Slashdot Mirror
Diablo III Released
Almost 12 years after the launch of its predecessor, Diablo III has now been released. The game went live last night with over 8,000 midnight launch parties across the world. 2,000,000 players showed up for the beta test prior to launch, including 300,000 concurrently during an open beta weekend, but even so, the login servers struggled for the first few hours after launch. Diablo III had been in the works for quite some time — another example of Blizzard's notoriously long development cycle — and game director Jay Wilson said it was in "polish mode" for the past two years. "One of our sayings internally is 'polish as you go.' We have a belief that when you put a feature in, you should prototype, but then after you prototype you should do the real thing, and you should polish it to shipping quality." For those of you who are familiar with this type of game, there's an official game guide in which you can browse class skills, items, and other game information. There are also YouTube videos showing how each of the classes work.
But should we really be celebrating one of the first major single-player games to *require* that you have an internet connection to even play in solo mode? You can still pop in your ancient copies of earlier Diablos and play. Will the same be true 10 or 15 years from now when the Diablo 3 servers no longer work, or if you should lose your internet connection for some reason (or if Blizzard ever goes belly-up)?
I know they want to fight piracy and all that. But once again, I think the people who will pay the price are the honest gamers who are going to be forced into piracy some day just to play the game they actually paid for. You try to do the right thing and end up having to make a choice between either not playing the game at all or becoming a criminal.
Now maybe they'll release a patch some day that will override this, or maybe they won't. But you can bet that the one group that will *definitely* have a patch are the pirates.
What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
NewEgg has failed me for the first time in a decade. I pre-ordered a copy ($10 off) but they didn't bother shipping it until today (UPS 3 day). Considering D3 has an interesting DRM that allows you to install it before the launch date and just prevents you from playing it until then, it would have made more sense to me if NewEgg shipped them late last week so they would arrive today or yesterday. One egg off for poor planning.
I can't believe it took over 14 (or 13,12,11 depending on time zone) hours from the launch of Diablo III for an article to get on /. I guess all the gamers were busy trying to log in?
sudo make me a sandwich
Requires an internet connection even for single player.
Not paying for that. I'll go find some indie developer to give my money to instead.
I believe he is referring to bnetd. I can see how a younger person might not have known about that.
"Diablo III had been in the works for quite some time — another example of Blizzard's notoriously long development cycle — and game director Jay Wilson said it was in "polish mode" for the past two years."
No fair that Poland got it two years early >_>
So they told us that having to connect to their servers to play in single player mode wouldn't be a problem, that we should trust them.
And now the EU login server is melting under the pounding of thousands of angry players trying to play solo.
And to add insult to injury they didn't even have the nice idea of implementing queues like most similar systems do..
Add this to the borked-beta weekend and I think they have more polishing to do.
Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
Check out torchlight 2, It looks really good and will allow multi-player without all the hassle.
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
Excuse me for asking without more politeness, but i wonder what the fun in this game is.
I never gamed much, although i have enjoyed flying Battlefield2 helicopters, enjoyed C&C:Red Alert 1 strategy, and did some discover/viving in minecraft.
Isn't it just a lot of clicking while walking, attributing but nothing more but a score?
Or is there humor or honor/pride in the process?
Is there puzzles (i don't count "do ten times that" or "walk to southpole and be rerouted" as puzzles) or does another form of honor/pride come at play?
After being burned by the always-on requirement of Starcraft 2, I'll be 2nd in that line.
The real evil here, where players will suffer even if they don't mind jumping through the hoops, is the limit of 10 characters per game copy, even if they are only used for single player. That pisses me off. I've been told you don't "need" more than that many, because there are only five classes times two sexes, and apparently no exclusive character choices such that you would need alts for game-mechanics reasons. But you're SOL if you want to enjoy the game experience from level 1 forward and don't want to delete any of your old characters.
