|
On August 13 2011 03:22 TheGlassface wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2011 03:20 ikona wrote:On August 13 2011 01:22 Manit0u wrote:On August 13 2011 01:16 Grettin wrote:On August 13 2011 01:12 Bibdy wrote:
Blizzard really needs to provide me with a way to play the game while I'm on the toilet, or I won't be purchasing their game. Wlan + Laptop = profit?? Why won't they just allow for "offline-mode" like with Steam games? You just don't get the achievements but you can play the game without Internet (no updates though). Because basically you could duplicate items and cheat in various ways offline. Those modes would have to be absolutely separated and require additional development time and resources. And realistically in the end almost nobody would play offline anyway (with all the restrictions). They had singleplayer and multiplayer for years in almost every game known to man. How in the world is this any different? Also, considering how many mods were available for D2 and how widely they were played...umm...realistically, in the end...a LOT of people would and DID play offline.
This time around everything ingame will have value in real currency, it changes pretty much everything.
Well i played d2 offline myself because i didnt have broadband connection back then, times have changed though. And if i have to, ill get some 3g plan because battle.net features make it pointless playing by myself.
|
On August 13 2011 03:32 TheGlassface wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2011 03:24 Bibdy wrote:On August 13 2011 03:22 TheGlassface wrote:On August 13 2011 03:20 ikona wrote:On August 13 2011 01:22 Manit0u wrote:On August 13 2011 01:16 Grettin wrote:On August 13 2011 01:12 Bibdy wrote:
Blizzard really needs to provide me with a way to play the game while I'm on the toilet, or I won't be purchasing their game. Wlan + Laptop = profit?? Why won't they just allow for "offline-mode" like with Steam games? You just don't get the achievements but you can play the game without Internet (no updates though). Because basically you could duplicate items and cheat in various ways offline. Those modes would have to be absolutely separated and require additional development time and resources. And realistically in the end almost nobody would play offline anyway (with all the restrictions). They had singleplayer and multiplayer for years in almost every game known to man. How in the world is this any different? Also, considering how many mods were available for D2 and how widely they were played...umm...realistically, in the end...a LOT of people would and DID play offline. Maybe it's time to stop playing alone and give the multiplayer a chance? They've been putting a lot of effort in their recent games to get people out of that rut. Multiplayer is a metric fuckton more fun than singleplayer. I played the Warcraft 3 campaign a total of twice. I played multiplayer for years. Nevermind comparing the time spent playing every single player RPG/action-RPG ever made, vs the time I've put into WoW. debatable and opinionssss I played WCIII multiplayer for a shorter while than I did the campaign. I played more single player RPG hours than I did WoW. So, now that we're on opposite ends of the spectrum and since I've given multiplayer a shot compared to playing alone...do I get to still make points or am I totally oblivious to the world? There's no "rut," if people want to play a game on it's own. Some people played games for the storyline, which I'd argue has diminished inside MMOs (D3 is essentially an MMO) Some people don't want to have to engage in social politics (WoW) just to enjoy a game. Some people don't want these changes and it's being force fed into games to combat an issue that's perceived as much larger a threat than it is. It's just silly to act like people who want to play singleplayer never played or enjoyed multiplayer. I liked the multiplayer aspect of D2, I also really enjoyed being able to just go solo and see the games sights, sounds, etc. on my time. So, it's still boiling down to my opinion vs yours and the end result is mine is being squelched for technical/profit reasons.
It's absolutely a rut, because a lot of people don't even give it a chance. Every game is different. Just because you hate multiplayer in those games doesn't mean you'll hate it in D3.
Blizzard know this, and they've been working doubly-hard to make it as seamless and easy as possible to transition from SP to MP in both SC2 and now D3. Obviously some people still won't appreciate it. Oh well. Plenty of other games for you to enjoy if you want to resist the wave of the future where people actually have internet connections that stay up for more than 10 minutes at a time.
|
On August 13 2011 03:22 TheGlassface wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2011 03:20 ikona wrote:On August 13 2011 01:22 Manit0u wrote:On August 13 2011 01:16 Grettin wrote:On August 13 2011 01:12 Bibdy wrote:
Blizzard really needs to provide me with a way to play the game while I'm on the toilet, or I won't be purchasing their game. Wlan + Laptop = profit?? Why won't they just allow for "offline-mode" like with Steam games? You just don't get the achievements but you can play the game without Internet (no updates though). Because basically you could duplicate items and cheat in various ways offline. Those modes would have to be absolutely separated and require additional development time and resources. And realistically in the end almost nobody would play offline anyway (with all the restrictions). They had singleplayer and multiplayer for years in almost every game known to man. How in the world is this any different? Also, considering how many mods were available for D2 and how widely they were played...umm...realistically, in the end...a LOT of people would and DID play offline.
