Blizzard Acknowledges Diablo III Always-On Acts As DRM

Blizzard have finally admitted that their useless always-on DRM in Diablo III is partly to prevent piracy. Despite having previously insisted that it was purely to improve gamer experience (oops), in a post spotted by Eurogamer, Blizzard boss Mike Morhaime has pointed out that it does “help us battle” such issues. But then goes on to say that it’s still the best solution, that it’s essential, and while there are “some downsides”, it was “the best long-term decision for the game.”

That “some downsides” was the closest Morhaime gets to acknowledging just what a(n entirely predictable) disaster the Diablo III launch, and following weeks, were. From reading his account, you’d imagine they had a bit of a hiccup on day one, and then everything settled down just lovely.

Clearly they’re going to defend their decision to needlessly enforce always-on DRM on single-player gamers, after having put so much effort into it before release, but not even a note of contrition becomes a touch galling at this point. For the millions of players who were affected by the issues, and the enormous numbers who still can’t play because their internet connection is either unstable, or they simply don’t have one. But at this point, maintaining the line that it was mostly done to ensure the best possible experience for players has to ring hollow. Players noticed what a horrible, horrible experience it offered them.

Morhaime states that no one has yet to crack the DRM effectively, and insists that the ‘feature’ is “critical for the long-term integrity of the game experience.”

Perhaps most confusing is his claim, “I fully understand the desire to play Diablo 3 offline,” when the sentence continues, “however, Diablo 3 was designed from the beginning to be an online game that can be enjoyed with friends, and the always-online requirement is the best way for us to support that design.”

So no, he doesn’t understand the desire to play it offline, fully or otherwise, whatsoever, because he repeatedly rejects the notion that it’s even a feasible way to engage with the game. No matter how much Blizzard may want it to be played as co-op, millions of people don’t want to. And refusing them the right to disconnect from the incessant authentication checks demonstrates just how much this isn’t understood. Which is a bit of a shame.

You can read the rest of the post here.


  1. eatfrog says:

    he is not a clever man

    • Docslapper says:

      I went to the Blizzard International thingy in Paris back in 2008, and saw him play with the “Lvl 70/80/85 Elite Tauren Chiefs”… and yes, he’s a complete dick. That whole ‘band’ is a total egomonster ride for a man who thinks waaaay too much of himself and has no-one saying ‘no’ to him. Plus, and I really mean this: they were so shit it was embarrassing.
      If the calibre of decision-making at Blizzard board level is such that they thought that was a good idea, then I can understand why WoW’s in the state it is and D3 is such a disappointment.

      • Frantics says:

        just shut the fuck up


        the launch really wasn’t that bad or a disaster they’re trying some crazy shit just try trusting them ;)

      • Sayori says:

        Of course he’s a dick. He ripped off 1.8 billions from us. Yep, that’s his wealth. The poor man could not afford to give everyone server resources to play on launch. On D3 forums he claims this is hard to predict. Wthat the hell?! Weeks before the launch I saw stats how many copies were sold. SO what happened is something like this.
        Many people rented a room in his hotel , but he didn’t prepare everyones room. Instead he prefered to wait and save money. Clever move to actually see how exactly rooms he will need without waste too much money on resources that will be never used.
        Yeah, for him is a waste to offer server capacity for 1 million people at once when the peak will be 0.5 playing same time. This is how he made 1.8 billions.

    • EOT says:

      …but does he know what love is?

  2. ts061282 says:

    If you’re going to publish unfinished games, you better have the DRMs.

  3. John Connor says:

    Just when the anti-DRM movement was gaining ground, when even Ubisoft were releasing their games DRM-free, this game comes out with DRM that makes Uplay look like a CD-key and a billion gullible fuckwits buy it.

    Seriously, if you bought Diablo 3, fuck you.

    • Belsameth says:

      After all these issues I’m starting to agree with you…
      and that while I did buy it…

    • bglamb says:

      I didn’t want to buy it, but it was too hard to pirate.

      • Blackseraph says:

        I agree, my personal opinion is that everyone who bought it is a moron. Pirates are also morons of course.

        Don’t know who is worse one in this case though.

        Meant to reply John Connor sorry.

        • Smashbox says:

          My Blizzard good-will pool was overflowing and I had +10 to Blizzard trust prior to Diablo 3.

          Sadly the game depleted every good-will point and gave me a permanent -10 penalty to Blizzard trust. The cooldown is also tremendous. I’m done buying their games.

          Diablo III, on my internet connection, may as well not even exist. It is COMPLETELY and utterly broken.

        • Sheng-ji says:

          I bought it, I enjoyed it a lot. Got a good 60 hours or so out of it, so I guess I’m a moron then! Though one would imagine I would be a bigger moron to not buy a game I would enjoy, right?

          • Blackseraph says:

            I was being facetious you know, sorry if that wasn’t clear.

          • Sheng-ji says:

            Sorry, most people who would write that think that they really mean it!

          • Droopy The Dog says:

            Well, the inability to abstain from immediate gratification (a game you like) at the expense of greater long term reward (many future games that follow a market trend that games with incredibly restrictive DRM can still by massive successes) shares a strong correlation with poorer performance in any mental task requiring focus and sound reasoning.

            So no, not to buying it wouldn’t make you more of a moron actually.

          • Sheng-ji says:

            Only if you believe that every game from now on will have always on.

            Spoiler: They won’t.

            It is a fact that believing that you can accurately predict the future and your predictions are always doom-laden e.g. this game will make all games have always on and gaming will be ruined forever – is a mental disorder requiring significant medication and hospital care.

          • bglamb says:

            God Sheng-ji, I can’t believe you caused all future games to have DRM just because you couldn’t delay your gratification.

            That’s such a mean thing to do.

            I other news I just ended all unjust wars by withholding £15 in taxes and writing “Peace now!” on my Facebook wall.

            Power to the people!

          • x1501 says:

            No single raindrop believes it is to blame for the flood.

            Maybe not all future games, but all future Blizzard games? You bet your ass he did. He, and millions of people just like him.

          • bglamb says:

            Yeah, and while I’d shoot myself in the foot to stop a flood, doing it to stop a raindrop would be crazy.

          • x1501 says:

            Your feet have nothing to do with this analogy. Think of it as collective flood control measures used to at least reduce the detrimental effects of flood waters. Besides, telling all those devastating raindrops to go screw themselves can at least make one feel less depressed about being an unwilling victim of their mindless actions.

          • Sheng-ji says:

            …. and yet every time you post, more seconds/minutes/hours/days/months/years/decades have passed in which gaming wasn’t ruined by diablo 3.

            Making me correct.

          • crizzyeyes says:

            yeah, uhh… there’s a post right underneath this talking about how Epic are now thinking about putting always-on into Fortnight. and it’s going “to be used to improve the game.” huh. that sounds familiar.
            just thought you guys participating in this squabble would be interested

          • Droopy The Dog says:

            Interestingly, confusing the meaning of simple words like “all” and “many” also has a strong correlation with poor mental performance in a more general sense.

            Likewise being only able to deal in absolutes and constructing delusions about conversations that don’t agree with a predefined set of extreme views could be said to be indicitive of an underlying mental dissorder.

            Just sayin’, since you’re so keen on the amateur psyche.

      • Harry Bosch says:

        bought it too unfortunately.

        Won’t buy any future games by this company.

        • theallmightybob says:

          lucky i bought it and realised in a few days that it was trash and got my money back. saddly many people have played it too much now to do that.

    • Greggh says:

      Although I don’t condone flaming in any kind of conversation (yeah, right XD) I agree with this sentence, on a matter of principle:

      “if you bought Diablo 3, fuck you.”

      • Lobotomist says:

        I am one that bought it. And was indeed fucked.

        I knew what was waiting for me. But since T2 release was (and still is not) in sight. And I needed something casual to play.

        But even I was surprised how much of unfinished hasty put together mess the game is.

        Blizzard might have won the battle (and made much sales) – but they have lost the war.

        They dragged their reputation from stars to mud.
        And in today’s gaming scene , reputation is everything.

      • psyk says:

        All I can say is “elemental war of magic” maybe SOTS2. LMAO vaguely remember people trying to get other people to buy those two games.

    • Sensai says:

      While what you say is a little strong for my taste, I must admit I’m frustrated with the people who bought it, as well.

      I understand not visiting gaming sites and buying it. Ignorance is bliss, they say. But if you’re reading RPS and, for some reason, decided that you’d buy the game all the same…what are you using your knowledge for? You knew the game was going to hurt PC gaming. You knew the success of the game was going to hurt it even more. Why’d you contribute to a problem?

      • briktal says:

        Oh no my online game requires me to be online to play it.

        • Chris D says:

          Let’s try this one more time.

          MMO’s have reasons to be online, ie persistent worlds where large numbers of players can interact.

          Diablo 3 has no such reason. Structurally it’s still the same single player/small group dungeon crawl as countless games that have gone before it. It’s online requirement has no benefit for a vast number of players but major drawbacks. It adds nothing, it only takes away.

          For those who like multiplayer and care about cheats and keeping score, fine, let them have their online only mode if they want. But make it optional. Leave the rest of us to play a game that could be played perfectly well offline to play it that way in peace.

          • DeVadder says:

            Like for example Dungeon Defenders has.

            I know noone in the AAA world cares for Dungeon Defenders, but i just like saying Dungeon Defenders in a positive context so much.
            Dungeon Defenders

          • Malibu Stacey says:

            Like for example Dungeon Defenders has

            That’ll be the same Dungeon Defenders which has such rampant cheating that the economy doesn’t exist to all intents and purposes.
            Also the same Dungeon Defenders whose dev’s & forum mods have fostered a culture of fear that people are scared of playing with people they don’t know in case they end up with hacked items unknowingly & are banned thereby losing all their characters & items through no fault of their own?

            Is it also the same Dungeon Defenders which boots you from a single player game you’re locally hosting because your connection to the Steam matchmaking servers drops for a few seconds due to the terrible implementation of the Steam APIs? (bear in mind I can be in a game of Dota 2, a game built entirely upon the Steam matchmaking API and not be kicked from the remote hosted game while friends in Dungeon Defenders get kicked from their own locally hosted games).

            Cool just as long as we’re talking about the same game.

          • alundra says:

            Yeah, that same game, you made a pretty good description, just ignored the part he was referring to. Dungeon Defenders can be played online *and* offline.

        • SanguineAngel says:

          Let’s try this as well.

          “Oh No! my online game doesn’t work reliably online!”
          “Oh No! my online game has rediculous restrictions on use, even after i paid £45 for it!”
          “Oh No! My online only game won’t drop those ridiculous restrictions after 72 hours like it’s supposed to because this hastily added precaution doesn’t work properly!”
          “Oh No! My online only game real money auction house doesn’t work properly and has fallen down”
          “Oh No! My real money auction has glitched, losing both item and money for me”
          “Oh No! My online only game won’t let me play it because it’s servers are full even though I don’t want/need to interact with anyone at all”
          “Oh no my online only game lost half an hour’s worth of progress because of connectivity issues on their end”
          “Oh No! my online only game is designed from the ground up to be a multiplayer experience but doesn’t even have a facility for voice comms!”
          “Oh No! My online only game doesn’t work because all the servers are down for maintenance!”
          “Oh No! My online only game is broken in just about every conceivable way”

          • briktal says:

            Everything you said, except for the RMAH stuff, applies to “legitimate” online games, and that’s just because most games don’t have a real money auction house/shop. If, for example, Guild Wars 2 has server problem on launch day are there going to be angry forum posts and comments about the always online DRM? Will gaming sites post articles about the evils of always online DRM and what it means for the future of gaming?

          • piratmonkey says:

            “Oh No! My online game is actually a tiger and not a game at all! He is very cross that I tried to put him in the disk tray!”
            “What-if” games ARE fun, aren’t they?

          • SanguineAngel says:

            Well to answer your question first. Will there be angry posts? Yes there will. Why? Because people cannot play the game they paid for. Just because it is the status quo doesn’t make it GOOD. Especially when it isn’t necessary for the very idea of the game (IE MMO)

            Anyway, do address you first point. I think most “legitimate” online & multiplayer games would probably attempt to NOT make the game unstable when online. Diablo 3 is STILL a laggy mess 100% of the time. To clarify, I have now got superfast connection, although when I first started playing i was on a sky broadband chugging away at 2 – 4Mb, now my connection is a stable 30 – 35Mb but it’s still just as laggy.

            Also, I don’t think most multiplayer or massively multiplayer games stop you actually playing more than the first two hours of the game for three days, or restrict your ability to interact with other players.

            Also, i think if they did, they would probably try and make sure that this restriction worked as intended before churning it out and that their customers would not be stuck, unable to play the game indefinitely. After 5 days I gave up and requested a refund. To their credit, i got it.

            ALSO I think that most multiplayer games allow you to communicate by voice as a standard option these days.

            ALSO most cloud saving games would probably try and have contingencies in place so that you do not lose all your progress if you lose connection. Many of them, in fact save locally and upload to cloud when appropriate.

            ALSO! Most online OR offline games [should] be making sure they are as bug free as possible BEFORE release.

            So, yeah, a lot of online games will have down time for servers that’s true. there’s still plenty to be irate about though.

          • diamondmx says:

            Oh, and most legitimately online-only games actually have a reason to be online-only. That’s what makes them legitimate.

            None of these problems would exist if Blizzard hadn’t made anti-consumer, blatantly greedy choices from the offset.
            This would be a lot less likely to happen in future if Diablo 3 had completely bombed because of the DRM.

            So, fuck you to anyone who encouraged this crap by buying it.