But... I went and picked up my collector's edition this morning anyway. I already play all-online games such as World of Warcraft with similar limitations. I can reluctantly live with with paying for Diablo III as long as I think of it that way: as a limited Internet service and not a game you can really, you know, have. It would be a better product if it were the latter, but oh well. Hopefully it will at least be fun.
"This algorithm runs in constant time. Come on, 2,147,483,648 is a constant..."
at least simcity 2013 will only need it to start the game.
Now why can't it be once a week?
Only the people with problems are here to post their complaints. Anyone who it's working fine for is too busy playing/enjoying it.
Except the bastards who have to work, like me, that is.
Oh look, here's another game I'm not going to buy. I don't care how good your game is, if you pull bullshit DRM stunts like this, it's off my radar now and forever.
Maybe I'll download the pirated version and play that, just out of spite.
Not even 12 hours after launch Blizzard is taking down US zone servers down for 3hr maintenance. Task: Calculate uptime so far.
http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/5051765603?page=1
11:30 a.m. PDT- We are in the process of performing an emergency maintenance for Diablo III servers in the Americas to resolve several issues that are currently impacting the game. This maintenance may cause some interruption in communication, ability to log in, use of in-game features, and disconnections. We anticipate all servers will be available for play at approximately 1:30 p.m. PDT. We will provide further updates as necessary. Thank you for your patience.
10: 22 a.m. PDT- We are in the process of performing an emergency maintenance for all North American Diablo III servers to resolve several issues that are currently impacting the game. This maintenance may cause some interruption in communication, ability to log in, use of in-game features, and disconnections. We anticipate all servers will be available for play in approximately 1 hour.
Thank you for your patience.
Error 37
Blizzard is one of the few companies to patch their older games years later to no longer require the CD's to play. It wouldn't surprise me if down the road they patched Diablo III to no longer require an internet connection.
Just to elaborate on this for those unfamiliar with Blizzard's older games. It is *not* that they simply put out a patch to remove the CD requirement.
The older starcraft and diablo games have been actively supported for over 10 years. Periodic updates for bug fixes, exploit fixes, new features, new support for communities and tournament organizations (thinking about some starcraft 1 updates), etc.
Blizzard has a team dedicated to actively maintaining and enhancing their "old" games. It is *not* an afterthought for the original dev team if and when they have time like at other companies.
Lack luster story and quests, progression is on rails, no character customization and the itemization is dull. Bit of a let down overall. The defense is that the game doesn't REALLY start till nightmare difficulty, but that feels like a cop out to me.
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
Going to be as much of a steaming turd as Duke Nukem Forever was? Honestly, a lot of these much delayed sequels are turning out to be a waste of time for players.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Fun little tidbit. Guild Wars 2 stress test was tonight and it overlapped with D3 launch (started a few hours before D3 launch and ended a few hours after it).
When D3 launch moment came, you could see many people basically vanished from the game. You suddenly didn't have full servers anymore, structured PvP had a whole lot less games available and so on.
Considering that D3 launch was done terribly, I heard several guildies complain loudly on the voice comm about not being able to get into the game at all, and the fact that GW2 was only available for a few hours, you can tell just how immensely popular D3 is.
From my time in the beta, it's basically Diablo 2 again, with somewhat more interesting character build options (I was never a min-maxxer, though, so take this with a grain of salt) and updated graphics, which is basically all I was hoping for. :)
I've viewed this "controversy" with curiosity and it somewhat mimics progress vs tradition arguments. I'm not trolling but honestly looking for insight:
- Day after day we have people happy to play single player games in online systems without complaint from consoles to phones to even Facebook. Why is this game different? The explanations so far lacking because the most compelling one is that "Diablo 2" used to do it. That doesn't mean I don't think an offline mode would have been impossible but that it isn't required.