Do you have numbers to back that statement up? You can't just make shit up.
|
On August 13 2011 03:43 PepperoniPiZZa wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2011 03:22 TheGlassface wrote:On August 13 2011 03:20 ikona wrote:On August 13 2011 01:22 Manit0u wrote:On August 13 2011 01:16 Grettin wrote:On August 13 2011 01:12 Bibdy wrote:
Blizzard really needs to provide me with a way to play the game while I'm on the toilet, or I won't be purchasing their game. Wlan + Laptop = profit?? Why won't they just allow for "offline-mode" like with Steam games? You just don't get the achievements but you can play the game without Internet (no updates though). Because basically you could duplicate items and cheat in various ways offline. Those modes would have to be absolutely separated and require additional development time and resources. And realistically in the end almost nobody would play offline anyway (with all the restrictions). They had singleplayer and multiplayer for years in almost every game known to man. How in the world is this any different? Also, considering how many mods were available for D2 and how widely they were played...umm...realistically, in the end...a LOT of people would and DID play offline. Do you have numbers to back that statement up? You can't just make shit up.
He doesnt need numbers yo ~ its opinions ~
Also he can always play alone in multiplayer. No one is forcing you to play with other people, you can be an introvert if you want to be.
|
|
|
On August 13 2011 03:21 TheGlassface wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2011 03:03 Puph wrote:On August 13 2011 02:57 Inex wrote:On August 13 2011 02:40 jimmyjingle wrote:
jeez, so many people missing a single point and beating this topic to death. go ahead and defend blizzards decision, but don't tell people who want a certain functionality that their opinions and wants are invalid.
the fact is blizzard is withholding the most basic functionality of video games in place of a fail-prone and less desirable system. there are good reasons behind this decision, but please don't (its completely pointless...) spout bigotry against a mode of play that does not affect your own. The only time I don't have internet is when the router is dead or there are some connection issues. I don't see how having to be constantly online will ruin the experience for you. Too much drama for something nobody will care when the game is out. We are in 2011, where PCs and laptops are constantly online. Almost every house here has a wireless router, a lot of households have laptops, what is the big deal I will never understand. Just ask Blizz for invisible mode and you might not even notice that the game requires constant internet connection. Grow up please. My igloo says otherwise + Show Spoiler +http://tinyurl.com/igloosayingotherwise !) What about data caps? With recent legislative and pricing changes, this could quickly become an issue for anyone with AT&T or the myriad of other ISPs swapping to this new format? 2) It removes mods, just to combat piracy. PC gamers love mods, it's the bread and butter of some of the greatest games released. Hell, some games that become insanely popular started off as mods. 3) One of the greatest things about both Diablos was the ability to just dick around and kill time as you pleased, whenever you pleased. You may tout about everyone being online, how every house has routers and so on but the facts is that's an assumption. A good deal of people enjoy being able to access the property they purchased at any time and this measure to combat piracy is both tired and surprisingly tolerated. 4) Saying grow up for wanting a basic function of a game is ridiculous. So...nuh uhh, youuuu grow up. Fatty.
You could play 24/7 all month and would only rack up 20ish megs, if fact youll most likely like spend more than you would on d3 playing if you visit youtube (or a pron site for that matter) one day that month. The I have bandwidth caps excuse is for people who are bad at technology. Patches will be the only thing that could possibly strain your cap, but you were stuck downloading them anyways.
I don't care that it removes mods because blizzard has only supported one game out of all their games being modded and that was WoW and the "mods" that were allowed were just customizing the UI (which was atrocious). It would be like walking over to the ferrari factory and asking why they aren't producing a sub $20k minivan. Many developers do like mods and they are often great, however blizzard has never been a mod friendly company, I dont expect them to change magically.
Go google internet accessibility rates for households in first world countries of your choice, anyone who would likely be the market for said game has internet, those without would cover the cost for development, as I'm sure some one in blizz/activision had to do the math at some point. People unwilling to accept the changes in the medium do not represent a market group worth going after sorry.