      • Lord Byte says:

        Because I would be playing it online with my friends, as I had played Diablo II. Only issue is it’s just an MMO with all the grind and repetition and a lot less other people. Also the balance was way, off and every single patch made it worse.
        If a skill allows us to continue, and others don’t, don’t NERF that one, BOOST the others (some were too powerful, I agree, but most were just meh).
        In any case, I played strongly for a month, then went away when the pay to win and nerfs became too much.

      • Sheng-ji says:

        Sorry, please explain how a PC game achieving massive success hurts PC gaming again?

        • InternetBatman says:

          That just an intransigent response. Here’s how it hurts pc gaming:

          Always-on internet completely eliminates the unique benefits of the PC. Greater technical power barely matters when half the computation is done by a server, and it certainly can’t provide a smoother experience than a well-made single-player game on a console.

          Mods are much, much harder to do on always on games where you don’t have access to assets. Do you think the next Dota is going to come from Diablo III?

          The freedom of the PC is severely reduced with always on games. If you don’t like what a patch does to a game, you don’t have to install it. Even Steam, which is much smarter DRM, lets you turn patching off. With always on games you don’t have the option. This has already happened in Diablo III, they released a bad patch that destroyed solo builds, but you had to install it.

          Speaking of freedom, how about the ability to play a single-player game whenever you want? Putting always on in a single-player game makes it far more vulnerable to service disruptions for no good reason.

          Finally, and perhaps most importantly to my mind. Always on destroys archiving and backwards capability for games. MMOs are never going to end up on Abandonia. You’ll never be able to find a working copy of Diablo III once the servers go down.

          And all of these are important because success follows success. This game sold a million copies so it’s going to have a million imitators. People who were gunshy of always-on before, because it causes a huge controversy, are going to plow ahead regardless of consumer wishes. This is numerical proof that for every customer who morally objected to such heinous and frankly wrong business practice there are a million more who don’t care or don’t care enough to go without one game.

          If you can’t see that you’re sticking your head in the sand, and then getting on forums and telling everyone else to do the same thing.

          • phelix says:

            Well said.

          • Sheng-ji says:

            I’ve forgotten just how many “threats” to PC gaming have sold by the million and not destroyed it.

            Let run with your assumption that many more games will attempt an always on, despite the company in the best position to try it utterly failed. Think it was a success? Then why are Vivendi dropping them out of the literally millions of pies vivendi has it’s fingers in, why drop Acti-Bliz if Diablo 3 was really the success they want us to believe? If other companies try this, they will only hammer the nail deeper into the coffin especially if other games to try this aren’t as good, which is unlikely as D3 is a decent game.

            And why do you think that consoles are somehow immune to this? My bet is that consoles are going to start streaming games to you across the net in the next generation.

            Anyway, modding has always been with the blessing of the developers, I didn’t see you on the Metro 2033 review decrying the end of gaming because it’s impossible to mod, so why this game?

            As for your abandonware argument, seriously, go get a copy of thief, the dark project (Not thief gold – TDP is abandonware, TG is not) and get it working. Go on….

            ….. Struggling? It is possible, I have done it myself (With my original copy, abandonware is too far into the grey with sites like GOG for me these days).

            You know what’s easier to achieve, setting up a LOTRO private server. Cos I’ve done that too (And yes that was naughty, I know). So when LOTRO goes down, I will still be able to play and guess what, it wll be easier than getting some abandonware to work.

            Your arguments are thoughtless and rely on this imaginary future where every game has an always on requirement. This will not happen. Period. Full Stop.

          • InternetBatman says:

            My arguments are not thoughtless.

            All the reports I’ve heard have said that Vivendi are dropping them because they’re cash strapped, but I don’t know. Considering how many copies the game sold, I doubt they’re hurting on the Diablo front, WoW is the one slowly leaking subscriptions. Also, consider how many people tried to copy Diablo II and WoW in the wake of their huge successes. It’s not improbable that that pattern will continue in the future.

            I don’t think that consoles are immune to this. I think consoles are living this right now, and this kind of technology makes a PC more like a thin client or console. That’s not a good thing.

            Why would Metro 2033 be impossible to mod? I hadn’t heard anything about it, and there are some mods for it right now. Not including mod tools is not the same thing as expressly banning them and removing a player’s access to the game for using them.

            I actually agree with you about the morally grey area of abandonware that’s been fixed up and is being resold by GoG. However, there’s lots of games out there that aren’t on GoG. System Shock for example. Anyways, sure the huge games out there will be safe. A lot of people are working and someone will crack the Diablos, WoWs, LotRs, etc. It’s harmful when a small game tries to emulate Blizzard and goes under. Think about all the Korean MMOs, or something like Hellgate London or Brink using this system, will they really have a successful server emulator? They each add to the collective consciousness, but their small contributions will be lost in time.

            I did not say that every game would follow this model, or that this model would kill pc gaming. I’m not denigrating the people who bought it, or engaging in extreme hyperbole. I am just saying that ignoring the systematic negatives this game will introduce to the industry at large because some of the people who are talking about it are jerks is not a great idea.

            It’s safe to assume that there will be a lot of mediocre games that follow this model, and that we as a society will lose out for it. This game is a carrier for several harmful concepts that will make the world a slightly worse place, and its massive success will ensure that they spread far and wide.

          • Sheng-ji says:

            If someone cares enough about a game, it will be saved. There was no server emulator for LOTRO, I created it using generic tools, because I care enough about that game. And when, and I mean when and not one second before LOTRO becomes abandonware, up will pop my server.

          • Arglebargle says:

            It adds a whole bunch of points-of-failure that you esentially have no control over. And, if you are part of the 60% that would have played the game solo (Blizz’s stats for Diablo2, iirc), they are ones that you didn’t really need.

          • Eddy9000 says:

            Oh hi sheng-ji, I really fancy a game of Grim Fandango right about now, do you mind pointing me in the right direction?

          • Sheng-ji says:

            Sure thing, have a linky:

            link to,cf.osb&fp=892bdcc816bdaa6e&ion=1&biw=1121&bih=938

            Have fun getting it to work on modern systems though.

            Sorry I can’t provide you a digital download, but if you wait, I’m sure the guys at GOG are working on it, all patched up too!

          • InternetBatman says:

            Really the best way to get old windows games to work is to download VMware and use a copy of the windows it was on at the time. It takes about half an hour to set up the first time, but it really does save the hassle.

          • pottering says:

            “Your arguments are thoughtless and rely on this imaginary future where every game has an always on requirement. This will not happen. Period. Full Stop.”
            That’s because many people ARE RAISING AN UPROAR, not because Diablo 3 is cool.

          • malkav11 says:

            Old games will inevitably have compatibility issues with modern operating systems and hardware. That’s fine, and must simply be dealt with. Developers don’t have a crystal ball and can’t predict the future, so it’s not really fair to expect, for example, a game made for Windows 95 to be built in ways that are friendly to Windows 7, 15 years down the road. But it’s not cool to deliberately introduce things that are clear and inevitable points of failure, especially when like server-based DRM they serve either no useful purpose (most DRM), or whatever purpose they do serve pales in comparison to the damage they do to the game (Diablo III’s always online requirement, which theoretically safeguards people from hacking and makes it easier for them to play with friends, but in practice actually makes the game impossible to play in a variety of circumstances and introduces exciting features like lag and mandatory downtime for patching to a solo experience, not to mention disallowing modding.)

    • Casimir Effect says:

      Perhaps the worst thing is the amount of people who have a kind of Stockholm Syndrome with Blizzard over this, leaping to defend the Always-On rubbish and shouting at people who complain about it. Luckily we’re pretty safe from that here but whenever I’ve followed links to forums or other sites (usually to find out more about the newest D3 fuckup) there seems to be a legions of people lining up to say “it was never a single player game” or “I’ve never had problems so it’s fine”.

      • Neut says:

        I’m pretty sure having a different opinion to you doesn’t actually classify as a psychological problem.

        • x1501 says:

          Going to great lengths to reduce your cognitive dissonance about the issues by rationalizing them in most ridiculous and incoherent ways, however, actually does.

          EDIT: Yes, sorry, I edited the “it was too hard to pirate” example out as soon as I realized what an irrelevant distraction it was, even before refreshing the page and seeing your responses. To clarify, I was thinking more along the “I don’t mind the downtime much, I managed to clean most of my house” types of comments. And yes, it is an actual user comment from forums.

          • Neut says:

            Dude said he bought the game because it was too hard to pirate. Yeh he’s cognitive dissonancing hard, along with everyone else who can’t reconcile their purchase with The Issue that they definitely give a toss about. How could they not? Everyone’s been angry in the comments and everything.

            EDIT: lol yeh I saw that and was like “clever bugger, now I look silly” – as well as being a sarcastic dick I mean, sorry.

          • Brun says:

            Did anyone actually think that the guy who said he bought it because it was too hard to pirate might have been sarcastic about that? Just a teensy bit?

          • Neut says:

            Don’t ruin this for us Brun.

          • bglamb says:

            I don’t get what people don’t understand about that comment? I bought it because it was too hard to pirate. It was at a time when I had very little money and I could only afford one or two games. D3 had to be one of them because I wanted to play it and, out of all of the games that I wanted to play, that one was not possible to pirate.

            So yeah, burn me at the stake, but DRM works at least some of the time.

            Edit: To make things clear, I don’t think that the DRM is nice. I think it borderline ruins the game and is a purely commercial move from Blizzard. However I think it may have been a *successful* commercial move from Blizzard (speculation) and whilst, as a comsumer, I think it was a dick move on their part, I still bought their game and I think a lot of other people did too. For the exact same reason. And I think that’s worth bearing in mind to all the people moaning at them.

            I don’t usually feel bad when I pirate, since it’s generally a case of me already having spent all my money on games, so nobody really loses, but this purchase literally took money away that I would have spent on an indie game. So I am a bad person, and I feel sad about it.

        • theallmightybob says:

          tell that to fan boys on the blizzard forums who were spreading mis-information about cool down times on online goods contacts to make it harder for people to get refunds.

          • x1501 says:

            Better yet, tell it to the guy who wrote this:

            “[B]ecause some 2+ million people have spent the past week battling with heinous lag, Error 33, Error 37, and Error 3003, critics and gamers have focused their ire on what they perceive to be the issue: Diablo 3’s always-online DRM.

            Now, while it’s true that D3’s reliance on does act as a form of DRM, this is just a value-added extra as far as Activision-Blizzard are concerned. Really, given the faith that Blizzard has garnered from its users over the last 20 years, I’m surprised that fans have been so quick to label this feature as crippling DRM, or worse, the hellspawn of Blactivision’s CEO, Bobby Kotick. In reality, Diablo 3’s connectivity requirement exists for a handful of compelling reasons that actually make the game better.

            Users and critics are quick to draw comparisons to Ubisoft’s aborted use of must-remain-connected-to-the-internet DRM, but Diablo 3 is really very different. To begin with, it helps if you think of Diablo 3 as an online game. In fact, think of Diablo 3 as an MMO, like World of Warcraft or Star Wars: The Old Republic.

            One of the biggest problems with offline games is that all of the game logic and game saves must be stored locally. […] To put it another way: Can you ever imagine an MMO like WoW storing character data locally on your hard drive? No. Just apply the same logic to Diablo 3.”

            (source: link to

          • Claidheamh says:

            @x1501, that was an abomination of an article.

    • djbriandamage says:

      No. John Connor and Blizzard, fuck you.

      Fuck Blizzard for inconveniencing its fans under the guise of customer service.

      And fuck John Connor for berating his fellow gamers for believing Blizzard’s two-faced lies. Blizzard has treated its customers with respect and given us value for 2 decade so we gave them the benefit of the doubt.

      Don’t forget who the enemy is, John Connor: greedy publishers who are happy to collect interest on our preorders but won’t give us a refund for dissatisfaction unless the police raid their offices.

      • Xerian says:

        Now you’re just bullshitting, if you’ve ever played WoW and compared it to any other decent MMO, you’d know they stopped respecting nor caring about their costumers a long time ago, and now only intend to squeeze money out of them. In-game purchases for real money in both diablo and WoW? Sure! A subscription whilst having these ingame-purchased things? Yup! And expansions? Nono, you pay for an entire new game! Yay!
        Oh and lets not forget paying for three games whilst getting one, IE Starcraft 2.

        • djbriandamage says:

          I’m a current WoW subscriber and have been playing off and on since beta. I consider it to be a good value because I have fun with it.

          I got about 30 hours out of Diablo 3 which I also consider to be a good value for $60. It would have taken me 2 or 3 hours fewer to finish D3 if the DRM didn’t keep disconnecting me and discarding 10-20 minutes of progress.

          • Sparkasaurusmex says:

            “Blizzard has treated its customers with respect and given us value for 2 decade so we gave them the benefit of the doubt.”

            I think you missed the part where Activision bought them

      • apocraphyn says:

        Blizzard’s games have been on a decline for a while, now. It’s difficult to say they’re truly innocent when half of the updates they provide within World of Warcraft are just hack jobs – a reskinned enemy for a new encounter, a reskinned mount as the latest top-tier raiding reward, a repurposed dungeon for the bored level 85s, uh…another storyline based on something getting corrupted? Can you think of a single enemy in a Blizzard game that hasn’t been corrupted, now? The primary time there’s ever any new content created for the game is with it’s expansions and it’s hardly worth paying for a game like that every month if all you’re getting in return is minimal effort – especially when you have to pay an extra £30 every couple of years for the new shizzle on top of the constant money feed.

        They lost two sales from me with Diablo 3’s DRM. I put that money into Grim Dawn.

      • Malibu Stacey says:

        I think you’ll find John Connor’s enemy is Skynet.
        Perhaps he fears Diablo 3 is a stepping stone toward the creation of Skynet & the downfall of human civilization hence his outburst.