- Do we operate under the illusion that all PC games are portable? I remember trying to play "Diablo 2" which has an offline mode, on vacation and on airplanes and other places and it was a miserable experience. "Diablo 3" is not meant to be portable or played in an environment with spotty power or spotty connectivity. Why do people insist on this mode when it seems more like an environment and usability issue instead of a missing feature? I suspect people believe that if "Diablo 3" had an offline mode they could play it anywhere but experience has showed me with "Diablo 2" that never happens nor is worth it.
- Are we denying the advantages this tech brings just to enhance the argument of what it takes away? I like the idea of storing characters "on their systems" instead of my computer since I've lost "Diablo 2" saves when machines and hard drives die. I like validation of characters, items, hosted environments because I've also lost a ton of characters to just joining the wrong games. It is not impossible to support both a completely validated system and offline but I would always lean in supporting the validated system when it comes to active support.
Basically I'm unconvinced that an offline mode is valuable let alone an effective workaround. Even if "Diablo 3" had an offline mode, we'd still have an article on /. complaining about how Blizzard/Activision/Blizzard-Activition/Satan is evil and can't handle it. Blizzard needs to address connectivity issues and delivery on the features they said they were supporting.
If you read above, some people are finding it too simplistic and shallow, others can't even get on to play or are getting kicked off after ten minutes. Try Torchlight II.
Actually, I am...Level 18. Took 43 minutes to login, has run pretty well since then for my party of 4. We all did D1 & 2 together, so this is old and new with better graphics.
Won't comment on DRM, etc. Buy or not buy, choose you must.
For me, it's fun with friends playing a game.
I am my own gestalt.
What if you're in a place where Time Warner is the only broadband available? They're not exactly known for speed or reliability.
It's D2 without the part where you need a spreadsheet to make a character build (admittedly, for many people that's the most fun part of the game). You don't make any significant character choices beyond class (much like Guild Wars).
The gameplay seems a bit slower than D2, but that may just be low levels before all the gear speeds things up. The graphics are meh - nothing special or interesting there, just like the previous Diablos.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
How about I can whine about an always-on internet requirement just the same as you can whine about my whining? And how about I whine about it and not buy the game so that when the suits see the game sales are low they don't assume it's just because they didn't pay for enough advertising.
So far, i have bought a game that i cannot seem to play. It did take hours last night to get logged in, i played for a bit but it was bed time. Got some time today, but now the servers are down for patching....
So i paid 60.00 for a game i cant even play single player without the OK from blizzard.
So here is the thing, diablo 2 was a great game, the animations where awesome, the story was compelling and the game play was fun. I am not so sure you get any of these from 3.The animations are more drawings then anything else, the skills are all locked so you cant switch them easy; also, once again, here we are starting in tristan....its like imagination went out the window.
Its not to say its fun, the hour i got to play was fun...not diablo 2 fun, but fun; I could be very wrong about this game, act 2 might bring in some cool stuff....but with all the log in problems and having big brother blizzard controlling when i play a 60.00 game, i honestly suggest people dont buy it, Simply to stand up for what they are doing. If i would of realized that single player was going to make me log in, i wouldn't of ever bought this game.
Should of done my research, o well...hope nobody else falls in this trap.
Excellent. I was hoping for this.
How's the visual aesthetic? Did they WOW-bunny it? Or does it still look hellish?
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
Saying the graphics are nothing special these days means a vast improvement from before.
When's the last time you ran Diablo or Diablo II? Try it, and see...
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
Then move, or start complaining to the people that actually matter.
It's not like any of us can fix it for you.
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
+1 Hilarious. Bonus points, they still had to pay the transaction fee for the decline.
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
they're just whining
I wouldn't say wanting to control the product you bought, wanting to be free from being treated like a pirate, and wanting to be free from pointless, idiotic DRM (online single player mode) is "just whining." I'd say those are very valid criticisms.
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
Stop whining about needing an internet connection.
I'd say it's a valid criticism.
You see, different people value different things. Some people value being free from DRM, and others do not. The fact that you don't agree with their criticism doesn't make them wrong.
