[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software
Usa Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

alt.games.warcraft

cracked's take on DIII

k

5/18/2012 2:46:00 AM

http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-reasons-diablo-iii-represents-gamings-annoyi...
(language warning - it's cracked.com so expect offense ;)

84 Answers

Blackheart

5/18/2012 8:47:00 AM

0

On May 17, 10:46 pm, "k" <fela...@PING.com> wrote:
> http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-reasons-diablo-iii-represents......
> (language warning - it's cracked.com so expect offense ;)

Anyone that wasn't expecting a good old fashioned Blizzard Fuck Up,
deserves what they got.

Enjoy your DRM.

Mamesick

5/18/2012 9:25:00 AM

0



"Blackheart - US - PvP" <blackheart666_2000@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1f7a8a0b-0dc5-4505-8d75-41abeefad551@d6g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...
> On May 17, 10:46 pm, "k" <fela...@PING.com> wrote:
>> http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-reasons-diablo-iii-represents......
>> (language warning - it's cracked.com so expect offense ;)
>
> Anyone that wasn't expecting a good old fashioned Blizzard Fuck Up,
> deserves what they got.
>
> Enjoy your DRM.

Oh well I'm playing it and I'm happy with it, when you play it then judge
it...

Ok the servers were busy the first 1 hour after midnight and that's all that
I can complain about but seriously if that's stopping you from playing then
LOL.

Who doesnt have constant internet access these days? And a lot of the
complainers just complain cause they cant crack/pirate the game for offline
play since it needs to be connected to blattle.net.

warulak

5/18/2012 7:03:00 PM

0

On Friday, May 18, 2012 4:25:21 AM UTC-5, Shammy wrote:
>
> Who doesnt have constant internet access these days? And a lot of the
> complainers just complain cause they cant crack/pirate the game for offline
> play since it needs to be connected to blattle.net.

Which I can understand why they want their game not be hackable but after
paying for the game and getting home and trying to play sortta sucks.

Can't even play single player without b-net.

Mamesick

5/18/2012 7:14:00 PM

0



"Warulak" <warulak@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:22138fea-de3b-4c04-af0e-92d4c51dc55f@googlegroups.com...
> On Friday, May 18, 2012 4:25:21 AM UTC-5, Shammy wrote:
>>
>> Who doesnt have constant internet access these days? And a lot of the
>> complainers just complain cause they cant crack/pirate the game for
>> offline
>> play since it needs to be connected to blattle.net.
>
> Which I can understand why they want their game not be hackable but after
> paying for the game and getting home and trying to play sortta sucks.
>
> Can't even play single player without b-net.

I'm playing in europe and I played a LOT... so much in fact that I think I
played at least 12-14h each day last 3 days, I finished the whole game on my
barbarian on normal and now I'm playing witch doctor on normal and I'm done
half way and the ONLY time I was unable to play was from midnight to 1 am on
launch day. There was once a realm restart and that is it was over in 2 min.

warulak

5/18/2012 8:04:00 PM

0

> I'm playing in europe and I played a LOT... so much in fact that I think I
> played at least 12-14h each day last 3 days, I finished the whole game on my
> barbarian on normal and now I'm playing witch doctor on normal and I'm done
> half way and the ONLY time I was unable to play was from midnight to 1 am on
> launch day. There was once a realm restart and that is it was over in 2 min.

The American servers were hit alot harder. 5-6 hours at a time of down time.

Still a single player game should not be reliant on network servers.

Ian Noble

5/18/2012 9:40:00 PM

0

On Fri, 18 May 2012 10:46:11 +0800, "k" <felafel@PING.com> wrote:

>http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-reasons-diablo-iii-represents-gamings-annoyi...
>(language warning - it's cracked.com so expect offense ;)

The 20th century called - it wants its dial-up back.

(Central servers means little or no dupping and item hacking, and
hopefully a reasonable in-game economy. I can live with that.)

Cheers - Ian

Ian Noble

5/19/2012 1:07:00 PM

0

On Fri, 18 May 2012 13:03:34 -0700 (PDT), Warulak <warulak@gmail.com>
wrote:

>> I'm playing in europe and I played a LOT... so much in fact that I think I
>> played at least 12-14h each day last 3 days, I finished the whole game on my
>> barbarian on normal and now I'm playing witch doctor on normal and I'm done
>> half way and the ONLY time I was unable to play was from midnight to 1 am on
>> launch day. There was once a realm restart and that is it was over in 2 min.
>
>The American servers were hit alot harder. 5-6 hours at a time of down time.
>
>Still a single player game should not be reliant on network servers.

You're not playing a single-player game. There is no single-player
mode in D3; it just feels like it. What you call a single-player game
is actually a (semi-private) four-player game in which it happens that
you're (currently) the only player.

I say "currently", and only "semi-private", because, at any minute,
anyone on your friends list can decide join what you thought was
"your" game. They don't need permission or a password; they can click
a button marked "Fast join".

Whether I like *that* is another matter - frankly, I think it's
abysmal, and the sooner that Blizzard understand that people need to
be able to play in private occasionally, and implement an invisibility
mode, the better - but right now, it happens to be the case.