        • Sparkasaurusmex says:

          No doubt Always On DRM is an initial ingredient in Skynet

      • theallmightybob says:

        I bought it online for me and a friend. I got a refund after 3 days . he got one after 27 and a lvl 60 they are not refusing refunds. there is a 30 days cool down clause in the UK and in other countries that allows this. the EULA can not remove your rights, you just have to have a valid reason. I even got mine done through an online support ticket, just be calm and expain why you think you need the refund. the copy does have to be bought online though for this to work as opened software boxes can never be returned.

        you just have to know how to speak legaliese. the BBB will do it for you too if your lazy.

        the real problem i see is all the mis information on blizzard and other forums about the EULA and what it can and cant do, it cant remove your rights.

    • bhagan says:

      Sorry, the hype machine ate me, and it wasn’t worth it either :(

    • Loopy says:

      What about those people who got a copy for free because they were already paying a subscription for WoW? Not that I play the game any more, I got bored after about a week of it…

    • Premium User Badge

      Gassalasca says:

      If I had the money I’d buy it just to spite you. You sanctimonious twat.

      As djbriandamage said, you’ve forgotten who your enemies really are.

      • Deltadisco says:

        So the enemies are the greedy publishers? The publishers that the Blizzard Defense Force insist on validating/handing a bunch of money to?

        I’m willing to cut the ignorant some slack. The willfully ignorant on the other hand – they ARE part of the problem. Ergo… what John Connor said.

    • Jenks says:

      Agreed 100%. The problem isn’t Actiblizz, the problem is the millions of idiots who enable them. If you bought Diablo III, or worse, spent money on its RMAH, you’ve set AAA gaming on a dark path. Actiblizz’s actions are evil but predictable, yours are just fucking stupid.

      You, purchaser of Diablo III, are to blame for this:
      link to

      It’s the first of many.

      • Sheng-ji says:

        Welcome to a land where the markets are free, you may hate that other people can buy things that you don’t want to exist, maybe if you wish hard enough it will go.

        I dislike the always online requirement intensely. But I knew all about it when I bought the game. To me, the game was worth it. I knew exactly what I was getting and I got it. It wasn’t perfect but it was worth the money.

        If another game has always online, I may or may not think that it is worth the inconvenience. If I think it is worth it, I will buy it, simples.

        At the end of the day, I’m the consumer and I will spend my money exactly where I wish. I am also an informed consumer, I tend to know exactly what I’m getting. And yes, my purchase may be partly responsible for more games adopting an always on requirement, but I do hope, that if I acknowledge that, for every always on game I don’t buy, you will give me credit. And everyone else.

        Oh, by the way, I’m not an idiot. I bought the game and I enjoyed the game. I would be more of an idiot to deny myself the game I wanted and would enjoy.

        • Jenks says:

          Just so we’re clear, after reading your justification of your purchase, you’re exactly who I was referring to.

          • Sheng-ji says:

            Right, good for you, millions disagree. Literally millions, that’s why the markets work! Go cry in your corner and tell everyone what an idiot I am, but in ten years time, when no-one in the world would dream of launching a game with always online unless it bought a direct benefit to the game, you can wipe those tears, wash your face and say in your meekest mildest voice

            “Oh, Sheng-ji didn’t ruin gaming afterall”

            And go have fun playing games.

            I of course will have been having a blast playing games for those ten years, so I still point to you for being a bigger idiot than I.

          • Jenks says:

            It seems like you’re confused about what is taking place here.

            I’m pointing out that you’re a fool. You are crying about it.

            Your argument is quite literally:
            “Always online DRM is going to fail so hard! In 10 years time, a company would be stupid to launch a game with it! I supported it in Diablo 3 so that it will fail. In fact, millions of people did! So many people supported it that it HAS to fail!”

            I’m sure it all makes sense in your head.

          • Brun says:

            No, you’re calling him a fool for having different philosophical motivations from your own, and he’s disagreeing with your assessment. Unlike you, however, he’s being respectful. But like myself, he seems to be one of the very few people who isn’t so utterly convinced of their own superiority that they believe that anyone that disagrees with them is an idiot.

            I may disagree with a lot of what’s being said in this thread, but at least I understand and respect people’s opinions.

          • Sparkasaurusmex says:

            “I dislike the always online requirement intensely. But I knew all about it when I bought the game. ”
            This is such a huge problem in the world today… not just in games.

            I don’t like that it’s bad for me, but at least I knew that when I bought it, and it tastes good.
            I don’t like that they pollute the earth, but at least we know about it.
            I don’t like that 13 year olds get paid $1 a day to make my clothes, but at least it looks good on me.

            I used to think a bit of education could help this sort of thing, but these days everyone is aware of the misbehavior of corporations, but that makes no difference. It’s all justified if we’re still having fun.

            ….yeah, a bit over board on the comparison, but it is the same mentality that causes this.

          • Sheng-ji says:

            You’re comparing apples with human rights abuses. I know in YOUR head there is no difference in having forced child labour and a computer game needing to be connected to the internet, but in my head there is a huge difference.

            I’m not lacking for education, but your sense of what is equivalent to what is astonishing. It’s not the same mentality because buying Diablo 3 doesn’t hurt children (feelings of entitled children doesn’t count), nor the environment, in fact it doesn’t hurt anyone. It’s a victimless not a crime.

            By the way, are you really calling wilful pollution of the earth “a bit of corporate misbehaviour” or the aforementioned forced child labour… seriously, get your perspective checked!

            Anyway, ALL games are “bad for me” because no game is perfect. Metro 2033 doesn’t allow modding, but apart from that it’s great… Legend of grimrock is too hard for me, but apart from that it’s great, skyrim is a shallow gaming experience but apart from that it’s great… I bought all those without encouraging every company in the world to repeat their mistakes, why pick on this one?

          • Chris D says:

            The point of an analogy is to illustrate a similarity in principle, not a similarity of degree. For this to work the example needs to be unambiguous enough that all parties will likely agree on the principle therefore the example given will necessarily be comparing a greater thing to a lesser one or vice versa.

            Or; No, of course DRM is not morally equivalent to human rights abuses, that was never the point.

          • Sheng-ji says:

            The point was never to provide an example which was similar in principle, the point was to try to engage emotions usually reserved for companies which wilfully pollute or use child labour and apply them to Blizzard.

            Scrumping an apple from a neighbours garden is like breaking and entering an elderly persons house and taking their lifes savings.

            Principle is the same, but the simile is moronic. It is not OK to cheapen real world problems to give more weight to an argument about a computer game. Never.

          • Chris D says:

            @Sheng Ji

            That wasn’t how I read his post. It does end with “….yeah, a bit over board on the comparison, but it is the same mentality that causes this” which is not something you’d add if you wanted to insinuate moral equivalence.

            But ok, let’s restate this without potentially inflammatory metaphors.

            Your argument, as I understand it, runs something like: I found the DRM annoying but ultimately I gained more enjoyment than annoyance from the game so it was worth it.

            If that’s more or less correct I would respond by saying that the cost you have to consider is not just the annoyance created by Diablo 3, it’s also that caused by any other games you might want to play in the future that will have AODRM due to the perceived success of Diablo 3. Also, if you should care about such things it’s a cost not just to you but also to the wider gaming community who will now have to face more DRM in the future because of this.

          • Sheng-ji says:

            @ChrisD – I completely see what you’re saying, I always have, my point is, and always has been, if you’re going to blame me because I bought D3, the next instalment in one of the most beloved PC franchaises, a franchise which for me defines some of my most memorable games – if you’re going to call me a moron and an idiot because for me personally, it is worth it, I sure as hell hope you are going to tell me how clever I am every time I don’t buy a game with always on because for me it wasn’t worth it.

            And at that point we see how ridiculous these people are being – it’s not intrinsically clever or stupid to make an informed choice in today’s market. Why should I burden myself with the responsibility of what other people want from gaming?

            That’s a serious question – I wouldn’t buy from a company who uses child labour, no matter how good the product is because that product hurts, physically hurts people. I don’t want that in this world. Not having the game you want by the way is not hurting you.

            Apparently millions of people agree and Diablo sold well. This means that those opinionites who dislike it are very much a vocal minority, so again, why should I burden myself with the responsibilities of what a minority don’t want from gaming, when in this instance I disagree with them.

            I am a responsable consumer, I care about PC gaming and if I thought this were really a threat to PC gaming, I wouldn’t have bought it. The truth of the matter is that this is not a threat to PC gaming in my opinion and I don’t see all games companies scrambling to implement always on, I see one company considering it, but I doubt we will see more than 4 games with this form of DRM in the next 10 years.

            If I’m wrong, I’ll spin of a fucking dime, I’ll boycott every game from now until infinity unless i can play offline, but so far, I’m very much being proved correct.

          • piratmonkey says:

            ^ more eloquent than I could have expressed.

          • Jenks says:

            ” I completely see what you’re saying, I always have, my point is, and always has been, if you’re going to blame me because I bought D3, the next instalment in one of the most beloved PC franchaises, a franchise which for me defines some of my most memorable games…”

            Diablo 1 & 2 are two of my favorite games of all time, and many others. That is the reason that this is an issue to begin with. It’s not hard to give up asparagus.

            “…if you’re going to call me a moron and an idiot because for me personally, it is worth it, I sure as hell hope you are going to tell me how clever I am every time I don’t buy a game with always on because for me it wasn’t worth it.”

            No, I’ll say nothing. I don’t need to tell you how clever you are every time you don’t fall down the stairs.

            “Why should I burden myself with the responsibility of what other people want from gaming?”

            Why should you even bother thinking?

            “Apparently millions of people agree and Diablo sold well.”

            Solid argument. The millions of people who bought pet rocks aren’t idiots, either.

            “This means that those opinionites who dislike it are very much a vocal minority, so again, why should I burden myself with the responsibilities of what a minority don’t want from gaming, when in this instance I disagree with them.”

            How the fuck could you possibly calculate that? There are 7 billion people on earth. There are hundreds of millions of gamers. How many copies of D3 are sold, 10 million? 15? I have no idea. I don’t know why I’m wasting time responding to this nonsense, I’m starting to think I’m being trolled.

            “I am a responsable consumer, I care about PC gaming”

            No, no.

            “I doubt we will see more than 4 games with this form of DRM in the next 10 years.”

            Right, because of heroes like yourself who showed the industry it won’t sell.

            “If I’m wrong, I’ll spin of a fucking dime, I’ll boycott every game from now until infinity unless i can play offline, but so far, I’m very much being proved correct.”

            Yes, you’re correct, 60 days after the game was released. You’re clearly a forward thinker looking out for us all.

          • Brun says:

            So basically, Jenks’ response to everything is “you’re an idiot.”

          • Sheng-ji says:

            Wow, so bitter, so hurt.

            I’m seeing guilt here, I think you bought the game!

            Note the above was trolling.

            Just so you see the difference, here is a post answering your genuine debate points:

            “No, I’ll say nothing. I don’t need to tell you how clever you are every time you don’t fall down the stairs.”

            Making an informed decision is not the same as falling down the stairs. Guess what, you are wrong, so wrong. Games are not going to have always on DRM in my opinion. You may disagree with my opinion, but quite frankly, calling me every name under the sun because you don’t agree with my opinion makes you a complete dick. So stop fucking doing it.

            “Why should you even bother thinking?”

            I don’t like (insert colour of trousers you are wearing) coloured trousers. I wish they didn’t exist because they are unpleasent to look at. How dare you buy (the aforementioned colour) coloured trousers, why didn’t you think about me?

            See my point now? Just because you don’t like something is not going to affect my purchasing decision, because I just don’t like or care about you.

            “Solid argument. The millions of people who bought pet rocks aren’t idiots, either.”

            As long as they got an appropriate amount of pleasure from them, of course they’re not. Surely you don’t think people actually thought they were sentient, do you, surely you realise that they knew it was a bit of fun, or are you that arrogant… I think I know the answer to that one.

            “How the fuck could you possibly calculate that? There are 7 billion people on earth. There are hundreds of millions of gamers. How many copies of D3 are sold, 10 million? 15? I have no idea. I don’t know why I’m wasting time responding to this nonsense, I’m starting to think I’m being trolled.”

            Not every human being alive is a gamer. Not every gamer games on the PC. Not every PC gamer enjoys ARPG’s. Not every ARPG fan likes dark fantasy, not every dark fantasty likes diablo. You know as well as I that it sold unbelievably well and that the majority of people interested in it bought it. You don’t need facts and figures for that, only common sense.

            “No, no.”

            Yes, yes.

            “Right, because of heroes like yourself who showed the industry it won’t sell.”

            Nope, nothing to do with me, because it was an expensive failure and other companies don’t already have set up.

            “Yes, you’re correct, 60 days after the game was released. You’re clearly a forward thinker looking out for us all.”

            As I said elsewhere, I can see no more than 4 games in the next 10 years, that’s one, thinking about it. Not confirmed yet, thinking about it. And hey bonus, I have no interest in it.

          • Jenks says:

            “Wow, so bitter, so hurt… but quite frankly, calling me every name under the sun because you don’t agree with my opinion makes you a complete dick. So stop fucking doing it.”

            I laughed out loud as I read this! Thanks for that, at least. :)

            So here are some fun quotes, let’s call this one A

            “I don’t like coloured trousers. I wish they didn’t exist because they are unpleasent to look at. How dare you buy coloured trousers, why didn’t you think about me?

            See my point now?”

            This one B

            “As long as they got an appropriate amount of pleasure from them, of course they’re not.”

            This one C

            “Nope, nothing to do with me, because it was an expensive failure and other companies don’t already have set up.”

            And this one D

            “You know as well as I that it sold unbelievably well and that the majority of people interested in it bought it. You don’t need facts and figures for that, only common sense.”