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
D2? Not so long ago. It was fine - and D3 is the same "fine", the graphics aren't bad or anything, just bland and boring. There are 100 "Diablo clones" out there, and quite a few of them have more interesting graphics than D3. Ever played Titan Quest? Gameplay is a total rip-off, but the graphics are great (mostly, it's the artwork choices, not the technology, I'd guess).
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
The important thing about the D3 launch is this:
People who bought the game online and pre-downloaded it with the advertising from Blizzard that they should (paraphrased) "download it early so you can play the minute it goes live," still cannot play the game.
its very valid - while I am fortunate enough to have a nicely working ADSL connection (except when it fails, like it did yesterday night)(and guess what I'll be wanting to do when I have no net? yup - play games) there are many people who have crap or next to no connections.
My mate lives a long way from the exchange, he gets 400kbps download. There was a TV program on the other week about a couple living in the middle of nowhere that couldn't even get that.
well.. they need it to control the amount of pokemons- er, I mean "unique" loot - in the game. gotta have 'em all!
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
The downtime for the login servers (again, to play a single-player campaign) has been extended to 3:30PM EDT.
At one point I was able to get into a queue (for my single-player campaign) but was randomly disconnected.
I could give a damn about duping and an exploited environment, I never played D2 online and I don't plan on playing D3 online, that's what I have WoW for.
I knew this going in, I was disappointed (I travel extensively, and it's rather difficult to find access points in the Southern US) since I wouldn't be able to play on-the-go, but I said 'well at least it'll be hella fun' when I'm home or at MOST of my destinations.
This is the first time I've broken down and actually purchased a DRM game of this type, and even though I realize that it's launch day, I'm still regretting it.
Don't park drunk, accidents cause people.
plenty of people were bitching about the drm because it prevented them completely from playing.... wtf do you do with a steady internet connection except bitch on forums if the login servers aren't working?
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
I think something that has been missed by posters so far on the DRM issue is the fact that, if/when my internet connection fails, often the first thing I do is go looking for single player games I have installed on the computer.
If you can't do that, it rather defeats the point of single player mode, at least to me. If the Internet connection is up I'm generally doing more productive things than playing games nowadays.
Fair enough - single player seems like it shouldn't be required. But from what I read about it, your single player character is tied into your account (same char when switching between multi player and single player). Sort of like an MMO - maybe done for hacking / cheat prevention - if all your character data is saved online on Blizzard's servers, then it makes hacking your character a lot harder, or near impossible.
I'm not saying the DRM isn't annoying for single player, but a 10-second check from my stable internet connection before playing a marathon session isn't going to make me stop purchasing the game, and neither is a few hours of downtime on launch day. But that's the alarmist reaction I'm seeing in "insightful" comments peppered on this thread.
Yes, it sucks if you have little or no internet, and I sympathize with you then. But I'd willing to bet 95%+ of the posters here have DSL / cable / better and just like to bitch about any and all DRM
Global warming and other natural disasters are a direct effect of the shrinking number of pirates - Gospel of the FSM
Lots of Porn!
~~"Of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~~Dennis Miller
It's May 15th and I'm going to rant, and you know why: Diablo.
I have a love/hate relationship with Blizzard. I love Diablo, but I absolutely LOATHE Blizzard as a developer.
First: Go here and page down to the Diablo section: http://us.blizzard.com/en-us/games/legacy/
Do you see the PSone version listed? No. And you won't see the PSone version of Warcraft II listed either! It's not as if those games got bad ratings either, both got ABOVE average ratings at the time. It's like Blizzard doesn't want to admit one of their premier franchises had a console release at all.
