Diablo 3, probably sticking to US servers for sure.
RPG Diablo III v2, Q2 2012
RPG Diablo III v2, Q2 2012
|
|
Aug 6 2011, 12:43 AM
|
![]() ![]() ![]()
Junior Member
369 posts Joined: Jun 2005 |
Diablo 3, probably sticking to US servers for sure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 6 2011, 12:48 AM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
3,809 posts Joined: Sep 2007 From: Jakarta |
Blizzard responds to complaints over Diablo 3 connection requirement
![]() QUOTE Diablo 3 requires a constant internet connection -- a decision that has caused some strong reactions from folks looking to play the game solo, or those pushing against overly demanding DRM schemes. MTV spoke with Robert Bridenbecker, the Vice President of Online Technologies at Blizzard to get the developer's side of the story. "Internally I don't think [always-on DRM] ever actually came up when we talked about how we want connections to operate. Things that came up were always around the feature-set, the sanctity of the actual game systems like your characters," said Bridenbecker. "You're guaranteeing that there are no hacks, no dupes. All of these things were points of discussion, but the whole copy protection, piracy thing, that's not really entering into why we want to do it." Bridenbecker goes on to mention that Diablo 2 offline characters couldn't be used online, which got messy for players and the developer, so this time they decided to "just keep everything clean." As for those looking to play alone, they don't have to interact with any other online players if they don't want to -- but they'll still need that internet connection. Source: Joystiq |
|
|
Aug 6 2011, 01:23 AM
|
![]() ![]() ![]()
Junior Member
308 posts Joined: Dec 2004 |
blizzard never go travelling to countries without internet problems
they dont understand the pain |
|
|
Aug 6 2011, 02:26 AM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
760 posts Joined: Aug 2006 From: coming back through stratosphere |
QUOTE(Nosferatu @ Aug 6 2011, 01:23 AM) dont you know they r making the game based on what they(blizz) like/dislike, not what we(gamers) want?QUOTE "Internally I don't think [always-on DRM] ever actually came up when we talked about how we want connections to operate. Things that came up were always around the feature-set, the sanctity of the actual game systems like your characters," said Bridenbecker. "You're guaranteeing that there are no hacks, no dupes. All of these things were points of discussion, but the whole copy protection, piracy thing, that's not really entering into why we want to do it." source blizz make it sound promising like if they enforce DRM there will be no hack, dupe, bot... come on, look at the current D2 bnet, dominated by bots farming elites & runes. even in the realm lobby is flooded by spambots selling items for cash. also not to forget infamous SOJ duping glitch? Always-online DRM will ensure no hacks, dupes, bots huh? LOL and they did admit, the purpose of DRM is not because of piracy, but to provide a fair gameplay among the players? so whats the point for forcing the single player mode to go DRM? to provide a fair gameplay comparing to who? myself? yes, in mmo it is best to enforce such rules to protect the other players, no botting, duping etc. in single player? what makes te different if i have a lvl10 char with 2 soj? (soj is min lvl29) how unfair would it be?? to the 1st boss blood raven in bloodmoor? QUOTE "All of these things were points of discussion, but the whole copy protection, piracy thing, that's not really entering into why we want to do it." now, they are so concerned making it always-online to protect DRM (DIGITAL RIGHTS MANAGEMENT), ensuring no hacking. yet, they would care less about piracy, copy protect. since when piracy isnt one of the the biggest threat against DRM (not only to pc games, also DVD, music album, softwares, the whole digital media industry) if they can live with piracy while talking about DRM, what makes duping an ingame item a DRM concern? damn, what a bullshit. This post has been edited by yamato: Aug 6 2011, 03:42 AM |
|
|
Aug 6 2011, 02:28 AM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
629 posts Joined: Jan 2003 From: Penang |
woot new thread, forget all the squabbles over at the old treads, start some constructive discussion that actually pertain to the game mechanics, so what you guys think of the new Rune System