            Let’s put it all together
            A -You are in complete denial that a game that sells over 10 million copies affects the rest of the industry
            B -You think the pet rock is a solid purchase decision and people who bought it shouldn’t be ridiculed.
            C -You think Diablo 3 failed
            D – You think the vast majority of gamers bought Diablo 3

            What a mess. C & D are especially befuddling when combined, but at least this has gone from a serious debate to me having a good laugh.

          • Sheng-ji says:

            A -You are in complete denial that a game that sells over 10 million copies affects the rest of the industry
            B -You think the pet rock is a solid purchase decision and people who bought it shouldn’t be ridiculed.
            C -You think Diablo 3 failed
            D – You think the vast majority of gamers bought Diablo 3

            Let’s take this slowly shall we:

            A – But, it’s coming true, exactly what I said is happening. So you must be in denial that not one game with always on has been confirmed.

            B – So have you never, ever bought anything just for fun? How about that icecream you bought last week, wasn’t very nutritious was it? Or that computer game you bought in the steam summer sale last year that you never played. Seriously do you have no sense of fun? Wait, I think I know the answer to that.

            C- Hmmm, what asset did Vivendi drop the other day….. Acti-Blizzard. Wow, they must be so hot right now that their owners can’t possibly bear to keep hold of them. Seen Vivendi’s stocks since D3 launched? Go look! Wait, what’s that massive dip.

            D – I believe I said that the vast majority of gamers who were interested in D3 bought D3. And I stand by that assertion.

          • Jenks says:

            “A – But, it’s coming true, exactly what I said is happening. So you must be in denial that not one game with always on has been confirmed.”

            2 months after the game came out, there’s *already* talk of a major developer making one of its games follow suit. Do you understand how game development cycles work? Do you think that every game planning to go always online is now known to you? We won’t know about the ones that are in development for a year or more, nevermind the ones not yet in development.

            “B – So have you never, ever bought anything just for fun? How about that icecream you bought last week, wasn’t very nutritious was it? Or that computer game you bought in the steam summer sale last year that you never played. Seriously do you have no sense of fun? Wait, I think I know the answer to that.”

            Hey, at least people that bought pet rocks weren’t killing an industry like you are.

            “C- Hmmm, what asset did Vivendi drop the other day….. Acti-Blizzard. Wow, they must be so hot right now that their owners can’t possibly bear to keep hold of them. Seen Vivendi’s stocks since D3 launched? Go look! Wait, what’s that massive dip.”

            You believe that is because they just released the fastest selling PC game of all time. You are truly fascinating.

            “D – I believe I said that the vast majority of gamers who were interested in D3 bought D3. And I stand by that assertion.”

            It’s fun to just make things up and state them as facts. How you could possibly even believe that, and at the same time call Diablo 3 a failure, is hilarious.

          • Sheng-ji says:

            …. and yet every time you post, more seconds/minutes/hours/days/months/years/decades have passed in which gaming wasn’t ruined by diablo 3.

            Making me correct and you wrong.

          • Vinraith says:


            Sadly, this isn’t even something worth arguing about, the damage is done. We’ll know exactly how bad it is when the next generation of games with always-online DRM rolls along. Until them, feel free to repeat “everything is fine” to yourself as much as you like.

          • x1501 says:

            Do you seriously believe that Electronic Arts’ recent announcement of ‘investing quite a bit’ in always-on DRM and Epic Games’ even more recent considerations (link to about the same don’t have anything to do with Diablo III’s success? Are you guys really that daft?

          • Sheng-ji says:

            @Vinraith – And by all means feel free to tell yourself “Everything is ruined”, my opinion has as much validity as yours except, I didn’t call other people idiots for holding it. As I said, If a generation of games try always online, despite the failure and PR disaster that was blizzards attempt, I will spin on that dime, but until then, no-one knows if the cat is dead or alive and I’m not going to curtail my enjoyment or brook being insulted because of a potentially dead cat which in my opinion is alive.

          • Sheng-ji says:

            @x1501 Wait, we’re allowed to want Epic games now, cos last game they announced, that freeform building one, I was getting insulted for wanting it…

            Seems whatever choice I make, I’m going to be insulted by children, so my policy from this moment on is say it to my face.

            i.e. blow all the hot air you like, you’re already ignored!

          • Jenks says:

            “Diablo III was released OVER TWO MONTHS AGO! Obviously any negative impact of its always online system coupled with its massive commercial success have come and gone long ago!”

        • nanowired says:

          In all honesty you sound like someone who has read a short news snippet about consumer rights at some point and immediately you believe you are a professor of such.

          Anyone NEW to PC gaming of course would never see anything wrong with what Diablo has become. However a lot of us – the majority of gamers actually being from the demographic which predates CoD – have seen better uses of gaming technology and have benefited from better innovation in the gaming industry.

          Simply put, this isn’t a good use of the technology. It doesn’t add value to the customer, it doesn’t allow for long term use of the product outside of Blizzard’s own business plan, and it doesn’t allow for the customer to use his product – within reasonable safety- in his own terms.

          • Sheng-ji says:

            You want to tell that to all the people I helped get a refund on From Dust because it was advertised as not having DRM then launched with DRM.

            I have been gaming for 30 years, I reckon that’s about 25 years longer than you, which is why I know that this will not affect our industry one bit.

            And by the way, as a consumer, you are perfectly safe using Diablo 3. I’d like to see the purchase you have made that you can use on your own terms, all products have limitations, we all knew the limitations of, so explain your point again please and drop the attempted legalese speak, you’re no lawyer.

          • nanowired says:

            Based on the fact that you think “strawman arguments” was popularized on the internet(hint: politics did it first), I’d say you’ve been actually only gaming for 5 years. That, and a lot of what you post regarding Diablo 3 shows it as well. So please, keep telling me how you’ve been playing games since you were in your mothers womb. It’s totally believable.

            And as far as your demand for an example…

            Diablo 2. Ironic isn’t it? Hey didn’t you say you’ve been playing games for 30 years? Oh wait. That was just you trying to puff up your own experience without actually having any.

            To steal a phrase from Fist of the Northstar, Your argument is already dead.

          • Sheng-ji says:

            What argument? In this thread all I did was merely explain to one person why a second person called the first person a hipster. I know you hate me so much that you desperately want to ridicule me in front of the whole 10 people browsing this thread, but you are just making yourself look like a fool.

            Not that I care what you think but I bought a Dragon 32 on launch, so now you can accurately date, with the help of wikipedia exactly how long I’ve been a gaming consumer. Obviously I gamed before that maybe for 2 years or so. Now you have that information, if you want to contradict it, you are basically calling me a liar.

            If you are going to call me a liar with no evidence to support your assertion (which you won’t have because what I posted above is true), then I cannot talk to you, for the simple reason, that despite your “education” you are going to pull nonsense from your ass and publish it as fact.

            So grow up, learn to interact with me in a non-sociopathic way and stop with the veiled insults, you are not as clever as you think you are.

        • Sheng-ji says:

          Wow, I’ve just blocked like 7 people (who were hurling insults, not based on which side of the debate they were on) and this thread is suddenly a really pleasant place to be, with reasonable well thought out debate and genuinely thought provoking idea’s.

          It gets even better when I block myself, you people drag me down, I’m definitely going with this policy! Banhammer for everyone who can’t keep a civil tongue, filter out the trolls!

          • Jenks says:

            A child runs out of the room with his hands over his ears shouting “LA LA LA!” and then announces he’s dropped the banhammer.

            This guy is fantastic.

          • alundra says:

            @ Jenks

            sssshhhhhh….. he/she might ban you, imagine the consequences and remain silent.

          • Sheng-ji says:

            Jenks was one of the first to be banned, he has proven that he will never, ever write anything that I will want to read.

            I still think he should shut up though, just to save others from the trauma of reading through his ignorant, incessant monologues.

          • x1501 says:

            So let me get it straight, first you put him on ignore, and then you proceed to give him a lecture about “self indulgent but ultimately ignorant monologues”? Ever heard of irony? Or Matthew 7:5?

          • Sheng-ji says:

            Sorry x1501, can’t hear you – remember the blowing hot air etc

          • hilltop says:


            You’ve come out and said you dislike drm, but that you bought the game anyway. Because for you it was worth it.

            Obviously it’s good to see someone arguing their quarter on the internet without foaming at the mouth overtly or diving into personal slurs and you seem to have been avoiding these.

            But at the end of the day, you have admitted you didn’t have the strength of your convictions in this case and placed the enjoyment of the game above your principles.

            That makes you a bad, weak-willed or at least hypocritical person.

          • Sheng-ji says:

            @hilltop – I don’t agree with you that I am any of those things – let me explain why not.

            All games have a cost beyond the cash you have to hand over for it. In the case of always on, the cost is inconvenience. The inconvenience that you can’t necessarily play your game on the train or exactly when you want – I don’t mean to cheapen it, it’s a big deal if you’ve had a tough day at work, your kids play up all evening, your spouse nags you for something then you sit back to relax and play your game and it lags or disconnects you etc. It is a big deal, I accept that.

            However plenty of other games are inconvenient too. Human Revolution combined with my graphics card and driver combination flickers like you would not believe, it is instantly migraine inducing. Once it starts, which is after something like an hour or two of play, it never stops, you have to un-install the game and then reinstall it. Damn inconvenient, I would say MORE inconvenient than always on.

            But again, the game is amazing, totally worth it to me. Others with my graphics card returned the game and to this day, it’s never been fixed :( But I still own it and proudly so, its great.

            Am I a bad person for owning Deus Ex? Am I a hypocrite for owning Deus Ex? Am I weak willed for owning Deus Ex?

            No, no and no.

            I am in fact strong willed for owning a game and enjoying it when lesser willed people would have given up.

            I am a good person because, and listen carefully: Owning a game is not a “bad” thing. Owning any legal consumer item is not a bad thing unless people suffer because of it. Note, and again listen carefully – not being able to play a computer game on demand does not meet the definition of suffering.

            I am not a hypocrite because I quite simply haven’t said one thing and done another. Yes I said that DRM is annoying, but if I avoided every game with DRM, my collection would be The Witcher 2, Hungry Horace in the Park and A few indie titles which are so dull I can’t even be bothered to look them up. I guarantee you have games in your collection with things that annoy you, I guarantee that you still find fun in some of them, but you’re not a hypocrite for owning them.

        • pottering says:

          “Welcome to a land where the markets are free”…
          …but the games are not, even when you paid for them.

      • alinos says:

        I don’t think where to blame for that at all.

        Epic left PC gaming for a long time. Primarily to pursue console money. Then they claimed that when their subsidiary People Can Fly released Bulletstorm to PC that it got pirated to all shit.

        It would be stupid to believe a company that abandoned PC for so long wouldn’t have some qualms about returning to it.

        Personally I think the biggest loss here though is the fact that the majority of these always online games don’t have any mod capabilities and Fortnite while it sounds decent could probably benefit from the ability for modders to add in all sorts of crazy stuff.

    • mire says:

      Hahaha I bought the Collector’s Edition and I had a great time with it :D So… fuck *you*, emo kiddy :D

      Down with PC gaming!!!

    • Brun says:

      Bought it, enjoyed it. Proud to stand up for why I play games (fun) amongst a crowd of hivemind hipsters that only care about politics. Enjoy your endless indie amateur platforming games.

      • Blackseraph says:

        I do consider consumer rights fairly important issue. That makes me hipster?

        Diablo 3 is very bad for consumers especially if other publishers will jump to the same train.

        • Brun says:

          Other publishers will jump on the same train and fail miserably, for several reasons. First, they aren’t making Diablo – brand recognition carried Diablo III to success and publishers like Epic that are considering it for a new IP (already a risky proposition) will either realize it’s a bad idea or throw caution to the wind and reap their just rewards with terrible sales and reviews. Second, Blizzard has more experience with running a large, high-capacity server environment that would be necessitated by a Diablo III-esque implementation (i.e., running part of the game on the server) than any other AAA publisher. You think their server issues were bad? Imagine if Ubisoft had tried this on this kind of scale.

          At worst we’ll be enduring 5 years of crappy attempts of doing this before most publishers realize they don’t have the manpower or “customer loyalty credit” to justify the risk of doing it again.

        • Sheng-ji says:

          “I do consider consumer rights fairly important issue. That makes me hipster?”

          I believe the accusation is more like this:

          No, you’re a hipster because you pick and choose which consumer rights you stand up for based on what’s popular.

          Obviously I’m not saying that to you personally, but in general, a tonne of people who don’t get involved in any other form of consumer rights are jumping on this band wagon. Making most people slating Blizzard here hipsters.

          And Brun is spot on. any company which tries this may as well file for bankrupsy now

          • nanowired says:

            I wonder which consumer rights do you think he’s not standing up for. Maybe just buyer beware?

          • Sheng-ji says:

            Staying in gaming, I don’t see him making a stand on every game which is impossible to mod, I don’t see him giving advice on how to obtain refunds for games which don’t do what the adverts said they did, I don’t see him getting involved on ANY consumer rights issues on this forum.

            But maybe I’m just not looking hard enough.

          • nanowired says:

            Nope, sounds like you’re using a straw man to try to knock down his opinion. Just because he’s not on EVERY BOARD OUT THERE raging about consumer rights, doesn’t mean he thinks any less of them.

            Posting about it here is important, because it’s clear that the gaming industry took a huge step back with Diablo 3. Even though the game sold millions, it was mostly on hype and a good chunk of the population which bought the game simply doesn’t play it anymore.

          • Sheng-ji says:

            I didn’t say that all these people do not care about consumer rights though did I,

            What I said is that other people are accusing them of being hipsters because they are only vocal about this popular issue while not making the same points elsewhere to other games to which they apply equally.

            Also anyone who uses the term “strawman argument” is a hipster or Total Biscuit.

          • nanowired says:

            Or, Alternatively, someone who has a real education. Also in the Real World where such things as innovation, design, and proper execution are important: The people who defend the use of logical fallacies with insults are the “Total Biscuit.”

