Best Diablo 3 Announcement reaction gifs ever...

[Vigo]

Blizzard has never advertised it as anything but an online game

From Blizzard:

"Under threat of a forum member's taser "of teh win," public relations staff explained that designed to be a revolutionary single-player and online role-playing experience, Diablo III will set players on a multitude of dynamically generated quests on the path to defeat the demonic forces of Diablo and his demon brothers Baal and Mephisto. Eight brand new and re-imagined character classes [zzap! aieee!] will be highly customizable in appearance and abilities, with 20 hero-specific skills per character and 10 shared abilities used to battle over 300 varieties of monsters in and an immersive 3D-graphics world.

Set in the massive worlds of Sanctuary, Hell, and the High Heavens, Diablo III will include a compelling single-player story mode, as well as fast-paced online play through an upgraded version of Blizzard's renowned online gaming service, Battle.netŪ."

http://www.planetdiablo.com/features/articles/d3-04012008/

Just saying.  

[CheffoJeffo]

WTF are you kids all on about ?

It ain't like this is Robotron or anything that matters!

Get offa my lawn!

 

[Hoopz]

WTF are you kids all on about ?

It ain't like this is Robotron or anything that matters!

Get offa my lawn!

 

You mean Centipede.

Where's Donk been lately?  That should raise his dander.  

[kahlid74]

That sounds like a really important argument, kahlid.

 

World Peace, Food for all, Water for all and Why diablo 3 shouldn't be thought of as having a single player game!  Sounds like my priorities are right on track.

so if I play the game from beginning to end by myself its not a single player experience?

So if I play an instance in WoW from Beginning to End by myself, is that a single player experience?  Is WoW then a single player game?  Single player game no, but experience, yes.  So now we're into semantics.  Diablo 3 provides a single player experience but it is not a single player game.  It's an MMO with instanced single player experiences while providing many of the large collective MMO benefits (AH, Multiplayer, Friends system, groupings, etc.)

Once you realize it's an MMO you get over the always on they want.  It's an MMO, it has to be always on.

[CheffoJeffo]

So now we're into semantics.

Even Captain Pedantic would be embarrassed.

[kahlid74]

So now we're into semantics.

Even Captain Pedantic would be embarrassed.

hmmm?

[shmokes]

Y'all are barking up the wrong tree. By endorsing server-side DRM checks for multiplayer games but condemning it for single-player games you're shooting yourself in the foot. You're seducing reducing your argument to one of inconvenience, i.e., since you already have to be online for an online game the DRM check causes no inconvenience and is, hence, okay. But that's a tacit admission that online DRM check for a single-player game is also okay so long as it causes no inconvenience. Which is where your argument really begins to lose steam because you have an always-on internet connection and the DRM check happens in the background without you ever even being aware that it happened.

By saying there's a difference between online and offline games you are effectively endorsing the DRM check for both.


edit: lol, typo

[Vigo]

1) I don't think anyone here arguing anti-single player DRM check is actually Pro online gaming DRM checking. Maybe ok with checking against hacks and cheats, but that is different from DRM.

2) You are still missing the point that people do not have an online connection in all cases. I might have online at home with my laptop, but not on the bus, a plane, my parent's house or at my office. If I like to play online at home with my $50 mouse, but play sinle player on the road since I only have the touchpad, the DRM is screwing the pooch there.

[Malenko]

Once you realize it's an MMO you get over the always on they want.  It's an MMO, it has to be always on.

Man you are just a troll bait chef, kudos!  Scroll up and read what vigo posted, I'll wait.





Done? YAY! Lets get back to semantics, you say its an MMO? MMO meaning Massively multiplayer online?

http://www.diablowiki.net/Diablo_3_Basics

The main focus of Diablo III is co-op PvE style play. Up to four players (yes, just four) will join up in a game and play together, and players in the same game are now always friendly and in the same party. There is no non-consensual PvP in Diablo III, and no way to "go hostile" in a PvE game. (All PvP takes place in the Arena, a feature that will not be ready for use upon Diablo 3's launch.)

I hope my PC can handle 3 other players all at the same time. As for WoW, yes it counts, if you can pick some sort of mode where its single player and you don't allow others to join you game or effect your world at all.

[Malenko]

By saying there's a difference between online and offline games you are effectively endorsing the DRM check for both.

You're just reading more than whats posted , that's all.  To me , it'd be stupid not to do some sort of online check for a online multiplayer game, if you can only play it online why wouldn't they validate? I would hope the server checking is more to stop hacking and cheating, which is supposed to be the purpose of what blizzard is doing. I already said I'm gonna be pissed when I try to play D3 and cant because my ISP sucks donkey dick. I don't recall anyone saying "Man it'd be ok if they server side DRM checked my single player game if it was convenient!"