And for those who don't know, this is the PSone version:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yv5dQwCFWoQ
It actually plays better (and faster) with direct movement control. And it's the ONLY version to have French language support, not even the PC version has that. (also German and Swedish even in the US version)
Then they did Diablo II...which I've never played because it never got ported. This is D2 as it's called:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ea8Ma7qqQaQ
Like D1, it was isometric 2D and since it came out in 2000 the PS2 should have been able to handle a port easy. But Blizzard never did it, and I think the following is the reason why:
2001's, Baldur's Gate Dark Alliance:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=srBRB18mHEs
Notice how in the review, Diablo is mentioned? BGDA is a Diablo clone, and a very good one, with a true 3D engine with a rotatable camera. It was a VERY popular game. The company that made it, Snowblind, licensed the engine out and there were more similar games made a LOT more. Good times, good times. Blizzard simply couldn't release D2 on consoles with Snowblind having trumped them with their engine.
And as always Blizzard said, "Oh were not doing Diablo III yet, it''l be ready when it's ready"
And my thoughts were, "yeah, if you were still had theconsole developer get-up-and-go like in the old days D3 would have been out in 2002! Because the sequel comes out in 2 years or less or heads will roll. Lazy Bums."
It didn't come out in 2003, or 2004, or 2005, or 2006, etc etc. Really what were they doing? It's not like a developer can't develop an MMO AND single player games at the same time......Square-Enix did....twice.
So eventually D3 was announced in development, and eventually video was released in 2008.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3NR6XNYs8f4
When I was that video my first thought: "Did Blizzard buy Snowblind's engine, because it looks EXACTLY like a snowblind engine game on the PS2."
in 2010 they posted job listings for people with console experience for a Diablo-related concept. So I expected the game to be cross platform from the start But then Blizzard executives said things that implied that a console release wasn't certain, very very stupid things
One was reported to say that D3's gameplay "might" work on consoles. Might? It's rather funny that he said, "Might" Since
the original Diablo game was released for the PSone... in 1998. Doesn't he remember?
He also said that the controls might be an issue. Well now, considering D1 was released for the pre-dual shock PSone
I don't think that's a problem at all. Heck, the modern consoles have USB ports so a keyboard+ mouse control
option could be thrown in alongside a traditional controller one. In fact, having played both the PC and PSone versions of
Diablo, I can say that the control pad suits the game better because it's less stressful on the hands. I can play the PSone
version for far far longer without crippling hand fatigue/pain.
In an interview Alex Mayberry is quoted as saying: "We want to give console players the Diab
... who just didn't really like the game?
Maybe I'm just older and my tastes have changed, maybe I didn't give it enough of a chance, but for whatever reason I didn't really like Diablo 3.
I played in the Beta for a few weeks, on and off - it never really hooked me. It was prettier than Diablo 2, but it didn't seem graphically more impressive than WoW. The colors were wrong, too bright and bold - big departure from D1 and D2. The gameplay was... kinda boring and repetitive. I didn't really care why I was going to click these things to death, and even the act of clicking them to death got very tiresome very quickly.
The class system was stagnant and unfeatured, linear progression unlocks are dull - I did hear about using runes to change talents/skills, maybe that's where the spice is but I saw none of that. The enemies were very standard fare with zero challenge and no real hooks to keep me playing. Again, maybe that changed with the full release, but I just don't feel the need to pay $60 to find out.
Maybe I've been MMOing too much but I've come to expect a little more thought required and challenge from my games. Or maybe I'm just getting old. Either way I Loved Diablo 1 and 2, but this one just didn't have the magic juice in it for me.
"Not all who wander are lost" -- JRR Tolkien
Complaining because the item you bought doesn't work isn't whining.
It feels like the game is an excuse to have an auction house. At least the Beta felt that way.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
"I'm not sure why slashdot hates the DRM here so much."
Because it's people like you who allow corporations to strip us of our rights to own the products we buy by blinding buying their bullshit. Most older slashdotters remember when you owned the games you bought and could play them without the hassle of the nanny corporation to look over your shouldre 'authenticating' your copy every time you want to play a game YOU PAID FOR. If you're paying you deserve to own it, this idea that when you pay for a product it is 'never yours' and you should just bow down for a bunch of greedy corporations who don't give a fuck about you is just fucking DISTURBING.