            And yes, thank you for repeating exactly what I was commenting on.

            Furthermore, you should probably stop using the term hipster like you are. It doesn’t apply here, nor does it mean what you think it means.

            to quote Insanity Wolf, “I drowned a hipster in a tributary, it wasn’t Main Stream.”

            Fact of the matter is that PC gaming got popular because of such features as modability, single player off line gaming, as well as being able to play such games with your friends online. Many people like to load games onto their laptop so that they can play them where ever they go on a trip.

            Making you unable to do that is not mainstream…

          • Sheng-ji says:

            “The people who defend the use of logical fallacies with insults are the “Total Biscuit.” ”

            teeheeee heeeeheeee


            I tell you what, I’ll stop using the term hipster if you stop using the term “total biscuit”

            Just so you know for the future, Total Biscuit is The Cynical Brit, a person who, about a year ago popularised the phase “strawman argument”.

          • nanowired says:

            Ah, well the total biscuit comment was mostly by the way you were using it. So that can be MOSTLY forgiven.

            However, again you are wrong. strawman argument has been a concept used for some time, and has been a focus of what to avoid in classes which help you develop a valid argument for longer than you’ve been a gamer. Which is 5 years.

            It wasn’t invented on the internet, it’s been a standard of what not to do for some time.

          • Sheng-ji says:

            I didn’t say he invented it, I said he popularised it, you know amongst the hipsters.

            Surely your vaunted “real education” which you got in the “Real World” taught you to read properly, didn’t it?

            Or was it all about the innovation et al?

          • hilltop says:

            But Sheng-ji,

            You have said yourself you have struggled against drm in other contexts but not here, making you the one that picks and chooses when to follow your principles, making you a hipster by your own definition.

            And it is not true that anyone who uses the term ‘strawman argument’ got it from Total Biscuit. That’s a pretty pathetic and revealing assertion you’ve made.

          • Sheng-ji says:

            My definition of a hipster is someone who blindly follows the “alternative mainstream” (not a contradiction, see goths and how so many of them look like Marylin Manson for proof) without question and usually end up paying way over the odds for stuff because of a badge (I’m looking at you Leica) and spout nonsense that they don’t understand just because someone they like is saying it etc. (But we have established that you guys don’t agree with my definition)

            So tell me again, how I fall under that definition.

            I know not _everyone_ who uses the term strawman got it from TB, but 99.99999999999% of everyone who uses it on the internet did or got it from someone who got it from him. Obviously I have no official statistics to back that up, but I’m yet to be convinced I’m wrong.

            Anyway, as you drift ever more towards just plain out insulting me, I drift ever closer to the block button, lets scroll down a little shall we and see if I can remove you forever!

            EDIT: Damn, no more that I can find with a quick look through, on consideration though, despite your eloquent manner, I’m going to block you anyway – it doesn’t matter how pretty you write, you called me a bad person for owning a game you don’t like, you called me a hypocrite because I stuck to my guns, you called me a hipster in a way that was meant as an insult, you called an assertion I made “pathetic” because in your opinion it was wrong – which was a roundabout way of calling my opinion pathetic, and you called me weak willed in a way that was meant to be an insult. That’s a lot of trolling, so yes, I am going to block you too.

            This is empowering, it’s like legal murder – you were an annoyance in my world, now you are, through my actions removed from my world and gone forever. And as I remove more and more of the plebs, my world increases in quality. Soon it shall be like the RPS of old for me.

          • alundra says:


            Seriously?? Replying to a comment found on a news entry two pages old??

          • Sheng-ji says:

            He made the comment hours before I replied, anyway, you’re obviously here, reading through – it’s not like it’s taking away from the more recent news, let us debate here if we want to?

            What exactly is your problem with that?

      • InternetBatman says:

        I play games for fun too, but creating and following my own code of ethics doesn’t make me a hipster.

        • Grygus says:

          Correct. However, trumpeting that it makes you awesome and everyone else an idiot does.

          • InternetBatman says:

            I try to stay away from those type of statements. I’m just saying that the world isn’t divided into people who bought Diablo III and hipsters.

      • houldendub says:

        I’m so, so, so, so, so sorry that I didn’t buy I game I have no intention of playing. Should I pay £45 for it to just sit on my shelf? No, I wouldn’t, but I guess that makes me a “hivemind hipster” that only cares about politics, right?

        Urghhh, fuck off Mike.

        • Brun says:

          I never said you were wrong for not buying it. You have your own reasons for that, just as I have my own reasons for buying it myself. The “hivemind hipsters” are the ones that are berating people for making decisions that they personally don’t agree with.

          • Vorphalack says:

            I find it baffling that you think an issue like always on DRM needs a hivemind to tell us all how to think of it, or is in any way a hipster topic. It’s obviously egregious and has been unpopular since it’s conception. This is not a recent hate fad, and i’m sure people are capable of deciding they don’t like it all on their own.

            However, i’ve always said that people have the right to spend their money on whatever they want, without being judged, provided it doesn’t negatively impact other people. Buying D3 is arguably harmless in that respect. Even a successful mass boycott wouldn’t have gotten the DRM taken out as it is essential for the RMAH, which is the real point of the game. Blizzard will want an RMAH, or a suitable equivalent, in every game they make going forward. So the game is what it is, and no amount of wishful thinking will change it. Consumers who want to oppose this sort of business practice should stick to doing something productive, like buying games from companies that have more respect for their customers.

          • Brun says:

            Oh I agree that they care the most about the RMAH, but I think their target is much more specific than “every game going forward” – they’re testing the concept for Titan, and in that particular case its use will be appropriate given that Titan will be a free to play game.

      • Carolina says:

        What’s really sad is that you see more and more of them among the RPS commenters. After reading the thread above this one, you can clearly see that this is not the place to have a mature and intelligent discussion about gaming that it used to be.

        Instead, all you have these days is a circlejerk of morons trying to convince themselves that they are smarter than anyone who enjoyed something that they can’t. And bots selling me shoes. This is what the RPS comments section is today; it’s been like this for a while now, and I’d advise anyone looking for a place to discuss games to look somewhere else.

      • malkav11 says:

        I’m glad you enjoyed it. It looks like a fun game. A fun game that I would like people to be able to play into the indefinite future, which is not going to happen as long as it requires Blizzard’s servers to function.

        Also, regardless of whether other companies succeed in getting away with this sort of DRM (which I tend to agree is less likely than Blizzard doing it), I don’t want to see future Blizzard releases shackled with this nonsense because they’re one of only a couple of developers where I consistently enjoy everything they make. If I have to sacrifice the experience of this one game to get that to happen, so be it.

    • reggiep says:

      Being that the Auction House is pretty much required to succeed in the game, how do you propose to solve the issues of: logging into the auction house, supporting drop-in/drop-out multiplayer, preventing the need to have online and offline characters?

      So in your version of Diablo 3 I have to maintain a separate online character to my offline character. I have to provide credentials multiple times in order to jump between the game and the auction house. I can’t tell when my friends are online unless I quit and check or call them (provided I actually have their number). Yeah, I think I like Blizzard’s version better.

      • bhagan says:

        ugh, no, the auction house shouldn’t be necessary, and no one would be forcing you to make a single player character, you could just create a multiplayer character from the get go and level it up by yourself when your friends aren’t online, though shouldn’t you wait to play with them if leveling with them is so important?

        • djbriandamage says:

          Maybe it was just my lack of skill but I think the auction house is absolutely necessary. I refuse to touch the AH and Nightmare difficulty was very difficult using nothing but gear I found myself. That’s where I quit the game.

          • Sheng-ji says:

            The AH or RMAH are in no way necessary. Yes the harder difficulties were indeed difficult, but isn’t that kind of the point. I didn’t touch either auction house with a bargepole, the easier modes were too easy, the later modes were as difficult as they should be. No I couldn’t complete the most difficult mode, but as I suck at games, this is only true and proper (to gauge just how much I suck, Metro 2033 is too hard for me on easy)

          • bhagan says:

            Yeah, it is currently necessary if you want to play the game without a ridiculous amount of grind, though that will happen anyways once you hit inferno act 2, but I wish that it was not the case, I think the game would be much more fun if the auction house wasn’t considered absolutely necessary

          • Sheng-ji says:

            Forgive me if I’m wrong, but isn’t the “grind” the game – there is no end point. You just keep “grinding”. So if you don’t enjoy doing that, why play the game, if you do enjoy that, they it’s not pointless, cos you’re having fun doing it.

          • Milky1985 says:

            You could say the grind is the game, but many people and reviewers say that if you have to grind at any point to progress, then the game is not designed and set out properly, this is something thrown at JRPGS a lot by western reviewers.

            Basically it should be designed so that its possible to get to the end with the gear you pick up, but the grind makes it easier for you to do so, this i not currently the case in diablo 3, where there are a lot of flat out gear check enemies (ones that teleport hit for example)

          • Sheng-ji says:

            You are most likely correct, I doubt this was the game most people thought it was going to be, for me it’s good – not great, like D2, not in my personal hall of fame like D1, just good and I have enjoyed it. I doubt I’ll ever play it again, but I found the “grind” fun, in the same way I find shooters fun – repetitive, soulless but satisfying.

    • Lemming says:

      Can’t really disagree with you John Connor. Especially as you are destined to save the world from the machines and all.

    • Chmilz says:

      The next DRM scheme should include rectal cancer plus AIDS. At least then we’d finally understand, and solve the problem of, fucking retards that perpetuate these bullshit anti-consumer DRM agendas.

      • Sheng-ji says:

        All I got from that is that you have a problem in that you enjoy having sex with retards and you want AIDS and ass cancer.

      • theallmightybob says:

        calling the customers the retards isent the way to get your point across or even start a boycott, all youre doing is alienating the people you should be educating about the issue of DRM by telling them they are stupid for having fun.

    • alundra says:

      I’m sorry but the anti-drm movement is still gaining ground, a lot of it, if Diablo 3 had been an unqualified success for actibliz from any other point other an economical one, that’s it, 7 million satisfied customers, then your statement would ring true.

      But as it is now, you don’t even have to fight to convince a person about the damaging effects of bad drm, the industry is doing all the work by themselves.

      One thing I don’t understand, they say drm is “critical for the long-term integrity of the game experience.” , yet, a few weeks ago they acknowledged that there is no end game for Diablo 3.

      So, how they fuck do these people earn their jobs?

    • arccos says:

      Yes, always online DRM is going to destroy PC gaming.

      Just like tablets before it. And Facebook games. And WoW. And GFWL, and Steam, and OS X, and Windows 8, Windows 7, Vista, piracy, DirectX 11, DirectX 10, corridor shooters, triple-A games, the Internet, Flash, XNA, XBox 360, Playstation 2, Playstation 1, SNES or Genesis (take your pick), NES, etc.

      And yet somehow PC gaming is stronger than its ever been. Have a sense of history, man!

      Do you also hate every one of the console users who buy a game not available on PC?

      • Malibu Stacey says:

        Meh I’m a PC Gamer & have been for decades but even I buy games on consoles that are available on PC because I’d much rather play them on that platform (PS3 at present) e.g. Batman Arkham Asylum because GFWL isn’t going anywhere near my PC or Assassins Creed series, Prototype, Burnout Paradise, BLUR, Chronicles of Riddick & Mirrors Edge amongst others because they’re more suited to the platform & its input devices in my opinion.

        • D3xter says:

          I understand your point about DRM, but what exactly makes a game “more suited” to a platform and its input devices please? And what the heck is preventing you from using your controller (I assume you already have one since you got a console) on your PC or instead of connecting that TV cable to the back of your console, connecting it to the back of your PC?

          • Brun says:

            I’d say that’s a matter of personal preference. I tend to enjoy third-person action games (GTA, Assassin’s Creed, Just Cause 2) more with a controller.

            Coincidentally those are all games that I owned either exclusively (Assassin’s Creed) or initially (GTA, Just Cause 2) on the 360. I picked up GTA4 in a Steam sale and got a PC copy of JC2 with my GTX 480, but I didn’t really enjoy either until I picked up a controller for my PC.

          • Milky1985 says:

            You could have used your ps3 controller on your PC, no need to buy another one :P

          • Malibu Stacey says:

            but what exactly makes a game “more suited” to a platform and its input devices please?

            Guess it’s personal preference but I’d never play an FPS on a console because it’s just so much better on a PC with mouse + keyboard (tried mates copy of Resistance: Fall of Man on PS3 & couldn’t bear it past the first few levels). Hence the converse is also true for stuff like Burnout Paradise, BLUR & most 3rd person action games.

            And what the heck is preventing you from using your controller (I assume you already have one since you got a console) on your PC

            I use a PS2 controller on my PC for arcade style games (twin stick shooters, Spelunky etc) but thanks for asking in your usual passive aggressive manner.

            or instead of connecting that TV cable to the back of your console, connecting it to the back of your PC?

            About 20-30 feet & not wanting to have an HDMI cable & all the other required cables trailing across the length & breadth of my flat maybe?

      • RegisteredUser says:

        If history has taught us anything, it is that the biggest downfall into oppression and misery comes from both not paying enough attention/being oblivious to the real implications of what is happening right now, and that there often first is a subtle grind(frog in slowly heating water kind of thing), that then suddenly and violently flips current conditions at one point. At which it is then too late to go back and change it again until the next major, fairly bloody war/revolution/outside influence comes in.

        So, in short, the point you are making is that you yourself don’t get it.

    • piratmonkey says:

      How about we be friends instead. We can like different things and still get along.

