to move into video gaming and bought them out- do you trust Oracle to do right by you? Or some faceless private equity firm?
With Blizzard, specifically, I'm willing to take those risks because of their past track record. As I said, I don't buy drm laden stuff except with Blizzard.
My only complaint with Blizzard's implementation of Diablo 2 is that each patch (especially after 1.07 or so) drastically changed gameplay. Suddenly great sets were crap, great characters were crap, etc. Sure, it adds a level of replayability, but if I have a lvl 60 on its way to greatness, I don't want to trash it and start over on the Blood Moore with a new character.
"I am Akara, High Priestess of the Sisterhood of the Sightless Eye. I welcome you, traveler, to our camp, but I'm afraid I can offer you but poor shelter within these rickety walls."
She'll reset your stats once per difficulty level now.
My experience with Wotlk expansion says otherwise. When a new patch rolled out, it was unbearable to play. The server would go down while we in the middle of a boss fight. A few hours later you could log back in and get instantly pwned by the boss. Talking to some veterans, it happened back in the days of vanilla WoW a few times but it seemed to have been corrected. Apparently not.
The WotLK launch was bad. It was also 5 years ago. The Cataclysm launch was completely painless - log out at midnight, log back in, start playing.
Things keep getting smoother is all I'm saying.
The majority of the issues seem to be affected by the number players in an area. Even when the server didn't give up, moving around in Dalaran was painful. It sounds like they might have fixed it with Cataclysm but I wonder is that because of fewer players these days or better architecture? There was a recent article about Blizzard auctioning off old blades for charity.
Blizzard is actually the one company that I feel I can trust to keep the servers running for a lon gperiod of time, becuase they tend to stick with and support their games. They seem to have a corporate mindset that looks and plans in the long term, as opposed to most other publishers that just look to the next game and leave just a token force to maintain a previous game. That being said, I really enjoyed Diablo II, but after being disappointed with SC2, I do not expect to buy D3 any time soon.
I agree with this, but the problem now is that it isn't just Blizzard. Activision is in the picture and my trust in them is much lower. I somewhat want to play Diablo 3 but I doubt I will because of this.
Have you tried playing Diablo 2 lately? The only thing you can do on it today is spam the 'n' key to clear the neverending spam. If you play in a game of 8 people, you'll be lucky to have just 1 of them be an actual person, the rest are bots hosting the run, leeching the xp, or spamming the chat log with websites.
If Blizzard were truly committed to their games, they would still be addressing live multiplayer issues. Keeping resources available for a game from not last decade, but the one prior, is not a maj
Also, Blizzard got big on Warcraft, Diablo, and Starcraft. Looking at the latest releases of these games it's clear they are no longer capable of creating the games that made them so popular. Would you like to play Diablo-themed WoW single player? We can do that!
Have you tried playing Diablo 2 lately? The only thing you can do on it today is spam the 'n' key to clear the neverending spam. If you play in a game of 8 people, you'll be lucky to have just 1 of them be an actual person, the rest are bots hosting the run, leeching the xp, or spamming the chat log with websites.
If Blizzard were truly committed to their games, they would still be addressing live multiplayer issues. Keeping resources available for a game from not last decade, but the one prior, is not a major commitment to anything.
That's also the old battle.net. The game had a lot of client side data which could be manipulated. Fixing it would require a major re-write of something earning 0 profit.
The new battle.net and design of D3 prevents a lot of this. Not to mention they have lots of experience in combating bots. That doesn't mean they will all be gone but I'm sure they will actively ban in big groups as before.
The real state of Diablo III (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:4, Insightful)
This is basically my thought on it as well. Loved Diablo and Diablo II, but my wireless is a little flaky because of my apartment's layout so the only multiplayer that works well is on the LAN. I'd be ok with an online activation. I'd tolerate it checking in once a week or once a month. But I don't want to have to spend a half hour fudging around with the wireless signal every time I want to play an offline game.
Re: (Score:0)
But I don't want to have to spend a half hour fudging around with the wireless signal every time I want to play an offline game.
Not even that, what happens in 5-10 years when you want to dig up the game and play it again?
Will the servers still be online? Will there be a "required" patch which doesn't work well with your system or nerfs your favorite character?
Re:The real state of Diablo III (Score:4, Insightful)
Not even that, what happens in 5-10 years when you want to dig up the game and play it again? Will the servers still be online? Will there be a "required" patch which doesn't work well with your system or nerfs your favorite character?
Blizzard is actually the one company that I feel I can trust to keep the servers running for a lon gperiod of time, becuase they tend to stick with and support their games. They seem to have a corporate mindset that looks and plans in the long term, as opposed to most other publishers that just look to the next game and leave just a token force to maintain a previous game. That being said, I really enjoyed Diablo II, but after being disappointed with SC2, I do not expect to buy D3 any time soon.
Re:The real state of Diablo III (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe being online isn't a problem. But, having multiple computers online, all connecting to battlenet while they really just need to talk to each other might be. Bandwidth may be a bottleneck.
Re: (Score:0)
Lolwut.
Blizzard has millions of simultaneous WoW users on Battlenet. They already scaled Battlenet from its original Diablo/StarCraft matchmaking service to support a huge MMO. When the Cataclysm expansion for WoW launched, millions of users were activating and logging in to play. The service worked without a hitch.
*Now* they're going to have a bandwidth problem? Ha ha, right.
Re: (Score:2)
No. I was not referring to their bandwidth, but that of 6 people all connection to BNet from the same location.