[shmokes]

I don't recall anyone saying "Man it'd be ok if they server side DRM checked my single player game if it was convenient!"

That's because you're only paying attention to what is explicitly stated, rather than also at the statements' implications. When someone says, "I don't mind online checks for online games because I already have to be online," what the mean is, "The DRM in this instance does not impose any additional inconvenience on me." It means they don't see anything fundamentally wrong with the DRM checks, else they would oppose said checks for online games as well.

[kalars123]

@Malenko  Look man i understand that you may want to play it when your out and about that's cool, the point i'm trying to get across is that the online check, is not a check all game modes single player or otherwise is all online it isn't like D1/D2 where you had the entire game on your computer and you just logged in to play online, it's a client/server type of game like an MMO the only asset's you have on your computer is the base game engine and graphic assets everything else is generated server side all the AI,loot drops, map layout...ect they did it this way to prevent dupes/hacks/bots...ect that's all i'm trying to get across.

And as for DRM checks for single player/multi-player, online/offline I don't have an issue with them at all as long as they are not intrusive or interfere with the gameplay in other words more like steam and less like ubisoft

[Malenko]

Then you're just twisting what people say into what you want to hear, you are a lawyer and its in your nature . If I have to be online to play an online game that's one thing, if I have to be online to play a game that could be played while offline, that's another.


schmokie-pie, I'm not arguing with you we're pretty much on the same side. I dont really like any sort of DRM, I'm not an ---uvula--- pirate like Fallacy. I spend way to much of my hard earned money not by stealing stuff but by buying. I even buy humble indie bundles that I dont expect to play just to support developers. I wish big companies trusted me like I'm forced to trust them. If you're ever in Delaware I'll kick back with you and buy you some beers, its all good bro.  

[kahlid74]

Once you realize it's an MMO you get over the always on they want.  It's an MMO, it has to be always on.

Man you are just a troll bait chef, kudos!  Scroll up and read what vigo posted, I'll wait.

Done? YAY! Lets get back to semantics, you say its an MMO? MMO meaning Massively multiplayer online?
http://www.diablowiki.net/Diablo_3_Basics

The main focus of Diablo III is co-op PvE style play. Up to four players (yes, just four) will join up in a game and play together, and players in the same game are now always friendly and in the same party. There is no non-consensual PvP in Diablo III, and no way to "go hostile" in a PvE game. (All PvP takes place in the Arena, a feature that will not be ready for use upon Diablo 3's launch.)

I hope my PC can handle 3 other players all at the same time. As for WoW, yes it counts, if you can pick some sort of mode where its single player and you don't allow others to join you game or effect your world at all.

I'm not on the same page as you with the troll bait, but to each their own.  We should start advertising WoW as single player because it satisfies your above statement when instancing. 

For people with poor internet connections it sucks, no doubt about it.  My next question would then be do you avoid MMO's all together because of said connection troubles or have you tried them and experienced a horrific time trying to play and continually getting disconnected?

[kahlid74]

Here's an interesting interview from Jay Wilson, the Game Director of Diablo 3 who basically says they see it as a multiplayer game primarily.  Very interesting to hear why he says they chose some things over others.  I also found it funny he described the single player experience just like WoW lol.  He also says those with poor internet connections will be just fine as they've built in way to "hide" latency issues but I'll wait to see that in the real world.

http://games.on.net/article/15544/Video_Interview_Jay_Wilson_On_Diablo_IIIs_Ladders_Latency_Piracy_and_More

Here's an extended interview too that's got lots of good stuff.

http://www.ausgamers.com/features/read/3205698

[Malenko]

[shmokes]

What the hell does that picture have to do with the message on the poster? And how is the moment described in the poster "awkward"? Frustrating, sure. Irritating, of course. But awkward? Everything about that poster is retarded. Please delete it.

[Malenko]

What the hell does that picture have to do with the message on the poster? And how is the moment described in the poster "awkward"? Frustrating, sure. Irritating, of course. But awkward? Everything about that poster is retarded. Please delete it.

if I would have known you hated it so much I would have posted it four times.

Also,
http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/that-awkward-moment

That awkward moment when the know it all doesnt seem to know it all  

Is this one easier for you to get?

[CheffoJeffo]

if I would have known you hated it so much I would have posted it four times.

 

[shmokes]

http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/that-awkward-moment

That awkward moment when the know it all doesnt seem to know it all  

No . . . you misunderstand. I know what an awkward moment is. The thing you described just isn't one.

[Malenko]

No . . . you misunderstand. I know what an awkward moment is. The thing you described just isn't one.

well now then you're half way there, go learn what a MEME is.