  4. orionite says:

    My biggest issue with the “always on requirement” isn’t the … “always on” requirement, it’s the way it is integrated into in a way that seems to completely preclude any modding. This game has serious actual gameplay issues and mods might have helped. The way it looks now, the game is fundamentally flawed and will remain a disappointment to a lot of people. (IMHO! YMMV)

    • D3xter says:

      My problem with the Always-On requirement is mainly the Always-On requirement, if there is no PRACTICALITY to it (see MMOs and Online Multiplayer games as opposed to playing against bots only), it has no business of being there.

      Despite sporting a 50MBit connection I recognize that there isn’t such a thing as “100% Uptime”, for instance a friend of mine just moved (I helped him move just two weeks ago) and he’s completely without internet for that duration of time, what’s even better is that a technician had to come by yesterday and unlock his new pipe, but he didn’t and now he got a new appointment for 01.08, which is againt 2 weeks away. At least they agreed to send him a SIM-card so he can do the basic stuff “in a few days”.
      Whenever I travel throughout the world there’s also a large problem with Internet or roaming, hell even inside the EU roaming charges are borderline retarded, travelling through Spain, Scotland, Portugal and so on you just see how limited your choices are, and even if you buy a SIM-card for that period of time how dodgy the connection can be.

      Even my 50Mbit connection has a mandatory 24 hour disconnect (getting a new IP), since they don’t want people using those for permanent server purposes.

      It’s just inane and I WILL NEVER buy a game that requires “Always Online” despite not needing it, and I kind of somewhat agree with “John Connor” above on that one xD

      This is how the games design would have to be to “justify” Always-Online (at around minute 12): link to

    • Shivoa says:

      And thanks to that always-on DRM it means that they can be monitoring your system and ban you (without refund) from ever being able to play the game again if you are using any type of mod to change the solo experience of the game you have already paid for.

      I am someone who has used DirectX interception to improve several of my games in a non-gameplay context, when playing alone, due to oversights by the developer. I think it’s rather obscene that this type of modification (the open platform of the PC being ideal for the cultivation of this sort of thing and adding infinite value to games that the developer may not have the funds to continue to support with free updates and tweaks) could result in the game I paid for being rendered unplayable with no avenue for recompense.

      PC is an open platform, that is one of the reasons PCs are great. Fighting against that with always-on DRM is going against the very concept of a game sale. Once you’ve sold the game then that copy is no longer yours, the person who purchased it can enjoy it however they want if it does not hurt others or break any laws.

      • Sheng-ji says:

        If you’re in Europe, I believe it would be against the law to ban you from the game unless they could prove beyond any reasonable doubt that you directly ruined someone elses experience with the game by applying mods.

        Of course it would take an informed banned player with the understanding of the law to have this enforced in court.

  5. Kdansky says:

    I think he doesn’t even understand why they have DRM in Diablo 3.

  6. simoroth says:

    The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers.

    • Shooop says:

      Not if your name is Blizzard or EA Games. Then you revel in your game smashing sales records.

      • simoroth says:

        Sales records can be smashed pretty easily when you set marketing spend records.

        Things aren’t so peachy for EA or Acti at the moment. Despite what the PR departments will tell you.

        • Greggh says:

          EXACTLY. I doesn’t matter if you make 1 million bad sales to the costumers; because even if you break a massive profit, they aren’t coming back to buy more in the future, and THAT screws any kind of enterprise. It’s a basic matter of business sustainability.

          • Shooop says:

            If that were true then why did Black Ops, Medal of Honor (2010), and Battlefield 3 sell so well? There were people who felt ripped off by previous games from the same developers, but they bought these anyway.

            The average gamer is an ADD-suffering colossal idiot who just wants the newest, shiniest pebble and doesn’t give a damn about the consequences to get it.

            I’m calling it right now, Medal of Honor Warfighter sells a million in a week or less. And whenever Blizzard gets around to releasing their next game in 10 years which has DRM that prevents you from playing on Saturdays people will take out second mortgages to throw money at it.

          • Greggh says:

            But selling a game like Black Ops, etc. to an “ADD-suffering colossal idiot” (that sentece is offensive in so many ways) is actually a GOOD sale – you sold a product designed for an ADDSCI to and ADDSCI.

            People who are not ADDSCI and bought the product unknowingly will probably dislike it and in some extreme instances – like this – will despise the company for it. That is a half assed marketing that makes money, but it’s not a very smart or sensitive strategy to be employed in the long run.

            Don’t you see that by doing that, Blizzard left a HUGE gap of customers unhappy, who are going towards other games in the same niche/segment? i.e. Torchlight.
            Sure they will live on making and selling crap to crappy customers, but what happens when a lot of those customers become more refined in their tastes? They lose MARKET SHARE, and that is as close to game over as it can get.

          • Shooop says:

            The affliction gamers suffer from and are too stupid to realize is they are like drug addicts and/or Stockholm syndrome victims.

            They see the shinny new game on the shelf and reason, “Well maybe it sucked last time, but this time might be different!” And to absolutely no one’s surprise it still sucks, they complain about it on the internet, and then the next game comes out. Gamers themselves are to blame for the industry perpetually churning out garbage.

          • Jesus H. Christ says:

            @shoop the problem is that it wasnt just colossal idiots who bought the game, but thoughtful gamers. And what happens is more and more of those leave the market because they aren’t catered to. So the videogame buying public increasingly becomes nothing buy morons, and hence we get shit streamlined shooter sequel after shit streamlined shooter sequel with very little else (indies excepted of course).

          • Shooop says:

            There are next to no more “thoughtful gamers” these days Jesus.

            That’s the real problem – the number of people who play The Witcher 2 are rendered insignificant by the people who buy Battlefied of Duty: Honor Call. “Thoughtful gamers” is practically a contradiction. And it’s absolutely wrong in the case of Diablo 3.

            You couldn’t have possibly not known Diablo 3 had always-on DRM if you spent any amount of time reading about the game on game sites. So 99.999% of the people who bought it knew exactly what they were getting into. That they bought it anyway proves they are anything but “thoughtful.” It proves the opposite.

          • piratmonkey says:

            Way to sound like a giant old man grumbling about how kids these days like different things that you’re not fond of! I personally think if we don’t go back to purely text-based puzzle games, then what’s the point!

          • theallmightybob says:

            @shoop what do you mean by no more thoughtfull games? can you define what a thoughtfull game is before you go off on a tangent? it might help your argument, becasue i have bought alot of what i would concider thoughtfull games in the last year. not only that but alot of thought did go into diablo 3, i just dident like it and got a refund.

        • Shooop says:

          That’s only if you look at it from a shareholder’s perspective. They are still making enough money to build blimps out money of to transport their money. It’s just from a shareholder’s perspective where you have to always have increasing profits they’re in trouble.

          The need for constantly growing profits is not related to the resounding success of people buying the product despite it being shit. Therefore they’ll only continue to produce shit because it’s selling.

          • Sheng-ji says:

            Don’t underestimate those of us who hold vivendi shares. We actually do research the companies we allow to spend our money and take the time to understand the markets they trade in.

          • Shooop says:

            That’s part of my point Sheng: Only you guys – the shareholders – have any opinion of the companies that really matter.

            They don’t need to worry about making a quality product, all they need to do is make sure the shareholders are happy with their investments. And even when they cease to be and sell those shares, they’re still guaranteed record sales from their games – even though they’re shit.

            They’ve become truly too big to fail because the have enough people who will buy their games no matter what and keep them in the black even if shareholders leave them.

          • Sheng-ji says:

            Ha, have a peek at Vivendi’s 5 year tracker and see just how happy I am with them. Spoiler: Not happy at all. Interestingly, take a look at the months before and after Diablo’s release, massive hike then a massive slump. The problems with the game wiped millions from the value of the company. Trust me, it wasn’t a sucessful experiment.

          • diamondmx says:

            Wow, man. When I saw you shilling in the rest of the threads – I thought I was imagining things.
            But you actually own shares in the company – maybe your opinion on people buying Diablo 3 isn’t worth all that much, since you directly profit if they do.

          • Sheng-ji says:

            Share holding is hardly “directly profiting” and I don’t hold enough to even receive dividends. I would only profit if I were planning on selling my shares, however, I’m a while away from retirement yet, I doubt a few more sales will make any difference. By the way, I wasn’t trying to convince people to buy D3, I wouldn’t dare be so rude as to tell someone their opinion is wrong. I was telling people why I bought the game and why I feel justified in buying the game. Notice at no point did I try to sell it to anyone, just explained to people what my opinion is on their doom laden predictions for PC gaming due to my actions.

            Just to give full disclosure here, in 1982 I was awarded £10 worth of vivendi shares. Subsequent events have rendered my shared to be worth about £100, my vivendi shares make up only one element of my very diverse portfolio, which includes shares in every major and most minor games companies with some notable exceptions

            But sure, accuse me of shilling or corruption all you like, the educated amongst us will know you for the fool you make yourself look to be. Oh, also, I hold EA shares, why don’t you check out my opinion on Origin on this site, why don’t you talk to one of the hundreds of people I helped to get a refund for games that I owned shares in the publisher or developer, when according to you I have a vested interest in not doing – still think I use these comments to try to boost my investments?

            Get real dude, if I wanted to boost the value of my portfolio, commenting here would be about the least efficient way to do it, but i’m sure you got some smug satisfaction for your ignorance and stupidity. Sometimes I wish I was as stupid as you make yourself look, then I could hur duh along with you and never know just how embarrassing being that publicly ludicrous is.

      • mondomau says:

        Big problem here is that some game franchises, like some movies, have become to big to fail – as long as there is enough hype and enough marketing, they will nearly always sell well enough to justify whatever bullshit the publisher pulls with DRM, DLC etc. This is why we are bombarded with such dross on the AAA tier – as long as it looks good and has known name attached to it, people will buy it.

        • Shooop says:


          The legions of idiots who have fallen in love with the brand will keep it alive until the sun burns out.

    • briktal says:

      Is that even true? There weren’t really a whole lot of facts being thrown out during that conversation and it was never brought up later in the series. Maybe she was wrong or it was Rebel propaganda.

  7. drewski says:

    You will play the game how we tell you and you will like it.

    If not, hey, we already have your money.

    • nasenbluten says:

      Two of my friends bought it and got sick of it 2 weeks later, then they passed their accounts to other friends again and again, 5 or 6 guys played the game with the same accounts.

      I won’t buy it or even play like that because I didn’t liked the beta. But people should just make new accounts for D3 and sell them when they get tired of it. Eat that DRM.

  8. tlarn says:

    Yes, Blizzard, we were aware of the elephant in the room well before you admitted its name is Dumbo.

  9. OniId says:

    First world problems

    • Harlander says:

      You know you’re on a videogames news site, right?

    • John Walker says:

      Yeah, because people in developing countries don’t play videogames, do they? In their mud huts, with their sticks.

      • Greggh says:

        I am brazilian and this is offensive.

        Now here, take this monkey. Thank you.

        • Alevice says:

          We actually have 3Gbps internet connection within out huts, but you wouldn’t know *mwahahaha*

        • alundra says:

          Yeah that was filthy racist and discriminatory hate speech, but I’m sure Mr. Walker was being sarcastic.

          Signed with my stick.

          From my muddy hut.

          • MadTinkerer says:

            I’m 99.9% sure Mr. Walker was being sarcastic to the guy saying always-online DRM is a “first world problem”, and not actually trying to argue that the guy is right.

          • alundra says:

            Yeah yeah, I know.

    • DiamondDog says:

      Well, considering the issue is centred around the quality of internet access, isn’t this more of a third world problem?

      • The Random One says:

        I am also Brazilian and if is to be believed my home connection is faster than that of most UK residents. My data limit is also much higher than, say, Canada’s.


        Edit: Or, as we say ‘ round here, #classemédiasofre

        • Renato84 says:

          Same here (brazilian, middle class, fast internet connection, worried about gaming’s future, ranting on RPS)

        • Llewyn says:

          You’re almost certainly right there. I’m in the UK and have only today upgraded from a connection which relied on carrier pigeons to deliver bits from the exchange to the local cabinet, and then on a man shouting “One! Zero! One!” very loudly to bring them to my attention.

        • DiamondDog says:

          I admit to only wanting to gibe the OP on his stupid “first world problems” comment. I suspect my ignorance of the subject would dig me a very large hole, if I were being serious.

      • Sheng-ji says:

        Dunno what part of the world you live in, but here in the 1st world, my internet connection can’t handle playing Diablo online without suffering problems.

        • Eddy9000 says:

          Really? Because earlier you were banging on like always-on DRM wasn’t a problem and saying that everyone who disagreed was a hipster.

          • Sheng-ji says:

            Actually, if you read what I said, instead of assuming I automatically hold opposing opinions to people who I was disagreeing with, what I was actually saying was that I hate always on-line, however, I still bought D3 because it was worth the inconvenience for me.

            You are representative of the problem, you read what you want instead of what I wrote.

            Also I only called someone a hipster because they used the phrase strawman – and even then it was only because they weren’t reading what I wrote and assuming that I was calling people hipsters (like you just did) and being a complete dick about it.

            If you read what I wrote, you will notice that person A called person B a hipster. Person B asked why he was getting called a hipster. I explained to person B in a way that didn’t accuse person B of being a hipster why person A may have thought that.


            And…. Blocked, so really, you’ll never get to communicate with me ever again, so I couldn’t care less if you read what I wrote properly or not.

    • Mollusc Infestation says:

      The internet’s favourite straw man.

    • Salt says:

      This otherwise pointless comment prompted me to look up why we only seem to refer to the first and third world. Turns out they were designations used during the Cold War, with the First World being USA and friends, Second World USSR and friends, Third World everyone else. Using those Cold War era groupings, plenty of nations in all three worlds are likely to have been affected by Diablo’s DRM.

      • InternetBatman says:

        Yeah, I always get annoyed by the term too. Especially since it’s now used a pejorative, when really it was a bunch of nations declaring their independence from being the battlefield of proxy wars.