Re: (Score:1)
Bandwidth is generally not an issue. Online games use very little of it, and there's no reason to believe Diablo 3 will be different. What you do need is low latency, and even then it's only really important for FPS type games.
Re: (Score:0)
I like Diablo. And I like Blizzard pretty good too. But how will Blizzard make sure servers are up for all their games if they happen to go tits up?
Re: (Score:0)
Unfortunately, that's not a good assumption. Look at it this way: Once D3 is out, Blizzard won't want you spending time playing D2.
D2 support becomes a drag on the D3 revenue stream, instead of good advertising for it. It's really hard to defend against that argument in a board room, and to shareholders ("due diligence" [wikipedia.org]), especially if D3 is less than a spectacular success. You shouldn't expect at all that D2 will be supported in 2 or 5 years.
Re: (Score:2)
True, the online multiplayer only restriction is a bummer for retro gaming in 10-20 years. And it will really bite me then. GOG will be an unsustainable business model. Could I play Dungeon Keeper 2 if it had been made today in 2022? Propably not.
That being said, for the time being I'm not too miffed about the online only restriction of D3. bnet
Re: (Score:1)
40 hours later, surrounded by empty cans of caffeinated beverages, trying with all my wits to get some 14 year old to trade a perf 3 OS DS for my spare SOJ and Mal so I can friggin get on with my hellfire grind...have to go to work in 3 hours...
Re: (Score:2)
I think that rather than plan to keep the servers up forever, I could see them release a patch that would allow LAN play if it were true that they had to close down for some reason" or, failing that, to at least patch it to remove the must be online part.
Blizzard has by and large done alright by me - I don't like the drm they are using now but they are the one studio that releases and supports their games well enough for me to put up with it.
Re: (Score:2)
I think that rather than plan to keep the servers up forever, I could see them release a patch that would allow LAN play if it were true that they had to close down for some reason" or, failing that, to at least patch it to remove the must be online part.
What if they go bankrupt? Blizzard are a strong company now, but 10 years is a long time and plenty of great companies have fallen before. Then they wouldn't have the resources to throw at that sort of thing- you'd be stuck with things in the state they are when the bailiffs move in.
What if they're purchased by someone less trustworthy. What if Oracle decided to move into video gaming and bought them out- do you trust Oracle to do right by you? Or some faceless private equity firm?
Better to not put the stup
Re: (Score:2)
With Blizzard, specifically, I'm willing to take those risks because of their past track record. As I said, I don't buy drm laden stuff except with Blizzard.
Re: (Score:2)
My only complaint with Blizzard's implementation of Diablo 2 is that each patch (especially after 1.07 or so) drastically changed gameplay. Suddenly great sets were crap, great characters were crap, etc. Sure, it adds a level of replayability, but if I have a lvl 60 on its way to greatness, I don't want to trash it and start over on the Blood Moore with a new character.
Re: (Score:3)
Remember this?
"I am Akara, High Priestess of the Sisterhood of the Sightless Eye. I welcome you, traveler, to our camp, but I'm afraid I can offer you but poor shelter within these rickety walls."
She'll reset your stats once per difficulty level now.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Blizzard is actually the one company that I feel I can trust to keep the servers running for a lon gperiod of time, becuase they tend to stick with and support their games. They seem to have a corporate mindset that looks and plans in the long term, as opposed to most other publishers that just look to the next game and leave just a token force to maintain a previous game. That being said, I really enjoyed Diablo II, but after being disappointed with SC2, I do not expect to buy D3 any time soon.
I agree with this, but the problem now is that it isn't just Blizzard. Activision is in the picture and my trust in them is much lower. I somewhat want to play Diablo 3 but I doubt I will because of this.
Re: (Score:2)
Have you tried playing Diablo 2 lately? The only thing you can do on it today is spam the 'n' key to clear the neverending spam. If you play in a game of 8 people, you'll be lucky to have just 1 of them be an actual person, the rest are bots hosting the run, leeching the xp, or spamming the chat log with websites.
If Blizzard were truly committed to their games, they would still be addressing live multiplayer issues. Keeping resources available for a game from not last decade, but the one prior, is not a maj
Re: (Score:1)
Also, Blizzard got big on Warcraft, Diablo, and Starcraft. Looking at the latest releases of these games it's clear they are no longer capable of creating the games that made them so popular. Would you like to play Diablo-themed WoW single player? We can do that!
Re: (Score:1)
Have you tried playing Diablo 2 lately? The only thing you can do on it today is spam the 'n' key to clear the neverending spam. If you play in a game of 8 people, you'll be lucky to have just 1 of them be an actual person, the rest are bots hosting the run, leeching the xp, or spamming the chat log with websites.
If Blizzard were truly committed to their games, they would still be addressing live multiplayer issues. Keeping resources available for a game from not last decade, but the one prior, is not a major commitment to anything.
That's also the old battle.net. The game had a lot of client side data which could be manipulated. Fixing it would require a major re-write of something earning 0 profit. The new battle.net and design of D3 prevents a lot of this. Not to mention they have lots of experience in combating bots. That doesn't mean they will all be gone but I'm sure they will actively ban in big groups as before.
Re: (Score:2)
Have you tried playing Diablo 2 lately? The only thing you can do on it today is spam the 'n' key to clear the neverending spam.
Sure I have. I just play solo or with friends.
Never EVER enter a public area on Diablo 2.