Games having offline ability was an old standard, it is shifting with the times you know progressing, maturing, getting older, you should do the same and grow with the times, double fatty.
|
Looks like im going HC-mode this time! I played lod before retarded runewords and such, not much HC at all I just got TPPK:d all the time, didnt know or care how they cheated with scripts I just stoped playing HC after remaking a few times. Gonna be alot more fun in D3 I think as long as they keep hackers away from me!
|
On August 13 2011 04:40 Knuppe wrote:
Looks like im going HC-mode this time! I played lod before retarded runewords and such, not much HC at all I just got TPPK:d all the time, didnt know or care how they cheated with scripts I just stoped playing HC after remaking a few times. Gonna be alot more fun in D3 I think as long as they keep hackers away from me!
people will still troll dragging monsters to waypoints (if WPs are still in D3) and/or dragging monsters to town portals
but I guess that is supposed to be part of the fun of Hardcore
|
On August 13 2011 03:43 PepperoniPiZZa wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2011 03:22 TheGlassface wrote:On August 13 2011 03:20 ikona wrote:On August 13 2011 01:22 Manit0u wrote:On August 13 2011 01:16 Grettin wrote:On August 13 2011 01:12 Bibdy wrote:
Blizzard really needs to provide me with a way to play the game while I'm on the toilet, or I won't be purchasing their game. Wlan + Laptop = profit?? Why won't they just allow for "offline-mode" like with Steam games? You just don't get the achievements but you can play the game without Internet (no updates though). Because basically you could duplicate items and cheat in various ways offline. Those modes would have to be absolutely separated and require additional development time and resources. And realistically in the end almost nobody would play offline anyway (with all the restrictions). They had singleplayer and multiplayer for years in almost every game known to man. How in the world is this any different? Also, considering how many mods were available for D2 and how widely they were played...umm...realistically, in the end...a LOT of people would and DID play offline. Do you have numbers to back that statement up? You can't just make shit up.
Try mod. Try Median XL, try Hell Unleashed. They have their own private battle net servers, vibrant online community, look at private server forums, its filled with ads for poeples private servers. Its booming, though it is a small boom.
|
Many hours spent i Diablo II LOD =) definitely getting diablo 3 at its release!
|
On August 13 2011 04:30 abominare wrote:
People unwilling to accept the changes in the medium do not represent a market group worth going after sorry.
Nailed it! Should Blizzard also spend time bending over backwards for customers that haven't been able to afford an upgrade past Windows 95? Get with the program, or get out of the way. Stop getting in the way of progress and improvement in the way the industry works, for the benefit of both developers and customers, because of outdated ideas.
|
On August 13 2011 05:01 Bibdy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2011 04:30 abominare wrote:
People unwilling to accept the changes in the medium do not represent a market group worth going after sorry.
Nailed it! Should Blizzard also spend time bending over backwards for customers that haven't been able to afford an upgrade past Windows 95? Get with the program, or get out of the way. Stop getting in the way of progress and improvement in the way the industry works, for the benefit of both developers and customers, because of outdated ideas.
It's blizzard. The graphics engine pretty much caters to outdated hardware anyway (read: hardware that wouldn't be able to run any game made in the past three years except WoW and D3).
|
On August 13 2011 05:05 maartendq wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2011 05:01 Bibdy wrote:On August 13 2011 04:30 abominare wrote:
People unwilling to accept the changes in the medium do not represent a market group worth going after sorry.
Nailed it! Should Blizzard also spend time bending over backwards for customers that haven't been able to afford an upgrade past Windows 95? Get with the program, or get out of the way. Stop getting in the way of progress and improvement in the way the industry works, for the benefit of both developers and customers, because of outdated ideas. It's blizzard. The graphics engine pretty much caters to outdated hardware anyway (read: hardware that wouldn't be able to run any game made in the past three years except WoW and D3).
There's a limit. They're not making this game to help out Grandma with a 386 any more than they're going to help John Q Dial-up.
|
it's just dumbfounding that people are actually rallying behind an inferior service (always online) at cost to the development time and their play experience. forgoing simply having their own opinion and leaving others to theirs, we continue the age-old tradition of bigotry and debating non-issues.
allow me to propose a scenario. diablo 3 is out, but you are limited to a single-player mode, nontransferrable. you have the option to play online for single-player mode, granting you no benefit at all [bar the instant-messenger], or you have the option to play offline.
|
On August 13 2011 09:10 jimmyjingle wrote:
it's just dumbfounding that people are actually rallying behind an inferior service (always online) at cost to the development time and their play experience. forgoing simply having their own opinion and leaving others to theirs, we continue the age-old tradition of bigotry and debating non-issues.
allow me to propose a scenario. diablo 3 is out, but you are limited to a single-player mode, nontransferrable. you have the option to play online for single-player mode, granting you no benefit at all [bar the instant-messenger], or you have the option to play offline.
Bigotry? Thou doth protest too much.