EDIT: I don't think you understand, I didn't make that picture.

[CheffoJeffo]

What I don't understand is why shmokes was so pissed about it (and I write that knowing that I have gotten unreasonably pissed about things in the past).

[Malenko]

What I don't understand is why shmokes was so pissed about it (and I write that knowing that I have gotten unreasonably pissed about things in the past).

me either.

[CheffoJeffo]

Dare I bump for the fourth posting ?

[shmokes]

I know what a meme is. But the meme has to be used properly or it doesn't work. It doesn't work to say, "That Awkward Moment when I was in a hurry but kept hitting red lights," or, "That Awkward Moment when the 9-1-1 operator said '9 1 1 emergency, hold please'." Because the whole point is to follow, "That awkward moment when," with an awkward moment.

[shmokes]

What I don't understand is why shmokes was so pissed about it (and I write that knowing that I have gotten unreasonably pissed about things in the past).

Lmao . . . I wasn't pissed. My humor tends to be dry. I wouldn't seriously ask someone to "please delete" a picture because I thought it sucked. If anything I'd actually be a little bit pissed if he listened to me and deleted the thing, because then it would be gone (since I didn't quote Melenko's post in mine) and my post would have lost context.

[Malenko]

I know what a meme is. But the meme has to be used properly or it doesn't work. It doesn't work to say, "That Awkward Moment when I was in a hurry but kept hitting red lights," or, "That Awkward Moment when the 9-1-1 operator said '9 1 1 emergency, hold please'." Because the whole point is to follow, "That awkward moment when," with an awkward moment.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/awkward
definition #4

Also,

for a change of pace.

[shmokes]

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/awkward
definition #4

http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/grasping+at+straws

Except . . . that's not the definition on which the meme is based.

[CheffoJeffo]

I know what a meme is. But the meme has to be used properly or it doesn't work. It doesn't work to say, "That Awkward Moment when I was in a hurry but kept hitting red lights," or, "That Awkward Moment when the 9-1-1 operator said '9 1 1 emergency, hold please'." Because the whole point is to follow, "That awkward moment when," with an awkward moment.

Well played ... Mr Pocket Dialer. 

 

 

[Malenko]

http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/grasping+at+straws

Except . . . that's not the definition on which the meme is based.

I didnt invent the MEME or the picture, sometimes you just gotta look at something and laugh, not (over) analyze.

[CheffoJeffo]

For everybody that is locked out of Diablo 3, I am having a lot of fun with Legend Of Grimrock, which is absolutely designed as a single-player game without any dial-home-style protection.

And the price is perfect.

[Samstag]

I've been playing Titan Quest, a diablo clone set in ancient Greece.  Plenty of loot with no server overloads.

[Samstag]

My favorite Diablo 3 "review" so far.

[Hoopz]

My favorite Diablo 3 "review" so far.

Hilarious article.   

[kahlid74]

It's a fun game, I say as I depart my cave of game dwelling goodness.  The difficulty doesn't scale they way they wanted it too and the people leveling have clearly shown that nothing short of 72 hours of straight game playing will stop them from defeating all difficulties as fast as possible. 

The servers going down was annoying but alas, in our world obsessed with "I want it now" what would we expect people to do?  I'm pleased.  The game plays great.  The items are great.  The feel of Diablo is back and the story (what little of it exists) continues to be fleshed out.

I'm happy with my purchase.

[shmokes]

It's a fun game, I say as I depart my cave of game dwelling goodness.  The difficulty doesn't scale they way they wanted it too and the people leveling have clearly shown that nothing short of 72 hours of straight game playing will stop them from defeating all difficulties as fast as possible. 

The servers going down was annoying but alas, in our world obsessed with "I want it now" what would we expect people to do?  I'm pleased.  The game plays great.  The items are great.  The feel of Diablo is back and the story (what little of it exists) continues to be fleshed out.

I'm happy with my purchase.

There's so much self-contradiction there it's hard to know where to start. Nothing short of 72 hours of straight game playing will stop them . . . ? So 72 hours of straight game playing WILL stop them? I'm honestly not sure what your first paragraph means.

In our world of "I want it now" the thing we would expect is for Blizzard to anticipate server strain and provide appropriate capacity. Obviously. Jesus, it's not like they were hit with a DDoS. They were hit with EXACTLY what was expected. We're talking about the company behind BY FAR the biggest online videogame in history. It's not like they were caught with their pants down. There's no excuse.

And how do you in the same sentence describe the story as both "what little of it exists" and "fleshed out"? Those seem like almost opposite things. Don't get me wrong. A game doesn't need a strong, fleshed out narrative to be fun. But are you sure Diablo has a "fleshed out" story?