Most intelligent people on slashdot don't like the way gaming is going. We all grew up during era's where we owned the games we bought (effectively) both console and PC. Even console games have been getting worse with 'already on disc dlc' and 'online passes' and other nonsense. The game industry is corrupt and out of control and it's people like you that tick us off.
As time as gone on DRM has gotten more intrusive and restrictive. Do you think it's just going to stop?
Really mods? Not seeing anything terribly insightful here...
I agree. I believe it's too obvious to be considered insightful.
Hacks / cheats.
Right. Punish everyone for that. Or you could just... separate online and offline characters.
There's a very absolutist position stance taken by many... that *all* DRM is inherently evil and they'll never buy any game with DRM.
I like to control the things I buy.
then quit whining about *all* DRM. Some is bad (Ubisoft), and some is barely noticable (Blizzard), it's not so black & white.
It's not so easy to make criticism go away. That's your opinion, and I have mine. To me, it's perfectly black and white.
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
The always on requirement in D3 is achieved by running the entire game world on the Battle.Net servers, so no dice.
For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
Dude, the N64 version of StarCraft was fucking awful - and I've played it. Controls and horrible and hard to use, the interface was terrible, and the game was laggy as shit.
And health orbs? Really? You're claiming that that's from Marvel Ultimate Alliance when games from the bloody 80's had that (on PC no less, not console)?Sounds like the lazy elitist might be you.
For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
Unfortunately as I learned last week when I bought a copy of Diablo II from the Blizzard store, that's not always the case; D2 isn't supported under OSX 10.7 and above. That's not Blizzard's fault, as it was Apple who removed support for PowerPC applications, but it's an exception to your argument.
As a Mac user I understand your point but I don't quite consider that an exception. Its not that Blizzard failed to support an existing product, its that Blizzard failed to port Diablo II from Mac OS / PowerPC to Mac OS X / Intel. The product did list PowerPC and Mac OS as requirements. The complication is not PowerPC to Intel, it is Mac OS to Mac OS X. Specifically moving from Mac OS's Carbon API to Mac OS X's Cocoa API. It really is porting to a new operating system despite both having "Mac OS" in their names.
But after not being able to play a single player game for the last two hour because the servers are not working, that is pretty terrible for a launch day.
No matter how unbalanced things might be at the start, you have to be able to PLAY the game!
It's certainly less dark and gothic than D1 and D2, but they do still have the characteristic diablo effects (i.e. bloated corpses that explode, disemboweled bodies, blood, bile, etc). The art style is different, but not necessarily in a bad way. It grows on you.
you mean, like how they're down right now and I can't play the game that I paid $60 bucks for. I buy about one game/year. So far this gaming year sucks. I can understand a release day rush, but if this happens again after this week I'm for sure never ever buying a single player game that depends on remote servers.
I'm old enough to know better. I feel stupid. I feel ashamed. I need to see my therapist...
damaged by dogma
How about the fact that this particular implementation of DRM is possibly the worst imaginable... being so beyond "inconvenient" that it renders the game completely unplayable.
A slight network hiccup while playing SINGLE PLAYER, and you're unceremoniously dumped out of the game, losing progress. SERIOUSLY?
Absolutely unacceptable.
- Spryguy
There are three kinds of people in this world: those that can count and those that can't
That's not how it works. If their servers go down for any reason, if the connection hiccups at any moment, you're kicked out of your single player game, losing progress.
Stop trying to defend this shit when it's clear you have no idea what you're talking about.
- Spryguy
There are three kinds of people in this world: those that can count and those that can't
Indeed. I've given it a couple hours today. Aside from server issues (irritating, but whatever...) I have no complaints and only praise.
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
But I'd willing to bet 95%+ of the posters here have DSL / cable / better and just like to bitch about any and all DRM
Right, because being annoyed with companies punishing their paying customers to try to screw over people who buy used games just like to whine. You're just a troll and one of these days when you go to play your favorite game and the company says "Sorry, the $60 you spent on that game is flushed down the toilet - we turned off the servers. Go fuck yourself." you'll finally learn why DRM is bad.