    • InternetBatman says:

      Please go fix third world problems then, instead of posting on a first world problem site.

  10. Thomas says:

    Bashiok already said as much way back even before the beta i believe.

    Of course it functions as DRM, just like Steamworks is essentially DRM as well.

    • MadTinkerer says:

      Okay, I’m only going to point this out once in this thread. Steamworks includes a DRM option to make the big publishers happy. Most of Steamworks is not DRM, it is optional stuff that simply doesn’t work without a connection. Harmless stuff like how you can’t download a fresh installation without an internet connection (but you can install from a backup), or get cheevos if your computer can’t call up Steam’s servers to tell them you got a cheevo.

      Steamworks in itself is not DRM, any more than your computer is a graphics card. Your computer (likely) includes a graphics card. Your computer can run without a graphics card! There are games you can run without a graphics card. Your computer is not, itself, a graphics card.

      Furthermore AFAIK even with the DRM option there’s no Steamworks enabled game that requires a perpetual online connection through Steamworks. There’s Spore and other games that constantly “phone home” to proprietary servers, but they’re not doing it through Steamworks.

      Or are you just trolling? Well too late, I already typed out my rant.

      • Brun says:

        Just to clarify:

        Steamworks is Valve’s DRM solution, and is distinct from the Steam application itself. They offer it to publishers interested in releasing games on Steam. It is not mandatory for Steam games – publishers are free to use other DRM or no DRM at all – putting your game on Steam doesn’t mean it automatically uses Steamworks. I’m not sure of the technical details, but sas far as I know it works pretty much like most other DRM products.

        Steam itself isn’t technically DRM (although if you ask the right group of people on RPS, they might argue otherwise).

      • reggiep says:

        Steamworks allows developers to leverage Steam for DRM by requiring a connection to Steam to authenticate prior to launching the game or setting the game to offline mode for a certain allowed period of time. Steamworks also provides extensions for developers to include their own custom DRM.

        So you can cover it with perfume all you want, but it’s only slightly different than Blizzard’s DRM scheme.

        • Milky1985 says:

          One works on a train with no wifi, one doesn’t

          One can work without being connection other than the origional install (asuming the publisher has chosen that option), one doesn’t

          Yeah its only slightly different

          However the slight differences have a MAJOR impact on what it does and does not do, stop trying to make out that steam is as bad DRM as blizzs new one.

          If you were saying its as bad as starcraft 2 i might agree (as the offline mode on that is crap, and no lan is a pain for users and tourment organisers,activly causing issues in some tournaments), but when comparing it to diablo 3 its apples and oranges. They are both fruits but very different taste and texture.

      • Thomas says:

        And “DRM” was just a bonus of too, it’s always on because people would almost always (when possible) opt for the service and it was confusing and annoying having to manage several distinct play experiences not only from a developer perspective but also from a customer perspective.

        But other than that you also get perks like achievements, chat, etc.

        But my point wasn’t to equate Blizzard’s “DRM” to Valve’s “DRM” in any shape or form, I simply pointed out that they were both types of DRM,.

  11. Caiman says:

    So what he’s saying to people who wanted a traditional ARPG like Diablo 1 and 2 is, and I’m putting this as eloquently as possible, “Fuck you!”

    • Kotlh says:

      Well that’s the whole problem, they didn’t quite designed it for the Diablo playerbase, but for their WoW playerbase. Think about it :

      – Always-on isn’t a problem anymore
      – Simplified specializations
      – Focus on group play
      – And the fact that keeps you in touch with your WoW buddies

      Oh god I can’t wait for a RMHA in WoW.

      • Brun says:

        I think the real purpose of Diablo III was as a testbed for the microtransaction-based economy, but for implementation in Project Titan, not in WoW. It’s the only explanation for such a dramatic departure from the traditional facets of Diablo.

  12. Niymiae says:

    It’s, well, interesting how the most interesting parts of Morhaime’s message have little to no place in this article.

    • mondomau says:

      it’s interesting how you think it’s interesting that the interesting parts from this article are missing. Would you care to elaborate on which interesting parts have been missed out? Because I would find your comment more interesting if you did.

      • Niymiae says:

        There is a little example just here below.
        Point is that should be RPS to interest us. While i support the anti-DRM crusade to a degree, I have the strong feeling that the subject is overshadowing things that could actually be news or worth talking about – because this isn’t, not anymore.

        • Shooop says:

          “There is a little example just here below.”

          If you have a point, make it. Otherwise you’re being an ass.

        • Chris D says:

          I think that given how Epic are now also considering always on DRM this issue is still very relevant. This isn’t just about one game. It’s a test case. How gamers respond to Diablo 3 is likely to have consequences for the direction of the whole industry for several years to come.

        • mondomau says:

          From your post below – “That said, there are still improvements we believe we can make to expand the online experience and make co-op play even more rewarding, and this will remain one of our priorities moving forward.”

          This doesn’t actually mean anything though does it? It’s just marketing babble. What improvements? Improve it how and for who? None of that is detailed in the slightest. That’s why the article doesn’t bother with it.

          Yes RPS focus on the DRM aspect, because that’s the only bit of any worth, particularly because (as they freely admit ) they are hell bent on not letting this bullshit slip off the radar. They want people to stay angry so they remember next time a big publisher trots out some transparent money making scheme / punitive DRM dressed up as ‘an improvement to the customer’s experience’ that they are not to be trusted.

  13. Arathain says:

    It’s a puzzling thing, really. The framework around the game makes co-op pretty smooth and easy, so that’s present and accounted for, and it’s nice the way the game scales seamlessly for extra players. But in terms of design there’s nothing in particular pushing one towards co-op over single play. There aren’t all that many abilities that affect other players. There’s are no extra bits of the game designed for parties. The co-op is just exactly the same as the single player, only a bit more so.

    I don’t mind games with an increased multi-player focus, since that’s as legitimate a design direction as any, but it just doesn’t seem to be there for D3.

    • Niymiae says:

      That’s why, for example, it should be mentioned that: “That said, there are still improvements we believe we can make to expand the online experience and make co-op play even more rewarding, and this will remain one of our priorities moving forward.” was part of the post, too.

      That would have been a much more interesting topic, since this “yes, it’s also DRM” is no news at all.

  14. Deano2099 says:

    Not really news, given this article on, of all places, Eurogamer from September 2011:

    link to

    Eurogamer: Does piracy have anything to do with your decision to make Diablo 3 always-on?
    Frank Pearce: I would never say it’s not a factor, but it’s definitely not the driving factor.

  15. Rovac says:

    The only Blizz game that I love was Warcraft 3 and it’s expansion. DotA was great, until they call me noob for the thousand time.
    I think no more Blizz game for me if they keep that always-on policy
    Anyway I never play Diablo nor WoW maybe a little bit Starcraft, is that good?

  16. yamalight says:

    I guess that was the last thing I bought from them. Too bad, they make very nice games. Yet they spoil all fun with crap like this :\

  17. MadTinkerer says:

    Amazing. “however, Diablo 3 was designed from the beginning to be an online game that can be enjoyed with friends, and the always-online requirement is the best way for us to support that design”

    No, the best way to support a co-op focused game meant to be played with friends is to INCLUDE A FUCKING LAN OPTION THAT ISN’T TIED TO YOUR DRM NETWORK JUST LIKE GAMES THAT YOUR COMPANY PRODUCED IN THE PAST.

    But no. To Blizzard, trying to ruin pirates’ efforts is more important than customer service.

    And that, more than the fact that I see games like Torchlight as an acceptable substitute, is why I have avoided buying Diablo III.

  18. BlackeyeVuk says:

    How about we talk about something more worthwhile that this? These kind of topics are depressing. Im old school gamer that does even like 3D anything ever. That much hardcore view I have.

    But still find some games awesome due to fix camera angle , fix unit movement (like star wars empire at war ) .

    -Remembering- That magic view from afar at hand drawn landscape … memories… Not everything is about graphics :(

    link to

    • MadTinkerer says:, my friend. They don’t have Avernum yet, but I think they’ll be getting it eventually since Geneforge is already on GoG.

  19. squareking says:

    Foooog hooooorn

  20. Sparkasaurusmex says:

    So now that this has been cracked, can they just remove the DRM? It DID actually serve its purpose, probably causing many impatient pirates to buy the game, but now they can pirate it so the DRM is literally worthless… patch it out.

  21. bahamut says:

    is he kidding me. in my country there is no copy right so we all pirate. always on drm does not make the slightest difference in pirating, it’s only problem for those who buy it.

  22. rocketman71 says:

    Oh, yeah, it worked fantastically, it prevented me from buying the game and made me lose whatever little respect I had for Blizzard after the crippled POS that was StarCraft 2.

    Congrats, Mr. Morhaine. Fucking fantastic job there.


  23. clownst0pper says:

    Oh look another news post moaning about DRM. Can we please move on? It’s a broken bloody record.

    I’d really love to see a positive post come out of RPS lately, instead every single one is a moan or complaint about everything and anything. Why not make a new weekly feature “the good news post of the week” that would do the trick.

    • rocketman71 says:

      Oh, look, another comment moaning about a post moaning about DRM.

      To me, this is one of the most important matters in gaming nowadays. If the rest of the industry follows suit, we’re going to get a fuckton of broken games. So I’ll take as much visibility as we can get of this.

      Don’t like the subject?. Don’t click the fucking link, don’t read it and don’t comment it.

      You’re welcome.

      • Neut says:

        Oh, look, another comment moaning about a comment moaning about a post moaning about DRM.

        To me, this is one of the most important matters on RPS nowadays. If the rest of their posts follow suit, we’re going to get a fuckton of dull stuff to read. So I’ll take as much visibility as we can get of this.

        Don’t like the comment?. Don’t reply.

        You’re welcome.

        • hilltop says:

          There is a wealth of stuff to read on rps pretty much daily. If the occasional article informing you that everything isn’t sunshine and roses is difficult for you, you could try reading any number of other game sites that focus purely on inane drivel.

    • drewski says:

      You mean a positive story like some Mount & Blade coverage of new free content, or an interview with the creator of Endless Space, or maybe a look at Heroes Rise, some hype about the new Mechwarrior trailer, an awesome Hotline Miami story or perhaps a WIT on some new interactive fiction like Nameless?

      Because they have that. Right there. On the front page. With this story.

      6/10 “positive” stories on the front page, a couple of standard newsy stories and two articles about DRM. Even if that were a typical RPS mix – and it isn’t – that would hardly justify your complaint.

  24. Phinor says:

    It’s been two months, they really should have fixed the issues by now. Just an hour ago I was disconnected from the game having just gotten five stacks of NV up. Just few hours ago they fixed the auction house once again, after it was unusable/broken for close to 30 hours. Just last week the auction house was down for three days.

    Is this common on the US side or is it the incompetence of the EU team as it seemed to be with WoW?

  25. Quasar says:

    In other obvious news, slippers can also act as shoes, and lunch can sometimes be dinner.

  26. Jamesworkshop says:

    Blizzard have finally admitted that their useless always-on DRM in Diablo III is partly to prevent piracy

    not from what i read

  27. Tolkfan says:

    I am still waiting for Riot to say the same thing about LoL and how it doesn’t allow me to play offline with bots.

    • hilltop says:

      I’m sure you’re being facetious, but nonetheless:

      It is much less of an issue with LoL given that I don’t think anyone really downloads and plays the game with a view to playing with bots. The core of the game experience is online play. And even then, if we take your comparison further, a full retail price for the game would be unusual if it didn’t come with LAN support.

      Diablo was once a perfectly compelling single player game that people enjoyed.

  28. trjp says:

    Nothing new here – everytime WoW had issues, the moment they were fixed people would forget about the problems and they’d be underwritten as a ‘minor issue’ (such as the one which rendered the game unplayable on my server for 2 weeks!!)

    I always looked at D3 as being an ‘MMO’ – with all the issues that comes with. I think the problem is that other people were still clinging to the idea it wasn’t one (and as a game it’s not – but technically/practically it is) and they’re the ones whinging.

    MMO players are hardened to this shit – and we know not to touch anything new with a bargepole :)

  29. Skeletor68 says:

    I bought D3, so yeah fuck me and all that for supporting bad ideas.

    Now, if D3 were really the experience it should be I would actually get over the always online thing. I would definitely have much preferred an offline single player considering how that was the majority of my D2 time. But aside from all the horrible Error 37s, hacks and auction houses the items are actually just plain boring… The whole point of Diablo is missing.

  30. Renato84 says:

    Let’s say always online gave them what, at the very most like 1 million more purchases than they would if the game had been cracked early (it actually is now).

    They would have spent a LOT less money on development, the game would have shipped much earlier, the legit buyers wanting to play multiplayer would be having a decent experience now and since day 1.

    And they would still have that former immaculate gamers’ trust they had pre-D3.

    Blizzard shot themselves in the feet.

  31. jesskitten says:

    Partly to prevent piracy. Uhhuh. And the other part of it? To prevent easy/safe reselling for the general user, so it can continue to be a revenue stream for Blizz in the future, of course, and not let that wicked, tricksy second hand video game market take their precioussss money away.

  32. shiromar says:

    I don’t get it, they obviously made out like gangbusters. Is he saying this in order to keep the RMAH cash flowing?

  33. Neut says:

    Ah the ol’ Angry Internet Men circlejerk.

  34. tkioz says:

    Looking back on it I’m wondering WHY I did buy it… I wasn’t going to… the whole decade long development cycle killed the interest for me… then it was out and I was like “I loved Diablo 2, let’s buy it”…

    I cranked out maybe 400-500 hours in D2, likely more… I finished D3 once, made it half way through the second play through and thought “wtf… this is boring… and still not a challenge, why the hell am I playing if I’m not having fun…” and haven’t gone back since.