Here's a scenario for you; a great multiplayer game is coming out and the creators are making it online-only to merge your singleplayer and multiplayer experiences, so that they can control the legitimacy of those characters and so the playerbase doesn't have to reroll a completely different character, just to take part in it. This grants many players an added benefit, at the expense of some techno-luddites.
|
On August 13 2011 09:15 Bibdy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2011 09:10 jimmyjingle wrote:
it's just dumbfounding that people are actually rallying behind an inferior service (always online) at cost to the development time and their play experience. forgoing simply having their own opinion and leaving others to theirs, we continue the age-old tradition of bigotry and debating non-issues.
allow me to propose a scenario. diablo 3 is out, but you are limited to a single-player mode, nontransferrable. you have the option to play online for single-player mode, granting you no benefit at all [bar the instant-messenger], or you have the option to play offline. Bigotry? Thou doth protest too much. Here's a scenario for you; a great multiplayer game is coming out and the creators are making it online-only to merge your singleplayer and multiplayer experiences, so that they can control the legitimacy of those characters and so the playerbase doesn't have to reroll a completely different character, just to take part in it. This grants many players an added benefit, at the expense of some techno-luddites.
are you incapable of answering to my question? its like you can't read. i am not interested in playing online. i have no intention of playing online, especially with an offline character. many players are not interested in playing online. i respect your ideal of that system and am glad that you can be a part of it, but i _do_not_care_about_online_multiplayer.
i feel i must also explain the way i would prefer to play the game [offline] will _in_no_way affect the way you play online.
|
everyone understands that view, jimmy. but blizzard's plan is to make this an online only product, which fits good into our time and also suits the game well in general, since it draws the most fun out of the multiplayer option (diablo playing with friends > playing alone).
the only drawback is weird circumstances like wanting to play on a laptop in a park or having no elictricity at home and wanting to play on laptop. in 99,9% of all cases you will be able to enjoy the diablo3 experience. so what the fuck are you crying about?
|
On August 13 2011 09:45 jimmyjingle wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2011 09:15 Bibdy wrote:On August 13 2011 09:10 jimmyjingle wrote:
it's just dumbfounding that people are actually rallying behind an inferior service (always online) at cost to the development time and their play experience. forgoing simply having their own opinion and leaving others to theirs, we continue the age-old tradition of bigotry and debating non-issues.
allow me to propose a scenario. diablo 3 is out, but you are limited to a single-player mode, nontransferrable. you have the option to play online for single-player mode, granting you no benefit at all [bar the instant-messenger], or you have the option to play offline. Bigotry? Thou doth protest too much. Here's a scenario for you; a great multiplayer game is coming out and the creators are making it online-only to merge your singleplayer and multiplayer experiences, so that they can control the legitimacy of those characters and so the playerbase doesn't have to reroll a completely different character, just to take part in it. This grants many players an added benefit, at the expense of some techno-luddites. are you incapable of answering to my question? its like you can't read. i am not interested in playing online. i have no intention of playing online, especially with an offline character. many players are not interested in playing online. i respect your ideal of that system and am glad that you can be a part of it, but i _do_not_care_about_online_multiplayer. i feel i must also explain the way i would prefer to play the game [offline] will _in_no_way affect the way you play online.
"The needs of the many out weigh the needs of the few or the one." - Spock
Easy counter argument - It's not your game. If you don't like how it's being designed, then tough fucking luck, because the world isn't going to kneel before your every demands. In fact, most of the world doesn't yield to any type of minority until they become a majority. I assure you that the mass either don't care, or prefer the complete online experience.
If you want Diablo 3 to have LAN, then design your own copy of the game. You will never convince Blizzard, or even have a valid argument FOR Blizzard to change their mind. Diablo 3 was designed with always online in mind. Simple. As. THAT.
Also, the people who mod without being given tools should probably learn to use an engine that's available to use, and not a prosperity one. I'm tired of reading people's posts QQing about how mods won't be supported in Diablo 3. Mods have neverbee supported in Diablo games, but were instead forced into those games. I for one think most of the mods are silly ways to play Diablo 2, because while it's different, it's limited to Diablo's engine and graphics. It's like continuing to make custom games in the Warcraft 3 editor when you could be using Starcraft 2's Galaxy Editor - which has way more functionality. In fact, that's not even a comparable simile because Warcraft 3's custom maps had more functionality and customization than ANY Diablo mod i've seen so far.