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
I wouldn't expect them to even take it out of the box since off-line single player isn't really their thing.
As time as gone on DRM has gotten more intrusive and restrictive while only inconveniencing paying customers.
FTFY. No pirate has ever been inconvenienced by these DRM schemes. Their product is free, better quality, and works all of the time.
Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
1. I am not a teenager, nor dumb.
2. that giant whooshing sound you heard was the joke going over your head.
I think it this was the first game in the series fewer people would be complaing about it. But as it's the third installment and the previous two were able to be played single player and offline they have created an expectation that this one would be also. With Diablo 2 there were roughly four play mode options:
True single player, nothing needed but your computer.
LAN multiplayer, you could create games with friends over the internet or any network, using characters from singleplayer.
Open Battlenet, same as LAN games but blizzard hosts the game for you.
Laddered Battlenet, games and characters hosted on blizzards servers.
My memory is a little fuzzy here and I think there might actually have been another battlenet mode where you had characters and games hosted on battlenet servers.
Anyways as you can see there was a lot of choices in Diablo 2 simply in how you wanted to play. Many people never played anything but singleplayer. Most of the obvious cheating you are complaining about was on the open game options. Where since the player has access to the save game files of course it's going to happen. But in the closed game options there was a lot less of that, cheating was limited to boting and duping via networking bugs. And the only case where another player cheating in those ways could actually hurt you was where you had opted in, by either joining/creating a public game or pvp'ing on hardcore.
In diablo 3 they've taken the most heavy handed approach to resolving all of the supposed ills of the previous games. All it'll really do though is slow down the development of bots and dupes, it's not going to stop them, well at least not the bots. In the mean time we get a game with less features than the game preceding it. One of my complaints is that even if the blizzard servers are up 100% of the time my internet connection is not. And justifying the inability of people to play their new game on launch day by saying some other game had a worse problem is not a valid excuse.
Moral quandaries aside, I am having a ton of fun in the game. The departure from a set skill tree has really paid off for me, I'm really enjoying tinkering with all the combinations. I got really disappointed with Diablo II due to the lack of viable builds you could make and getting burned for early bad choices. For me, this feels like a much better entry in the series.
Titan quest also had way more character customization in the skills department than any of the Diablo games.
My wife pre-ordered Diablo III. SC2 was annoying with the log-in requirements, but given everything I had read about the Zero Day issues, I asked her to send it back, unopened.
I'm not really a fan of game piracy. I keep all my PC games; dating from the mid-90s, I've got 500-700 PC titles tucked away into binders upon binders upon binders. Once upon a time I had the brilliant idea of putting all the activation codes into an excel file so that I could get rid of the boxes and manuals, but I lost that a decade ago - from time to time I've had to visit Megagames or other sites for a crack over the years, but I never felt bad about it because I always owned the game.
I think this is where I finally draw the line on piracy. When a game is unplayable in single player mode because of DRM, regardless of reason, temporary nature....I think that crosses a line. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow...but one day soon there will be a pirated, DRM free version of Diablo III. If people will build Everquest or WoW servers....if random would-be customers will donate money to an indie developer to recreate Asheron's Call 2 from the ground up years after the game shut down with no hope of Turbine releasing the code for it...then I imagine someone or a team of someones will muster up the energy to give us a version of Diablo III that we can play offline in single player mode.
Blizzard lost a $60 sale from me. The game is being returned, un-opened today. In the not too distant future, Usenet is going to get $20 from me.
Anything interesting written yet on this?
I did find:
http://wow.joystiq.com/2012/05/15/an-introduction-to-the-diablo-3-economy-for-wow-players/
and was surprised to see the 1 week lockout from launch for the sales.