[kahlid74]

There's so much self-contradiction there it's hard to know where to start. Nothing short of 72 hours of straight game playing will stop them . . . ? So 72 hours of straight game playing WILL stop them? I'm honestly not sure what your first paragraph means.

The idea is that playing the game straight for 72 hours would cause them to need sleep/sustenance forcing them to stop.  On the subreddit of Diablo the guys/gals who got to level 60/inferno in two days basically played 24/7.  So it was more a figure of speech that nothing short of the limits of the human body would stop them from reaching the end game as fast as possible.  No coding/additional difficulties by Blizzard would prevent them from reaching the end game.

In our world of "I want it now" the thing we would expect is for Blizzard to anticipate server strain and provide appropriate capacity. Obviously. Jesus, it's not like they were hit with a DDoS. They were hit with EXACTLY what was expected. We're talking about the company behind BY FAR the biggest online videogame in history. It's not like they were caught with their pants down. There's no excuse.

I've got a bit of experience with data centers and traffic and I'll say this, traffic does not always behave the way you anticipate it to.  There are also budgetary factors at play here and I've been down that road too.  What is experienced on a launch day of a hot game posses similarities to a DDoS.  I've been on the ground in data centers when events like this occur and it's a fun/terrifying experience.

And how do you in the same sentence describe the story as both "what little of it exists" and "fleshed out"? Those seem like almost opposite things. Don't get me wrong. A game doesn't need a strong, fleshed out narrative to be fun. But are you sure Diablo has a "fleshed out" story?

I'll clarify.  In a game, Diablo, where story was never been one of the strong points and where much of the history of said game has not been told, it's nice to see Diablo 3 trying to tell a lot of those back stories such as the story about the high heavens and the story about all of the lords of hell.  I didn't say it was fleshed out, I said they continued too.  

[kahlid74]

I played in Saturday on a friend's laptop.  The zombie thing bores me to no end but I'm still twitching trying to resist going out and buying this thing. 

It gets better once you get out of Act I.  2/3/4 are all jam packed with new monsters and you don't have to really worry about Zombies until you go back to Act I on NM/Hell/Inferno.

[shmokes]

I've got a bit of experience with data centers and traffic and I'll say this, traffic does not always behave the way you anticipate it to.  There are also budgetary factors at play here and I've been down that road too.  What is experienced on a launch day of a hot game posses similarities to a DDoS.  I've been on the ground in data centers when events like this occur and it's a fun/terrifying experience.

They had preorders and sales projections to gauge what the server demand would be during the launch week. Nobody preorders a game or buys it on launch day only to put it in a drawer and play it a month later. Especially a game with the feverish anticipation of something like the Diablo franchise. And there were no budgetary factors at play (or at least there should not have been). We're talking about a game that will make hundreds of millions of dollars in profit for Blizzard/Activision. Hundreds of millions. You build out the appropriate server capacity for a game like that. And to deliberately fail to do so because you know that after the launch-week server demand will be dramatically lower would be a terrible business decision. Look at all the bad will and negative press this has generated. You meet launch week demand and then repurpose excess server capacity later on. You don't leave millions of users unable to play their new game so you can squeeze out a few extra pennies of short-term profit. That's ---smurfing--- retarded.

[Hoopz]

I've got a bit of experience with data centers and traffic and I'll say this, traffic does not always behave the way you anticipate it to.  There are also budgetary factors at play here and I've been down that road too.  What is experienced on a launch day of a hot game posses similarities to a DDoS.  I've been on the ground in data centers when events like this occur and it's a fun/terrifying experience.

They had preorders and sales projections to gauge what the server demand would be during the launch week. Nobody preorders a game or buys it on launch day only to put it in a drawer and play it a month later. Especially a game with the feverish anticipation of something like the Diablo franchise. And there were no budgetary factors at play (or at least there should not have been). We're talking about a game that will make hundreds of millions of dollars in profit for Blizzard/Activision. Hundreds of millions. You build out the appropriate server capacity for a game like that. And to deliberately fail to do so because you know that after the launch-week server demand will be dramatically lower would be a terrible business decision. Look at all the bad will and negative press this has generated. You meet launch week demand and then repurpose excess server capacity later on. You don't leave millions of users unable to play their new game so you can squeeze out a few extra pennies of short-term profit. That's ---smurfing--- retarded.

Stupid or not, it's what they did.  And hence why a lot of people won't buy single player games that require constant internet access.  People can argue the semantics of it being single player or not, but a lot of people won't drop $60 for a game that you can't play unless the server is functional at the time that they want to play.  Probably not enough people to make a difference for Blizzard to change anything though.