    Well I tell a lie, I fired it up once… and got a “the server is down for maintenance” error… which I took as fate telling me not to bother.

    The game just lacks something, like the soul has been sucked out, it should be good… but it’s really not.

  35. Shooop says:

    This is what gamers wanted.

    Unless you never read any news from gaming sites you knew it had always-on DRM. I only feel bad for the RPS team who probably weren’t given review copies because they didn’t guarantee a positive review for it and probably had to buy it themselves.

    Blizzard assumed you didn’t mind, and you didn’t obviously. Your $60 said so. And you’ll buy the next game too, don’t kid yourself. You are the reason AAA PC gaming sucks. I hope you’re happy gamers.

    • piratmonkey says:

      Please give me another diatribe about Blizzard and people who enjoyed D3.

      • Shooop says:

        Please give me one reason to believe Diablo 3 fans aren’t crack-brained ADD-addled /v/ posting morons. Because I can’t find any.

  36. xephyris says:

    If only the always-on DRM was the only problem plaguing Diablo 3. Having played it a considerable amount I’d say that it is the least of its problems, even after several sizeable patches.

  37. Mutak says:

    Meh. I played Diablo. I played WoW. I don’t need to play their bastard lovechild. The DRM is just the icing on the “no thanks” cake.

  38. Harry Bosch says:

    So many lies about this game (Vases, inferno challenge, you name it). Always-on isn’t my biggest concern, but the huge mess this game has become is.

    They fucked up so hard, I bet EA was involved one way or another.

  39. Freud says:

    There are some issues with the game that needs to get fixed. Loot isn’t as rewarding as it should be and there is a lack of endgame beyond the loot hunt (which, once again, isn’t rewarding).

    The core systems (combat, skills) are spot on for the most part (which doctor needs some work) and with Blizzards track record I would expect them fix the weak parts of the game. Hopefully before an expansion, but you never know.

    The always online debate is a tired one and RPS whinging about it enlessly got old in May. The login problems were solved in the first week, as expected.

  40. Moraven says:

    And the millions it would have no effect on them since they would want to solo play with a B.Net character anyway. /shrug

    If D3 was purely intended for co op only, I do not think they would have invested that much time into a follower system, other than having them in the past.

    But there is a bit of work into the voice work and interactions of your followers and their stories.

  41. piratmonkey says:

    Can we stop the “people who bought D3 hate the PC platform and are killing it?” Please? Can we not be civil about the issue?
    I enjoy the game immensely. THERE I SAID IT.
    Also if I see another post about “cognitive dissonance” I’m going to weep.

    • Shooop says:

      And your plan to achieve that is by seeking out a comment which pointed out how stupid it was for people to complain about something they knew about beforehand and flamebait?

      There is no way you could go wrong!

      Back to /v/ with you.

      • piratmonkey says:

        I like my spot on RPS quite nicely actually. It was more an attempt to point out how it was ridiculous to call people who bought and enjoyed D3 the bane of AAA PC gaming while engaging in UNCOUTH behavior like name-calling. While snarky, I’ve remained civil at least.
        In all seriousness though, to keep harping on ADD and ADHD is simply unwarranted.

        • Shooop says:

          You missed half my entire point in the process.

          • piratmonkey says:

            I’m sorry please reiterate, it’s hard to keep track of what threads we’re referring to sometimes. (The above response was in reference to the diatribe, for clarity).

    • hilltop says:

      A lot of perfectly civil comments have sought to lay out why buying the game while in full knowledge of the drm was a bad idea. Buying it in full knowledge of the drm and then claiming to dislike drm is hypocritical. Buying it because – as many people have been keen to explain here – they didn’t give a fuck, they enjoyed the game, simple as, etc, etc – doing that and disregarding the message it sends to publishers. Well, that’s short sighted. Yes, you get your game. You also disregard the greater impact of your actions. If that doesn’t matter to you, fine and dandy. But don’t expect to be praised for it.

      I haven’t been rude to you here. But you should be a little realistic.

      Some people cared more about not supporting a drm system they didn’t like than they did about enjoying a game. Millions didn’t care that much. Can be frustrating.

    • RegisteredUser says:

      If you can’t cognitively seperate the hate against DRM schemes and its impact on a community from whether or not the attached game is good or liked, then that’s your fault.

      I couldn’t mind less if everyone in the world bought a DRM free Diablo 3 and crowned it the jewel of gaming perfection.

      I severely mind the “enabling” of always-on DRM schemes for singleplayer games / game modes through massive, widespread financial support.

  42. MythArcana says:

    Internet Connection Required.

    Let’s set a higher standard and ditch the kiddie terminology. These games are, in fact, not “always-on”. They are not memory resident, they are not TSR, they do not load until launched, and they never will be “on” when your computer is turned off. The term is Internet Connection Required or ICR if you are too damned lazy to type.

    Please, RPS; educate and stimulate.

    • Brun says:

      “Always-on” is just shorthand for “always-online,” which is just as accurate as ICR when used in the context of actually playing the game. I agree that ICR is clearer in a more general context, but two of the best things about English are context-based interpretation and synonyms. I feel like the drive to relabel this kind of DRM as “ICR” is really picking at nits.

    • Shooop says:

      The term “always-on” is applied only to the DRM.

      Which it is – the DRM is always on when you run the game.

    • InternetBatman says:

      How does the term Internet Required differentiate itself from games that require a check right at startup and games than require online activation?

  43. Freud says:

    So what are the odds RPS will bash Path of Elixe in article after article about that game being online only?

    • Brun says:

      It’s okay because that game is indie.

    • Shooop says:

      Does it have a “single-player” mode?

      • Freud says:

        When I played the beta every zone was instanced and I was the only one playing in it. I assume I could play with others if I choose to.

        The only zone where I saw others were in the tiny ‘town’ where you vendor stuff and get quests.

        So for all intents and purposes it does seem to work exactly like D3.

        I’m not bashing PoE. I understand that a game being financed by micro transactions is played online. I just don’t understand the twisting of panties that D3 requires internet connection to play. It solves a lot of problems for a company (pirating, hacking, DRM, extra income, makes updating the game much easier). If the downside is that some with dodgy connections can’t play or you can’t play it on a train, it’s a shame but not a major deal. But we live in an age where people love to feel like victims so people blow these small downsides completely out of proportion, RPS style.

        • Moraven says:

          So, Guild Wars basically?

          How i perceived D3 as. You can solo play, get followers. The downside is guild wars has a lot more “guild” mmo like features that D3 lacks right now. Tho Guild Wars has had some years to keep adding to their system.

          • Freud says:

            Guild wars is a good comparison.

            I think a lot vitriol is because people had this idea of Blizzard being good guys. But in reality they are a corporation doing what corporations do. Anyone who played WoW where they ask for obnoxious fees to transfer realms and selling in-game pets for money already figured that one out.

            They are however a corporation that has a history of polishing their game until they are excellent and that is where RPS should focus on reporting and holding them accountable if they want to cover D3. That login servers got hammered first week of release is old news, but judging by the picture RPS choose to illustrate this article with it’s something they haven’t gotten over yet.

          • hilltop says:

            I prefer my rps with commentary on the unsavoury business ethics of titans in the industry, thank you very much. If you want to relegate your reading and critique to a narrow realm of how companies technically execute their games in a complete moral vacuum, that’s your business.

            Pretty much every other gaming news site will facilitate you.

        • Shooop says:

          The uproar over Diablo 3 is because people are having trouble playing the game they paid for that’s in no way their own fault. The fact it has a single-player mode but it doesn’t work as one is the piss-flavored frosting on a crap cake.

          But again, I’m beginning to find all the complaints hollow and meaningless because who didn’t know about the always-on DRM before parting with $60? Gamers get what they say they don’t want because they pay for it.

          • Brun says:

            That issue is not unique to Diablo 3 so it’s not the source of the uproar. The source of the uproar is that Blizzard took the newest installment in a traditionally offline single-player franchise and turned it into an online-only game. No one would care about having to be online if that requirement had existed in the previous Diablo games.

            Curiously, Blizzard did the exact same thing with Warcraft and WoW – you could even argue that the change there was even more drastic since they also took an RTS franchise and turned it into an RPG. Even so, I don’t remember seeing as much vitriol back in 2004.

          • Shooop says:

            That’s one half the problem, the other half I brought up. Basically they engineered the perfect PR shitstorm:

            Take a famous single-player game, (pretend to) leave that option in it, but force you to be online at all times even while playing single-player while claiming you just want to strong-arm people into playing multi.

            When you have to go online to use a single-player option in a game there is a very serious design flaw somewhere.

          • Brun says:

            The problem is that people keep getting caught up on the mentality of “single-player mode” when in reality it’s more analogous to playing a game like LoL (which you can play by yourself, with bots, but still have to be online) or any MMO (which you can play “solo” by refusing to group with other players). When you play “single-player mode” you’re really playing “alone in a multiplayer game.” Which is perfectly fine, but that’s how Blizzard will see it. That’s their vision for the game.

            Diablo 3 uses a very different high level design concept than the previous games in the series. They are trying to take the franchise from what it used to be and make it more like an MMO or a MOBA. They are doing this on purpose, for reasons with which you may disagree. It’s that change in high-level design that causes the uproar – people are fixating their anger on the always-on requirement but that’s only because it’s the most visible component of the new design.

          • hilltop says:

            Not just because it is the most visible design element in the new approach, but also because it just so happens to be a design element that other companies have been trying to implement in their games for some time. And which flies in the face of the consumer.

            Something worth being up in arms about. Perhaps not to you.

  44. Thoric says:

    Got 37 problems but a pirate ain’t one.

  45. derbefrier says:

    I think this sad display of bigotry against those that bought and enjoyed D3 needs to stop. All of you are acting like a bunch of tools. We bought the game we liked it, we didn’t give a Fuck about the always online part and, we are happy with our purchase. Who the fuck are you people to pass judgement on me or any other gamer. I play games I like its as simple as that. I am aware of what always online means and the possibility that there could be problems. I didn’t care I still wanted the game. Believe what you want it has no affect on me or the enjoyment I get out of D3. I will make my own decisions and I don’t need a bunch of idiot kids or ego inflated game bloggers telling me what’s ok and not ok to buy. I will make that descision myself.

    • x1501 says:

      Cry me a river.

      The big picture here is that DRM access control implementations are all about unnecessary restrictions and invasions that often cause more problems for legitimate consumers than they do for illegitimate ones. Not to mention that considering that online DRM is already used for spying on some user activities for marketing purposes, it’s obvious that companies see it as an untapped source of marketing and advertising potential. Left unchecked, this blatant privacy-invading tracking and monitoring of user behavior will only become more pervasive and sophisticated over the years. So, just because you feel perfectly comfortable about silently giving up your established consumer rights and whatever is left from your digital privacy, doesn’t mean that everyone should stop voicing their disapproval of this heinous and entirely unnecessary power grab.

      The fact that you and millions of people like you happily accepted the draconian DRM and bought the game without fully considering the possible negative consequences of your actions, makes you a perfectly valid target of ridicule and criticism.

      • piratmonkey says:

        So basically it’s the “I know what’s best, you don’t get it” argument?

        • x1501 says:

          No, it’s the “I’m giving you a quick explanation of my position and a couple of arguments in its defense” kind of argument. Since derbefrier’s expressed motivation for buying the game was that he “liked it”, “didn’t give a fuck about the always online part” and “as simple as that”, his thorough knowledge of the implications of his support of always-online DRM is yet to be demonstrated.

          But please, if you truly think that always-online DRM is actually good for legitimate customers, that it does not at all weaken their privacy, their freedom of expression (modding, etc.), and their established fair use consumer rights, nothing really stops you from presenting your arguments here or elsewhere.

    • Eddy9000 says:

      No no, you see we’re arguing against always on DRM, not insulting the people that bought the game. If you enjoyed it then good for you, lots of us think we could enjoy it more without the ridiculous always on restrictions.

      So in your language, who the fucking fuck do you fucking think you are telling us what we should or shouldn’t fucking complain about?

      • RegisteredUser says:

        I don’t know why that seperation is so hard for people to understand.

    • RegisteredUser says:

      You help to poison the well and then complain that half the village is now looking at you rather angrily?

      Really, you feel you should be left alone while doing something that has a direct impact on literally everyone else trying to participate in the same pastime you yourself feel entitled to enjoy?

      Does this seriously surprise you?

  46. mckertis says:

    Wait, i thought the D3 offline crack (i.e. server emulator) was released a week or two ago. Did anyone try it ?

  47. archimandrite says:

    I’m sure this has been brought up before, but I’m curious as to whether people were pissed off about Guild Wars 1 and its always-online requirement when it was launched. Like Diablo 3, it is essentially an instanced single-player ARPG that you can choose to play with other players. The only MMO-ish aspect is the cities, which are little more than visual chat rooms.

    • malkav11 says:

      Only eleven billion times or so. It’s a bad analogy because they are fundamentally dissimilar designs. Guild Wars is structured from the ground up as a multiplayer experience that happens to be playable with bots. It was also initially PvP-focused (I mean, it had a PvE side to it but it was clear where the emphasis lay) and gradually shifted towards PvE primacy as it became clear what the majority of people were spending the majority of their time doing.

  48. Baines says:

    I see the RPS comments system still doesn’t display properly when a page gets a nested thread that overruns the page post limit.

    Page 1 has the overlong nest at the end. Page 2 has a a single nesting that holds four posts. Page 3 displays only a single one sentence post. (Page 4 currently looks fine, but will presumably lose posts if the overrun on Page 1 keeps growing. Page 5 and 6 are currently normal.)

  49. mr.ioes says:

    Outstanding translation: link to

  50. malkav11 says:

    A decision that ensures there IS NO LONG TERM for the game is the exact opposite of the best long term decision for the game.