I'm still surprised that they haven't run afoul of anti-gambling legislation and am curious as to what is in place to prevent money-laundering, &c.
That said, I'd still love to see an instance like to that of the short story ``Catacomb'' from _Dragon Magazine_ May 1985. For those who haven't read the story it begins here:
http://henrysstories.blogspot.com/2011/03/catacomb-part-1-of-5.html
William
Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
iTunes Store and DRM-free music: What you need to know
...My daily Slashdot digest mail said "Diablo III unleashed". Funny.
I am not devoid of humor.
I intend to play Diablo 3 on Blizzard servers with friends, never single player "offline". Therefore, the DRM has no negative impact for me. If you were hoping to play it on your own, offline, sure the DRM means the game isn't for you, but that doesn't make you somehow more intelligent, your preferences are just different. If we were talking about a game that has no online/community gameplay (so far as I know Assassin's Creed meets that description), then I am 100% with you, as in that case the DRM is certainly a problem. I would certainly like to see Blizzard allow offline single player (to accomodate those who want to play that way), but that doesn't bother me as much as people like you telling me I'm an idiot for buying a game for reasons that don't affect me.
My webcomic
That's unreasonable.
Do you expect a painter, or author, to keep up with small modifications (that you elect are required) 10 years after the sale? That hardly sounds reasonable at all.
Copyright allows them the sole right to distribute copyrighted material, it does not allow them the sole right to modifications. Once you have something in your possession, and copyrighted material is no different, you can modify to your hearts content.
What is prohibited is distributing the copyrighted work with said modifications, but nothing prevents you from explaining those modifications or releasing your own patches. The DMCA is often used to unethically block such modifications, but has nothing to do with expecting code updates 10 years later.
I honestly don't see how you can reasonably expect a developer to spend his/her time 10 years later to make updates simply because you think they are blocking your right to modify.
In spirit, I do agree that 10 years should be more than enough to profit from a game and that afterwards anybody can do anything with it. Might be difficult without source........
I didn't find it so. It was neat that every character was effectively 2 classes, but just like diablo, there were 2 or ways to make each skill tree work, and one optimal point distribution for each of those.
Plus of course, character customizaiton in Diablo is mostly about loot (which is why I'm not the biggest fan) and Titan Quest was far less rich in that regard.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
Hoping for the same regarding depth. After playing D2 for years (Hell, I'm building a summoner right now), I'm a bit afraid of a Godfather 3 scenario. The beta seemed nice, but I'll lay off the game until someone gives me a thumbs up about replayability and all.
Strangely, I never got into Torchlight at all. I don't think it's a bad game and there's nothing that really bugged me, as was the case a few times with Titan Quest (which I liked and finished a couple times, though), I just can't get myself interested.
I'm not sure how you would play it, though. Much of game is actually implemented in the server and not the client. You might be able to look at the art, but it's the server that sets the maps, orders the AI of the monsters, and many other basic things.
The End User License Agreement clearly states that we have not purchased a copy of the game, but a rather license to use it. While I disagree with their choice of legalese, I'm still having a ton of fun hacking & slashing with my buddies.
What else can happen when an unstoppable force collides with an immovable object?
1. I am not a teenager, nor dumb. 2. that giant whooshing sound you heard was the joke going over your head.
OMG, Did you hear that? It went over your head too! (Did you not realize I was actually commenting in support of your "joke"?). Let's face it, if people don't recognize your comment as funny, then it's probably not the public that is missing the joke.
Quartz Extreme and Core Image. Are there any other real reasons to spend all that money on generic hardware?
Nethack was all about the joy of learning what the dev team could throw at you. If "discovering new things" like which corpses to eat gave you trouble, then maybe a deep game like nethack just isn't for you. It's not everyone's cup of tea.
Also, Nethack can teach important life lessons. Like, you're taking way too damn long on level one. The hunger requirement is a motivational force to keep you going. This isn't WoW where you can kill the same pack of wolves until you hit level cap.