To be able to do what you and others seem to be asking, Blizzard would
have had to develop either:
- a single-player, full verion of the game that could run stand-alone
alongside the server version. That's bug-prone and expensive, and of
no obvious benefit to Blizzard - so not going to happen.
or:
- a near-serverless architecture in which the full game runs on, and
only on, everyone's machines (look at D2). That's hack-and dup-prone
(look at D2). Ignoring other considerations, that's in particular an
incredibly bad design if you want, say, to provide an auction-house
that people can use and trust - let alone one where you can actually
sell that incredibly rare drop for real money (so, again, not going to
happen).

Central servers have other benefits; they offload compute cyclesgame
cycles, mean that quite a lot of game bugs can be fix transparently,
without needing to roll out a patch, and make the game effectively
unstealable. Personally I don't see any of those things as downsides.
If there's one *big* problem in my book, it's that they also guarantee
a limited life - because once Blizzard decide to pull the plug on the
game, that's it - and I have no control over or input to when that may
be.

The other, more obvious down side is that, yes, when the servers are
having problems, or being maitained, or your internet connection is
down, you can't play. But frankly, that's such a small portion of the
time that I can live with it.

Cheers - Ian

Catriona R

5/19/2012 9:37:00 PM

0


On Fri, 18 May 2012 21:13:57 +0200, "Shammy" <noone@nothing.com>
wrote:

>I'm playing in europe and I played a LOT... so much in fact that I think I
>played at least 12-14h each day last 3 days, I finished the whole game on my
>barbarian on normal and now I'm playing witch doctor on normal and I'm done
>half way and the ONLY time I was unable to play was from midnight to 1 am on
>launch day. There was once a realm restart and that is it was over in 2 min.

Yeah I had no problem after the first hour after launch, maybe took
3-4 attempts to login a couple of times after that but really, no
hardship. Only reason I've not completed normal is a sudden family
illness which took me off visiting hospitals the past few days... some
stuff's more important than games, however good the game might be!
--
EU-Draenor:
Sagart (85 Undead Priest) Tairbh (85 Tauren Druid)
Buinne (85 Troll Shaman) Eilnich (85 Blood Elf Warlock)
Ruire (85 Blood Elf Paladin) Balgair (85 Human Rogue)
EU-Earthen Ring:
Iarnaigvi (85 Human Warlock) - Ironman Challenge completed!

Catriona R

5/19/2012 9:42:00 PM

0


On Sat, 19 May 2012 14:07:06 +0100, Ian Noble
<ipnoble@killspam.o2.co.uk> wrote:

>I say "currently", and only "semi-private", because, at any minute,
>anyone on your friends list can decide join what you thought was
>"your" game. They don't need permission or a password; they can click
>a button marked "Fast join".

You can turn that off in the options. Which I'm glad about; I only
have two friends on real ID, both of whom I'm sure would respect me
and not barge in, but still, it's not a concept I'm too happy with,
letting people just jump in without being invited first.

>Whether I like *that* is another matter - frankly, I think it's
>abysmal, and the sooner that Blizzard understand that people need to
>be able to play in private occasionally, and implement an invisibility
>mode, the better - but right now, it happens to be the case.

Totally agree it needs an invisible mode; the lack of one is why I
only have two people on Real ID - my partner, who's sitting right next
to me, and an old friend I've known and gamed with since before WoW
was even launched. Nobody else gets my Real ID, however nice they may
be, and since BattleTags work the same way without invisibility, same
will apply to them.

>The other, more obvious down side is that, yes, when the servers are
>having problems, or being maitained, or your internet connection is
>down, you can't play. But frankly, that's such a small portion of the
>time that I can live with it.

Agree there. It's a nuisance, yes, and I'd like it to act like a true
singleplayer game, since I'm not too interested in most of the
multiplayer aspect, but I see why they've done it that way and it
doens't hurt me much, so long as they keep the servers reliable.
--
EU-Draenor:
Sagart (85 Undead Priest) Tairbh (85 Tauren Druid)
Buinne (85 Troll Shaman) Eilnich (85 Blood Elf Warlock)
Ruire (85 Blood Elf Paladin) Balgair (85 Human Rogue)
EU-Earthen Ring:
Iarnaigvi (85 Human Warlock) - Ironman Challenge completed!

Ian Noble

5/20/2012 7:53:00 AM

0

On Sat, 19 May 2012 22:41:57 +0100, Catriona R
<catrionarNOSPAM@totalise.co.uk> wrote:

>
>On Sat, 19 May 2012 14:07:06 +0100, Ian Noble
><ipnoble@killspam.o2.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>I say "currently", and only "semi-private", because, at any minute,
>>anyone on your friends list can decide join what you thought was
>>"your" game. They don't need permission or a password; they can click
>>a button marked "Fast join".
>
>You can turn that off in the options. Which I'm glad about; I only
>have two friends on real ID, both of whom I'm sure would respect me
>and not barge in, but still, it's not a concept I'm too happy with,
>letting people just jump in without being invited first.

So you can - I'd missed that. Thanks. I'm still finding stuff in the
options that I hadn't noticed.

I didn't use Real ID at all, for precisely this sort of reason. It
seems I'm going to need my RL friends as Battle.net friends as well if
we're to play together, though.

Cheers - Ian