The argument that CS, DotA, tower defense etc. were mods before becoming legit games isn't a good argument for mods in D3 either. The mods listed above were made in games that HAD the tools to let people mod. If a game doesn't let you mod, then maybe you should use something else. Like the gameplay and feel? Then get a different engine. It's a weak argument to say that people should be able to modify a game that's not meant to be modified - Grow up, and learn to make real games like an adult. Stop playing with "children's toy's." This statement is not meant to undermine the creative efforts of those who make mods for any game. It's purpose is to suggest that if you really like making games that are Diablo-esque, then get an engine, and start making it yourself.
TL;DR - You have a preferred way of playing, but just because a company doesn't cater to it, doesn't mean that what they're doing is wrong. It means that you simply disagree with what they're doing. It's your choice not to play a game for any reason. If you don't like it, don't play it.
|
I don't trust my connection to play hardcore (small lagspike and you're dead).
I can't play singleplayer so I'll have to play normal, which gets old fast imo since I don't play diablo for pvp.
=> I'm probably not buying this game.
And do mind that people don't have an internet connection 24/7, Diablo 2 has been my main source of entertainment on holidays, hospital visits for many years, also known as: places without (proper) internet.
I won't whine about it, it's their product, they can do as they please. I just have the feeling that game features are going backwards instead of forward.
|
On August 13 2011 03:32 TheGlassface wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2011 03:24 Bibdy wrote:On August 13 2011 03:22 TheGlassface wrote:On August 13 2011 03:20 ikona wrote:On August 13 2011 01:22 Manit0u wrote:On August 13 2011 01:16 Grettin wrote:On August 13 2011 01:12 Bibdy wrote:
Blizzard really needs to provide me with a way to play the game while I'm on the toilet, or I won't be purchasing their game. Wlan + Laptop = profit?? Why won't they just allow for "offline-mode" like with Steam games? You just don't get the achievements but you can play the game without Internet (no updates though). Because basically you could duplicate items and cheat in various ways offline. Those modes would have to be absolutely separated and require additional development time and resources. And realistically in the end almost nobody would play offline anyway (with all the restrictions). They had singleplayer and multiplayer for years in almost every game known to man. How in the world is this any different? Also, considering how many mods were available for D2 and how widely they were played...umm...realistically, in the end...a LOT of people would and DID play offline. Maybe it's time to stop playing alone and give the multiplayer a chance? They've been putting a lot of effort in their recent games to get people out of that rut. Multiplayer is a metric fuckton more fun than singleplayer. I played the Warcraft 3 campaign a total of twice. I played multiplayer for years. Nevermind comparing the time spent playing every single player RPG/action-RPG ever made, vs the time I've put into WoW. debatable and opinionssss I played WCIII multiplayer for a shorter while than I did the campaign. I played more single player RPG hours than I did WoW. So, now that we're on opposite ends of the spectrum and since I've given multiplayer a shot compared to playing alone...do I get to still make points or am I totally oblivious to the world? There's no "rut," if people want to play a game on it's own. Some people played games for the storyline, which I'd argue has diminished inside MMOs (D3 is essentially an MMO) So, it's still boiling down to my opinion vs yours and the end result is mine is being squelched for technical/profit reasons.
First, Diablo 3 is NOT an MMO, not even essentially. The fact that it requires an internet connection to play doesn't instantly make it an MMO. MMO's have MASSIVE CONSISTEN worlds with THOUSANDS of people running around in them at a time. That doesn't happen in Diablo, Diablo 2, and won't happen in Diablo 3. There's a limited amount of players you can actually play with at one time. If i were to use your logic, then ANY game with an online experience could easily be considered an MMO. Halo, Starcraft, Diablo 1 and 2, Borderlands, any game with Xbox live multiplayer compatibility etc. TEAM LIQUID IS AN MMO!
Also, your last statement is ridiculous. When doesn't a company add or disable a feature for profit or technical reasons? Is there any other reason to do stuff? I mean, do people really think that companies ALWAYS have their fans in mind first? Because if you do, you need to wake the fuck up. Blizzard is a company, and they're pretty big. Their decisions are hardly going to be because of fan input, unless they request it. Like the Dark Templar vote in SC2 - They asked everyone's opinions, then made the decision based upon that.
Blizzard is a gaming company full of people with brains. They use their brains to come up with ideas that they would want to put into their games. They don't go on forums and try to please every fan's want. They probably don't even read the forums of what the fans want. They make games how they want to make them, and if the end result is your opinion is being "squelched for techincal/profit reasons", then don't play. Simple as that.
I can't stress enough to people making the argument "well, Blizzard isn't doing what I want, so they're doing it wrong" that all they have to do is not play or buy the game. None of us will care if you do or don't. I probably won't even talk to most people on here, because when I read through this thread, I feel like I could be spending it pounding my head against a wall.
TL;DR - Don't like? then don't play.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