http://www.diablofans.com/topic/26476-runi...post__p__624097 QUOTE Overall, this theory of Blizzard’s isn’t particularly earth-shattering. Runes will still be placed in skills to alter their functionality in the same way we’re used to. They’ll still be item drops off of monsters, but the team didn’t think that Runes felt like items in the classic Diablo sense. There was no variation, no randomization. A given Rune-Skill combination always produced the same result, so long as the level of the Rune was constant. In addition to this, when moused over, the UI for Runes simply displayed the effect it had on each of your active skills. During the internal alpha testing, they found that this became a nightmare point of comparison and, after a while, just got to be frustrating for the players. To rectify these issues, they came up with the idea of having Runes drop “unattuned.” This basically means that when a Rune drops, it’s just plain and grey and doesn’t have any specific effect on your skills. Once you socket the rune into your skill, however, it becomes attuned to that skill, providing it a bonus based on the Rune type that it randomly rolls. In addition, they are considering adding an additional random stat bonus – much like the charm system of the now-scrapped Talisman – to attuned Runes. Bashiok had this to say about the new system I am not particularly happy about the random stats thingy, like when you get some rank 7 runes, after u socket it, turns out to have some crappy stats...which is no use to you or anybody else...kinda wasted the time spent of farming the rune.. This post has been edited by SoLiD: Aug 6 2011, 02:31 AM |
|
|
Aug 6 2011, 03:25 AM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
5,366 posts Joined: Jan 2007 From: KL Malaysia |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 6 2011, 03:44 AM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
518 posts Joined: Jul 2011 |
trivia: did you guys know that all three heroes in the first Diablo died and met very depressing ends? After the defeat of Diablo, the Sorcerer went mad in his search of the Summoner, and finally became the Summoner himself only to be killed by the heroes in Diablo 2. The Rogue returned to home, only to be corrupted by Andariel and became Bloodraven who was also killed by the heroes in Diablo 2. And the Warrior, as we all know, placed Diablo's soul stone on his forehead, and consequently became possessed and slowly transforming into Diablo himself, who was also killed by the heroes in Diablo 2.
|
|
|
Aug 6 2011, 04:02 AM
|
![]() ![]() ![]()
Junior Member
378 posts Joined: Feb 2008 From: Kuching, Sarawak |
QUOTE(Seeker_of_Truths @ Aug 6 2011, 03:44 AM) trivia: did you guys know that all three heroes in the first Diablo died and met very depressing ends? After the defeat of Diablo, the Sorcerer went mad in his search of the Summoner, and finally became the Summoner himself only to be killed by the heroes in Diablo 2. The Rogue returned to home, only to be corrupted by Andariel and became Bloodraven who was also killed by the heroes in Diablo 2. And the Warrior, as we all know, placed Diablo's soul stone on his forehead, and consequently became possessed and slowly transforming into Diablo himself, who was also killed by the heroes in Diablo 2. More or less hinted in the second game to be honest. |
|
|
Aug 6 2011, 09:56 AM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
3,809 posts Joined: Sep 2007 From: Jakarta |
QUOTE(Seeker_of_Truths @ Aug 6 2011, 03:44 AM) trivia: did you guys know that all three heroes in the first Diablo died and met very depressing ends? After the defeat of Diablo, the Sorcerer went mad in his search of the Summoner, and finally became the Summoner himself only to be killed by the heroes in Diablo 2. The Rogue returned to home, only to be corrupted by Andariel and became Bloodraven who was also killed by the heroes in Diablo 2. And the Warrior, as we all know, placed Diablo's soul stone on his forehead, and consequently became possessed and slowly transforming into Diablo himself, who was also killed by the heroes in Diablo 2. Post that in the first page as well.Recap of Diablo 1 and Diablo 2 story. |
|
|
Aug 6 2011, 02:31 PM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
598 posts Joined: Aug 2006 |
QUOTE(yamato @ Aug 6 2011, 02:26 AM) dont you know they r making the game based on what they(blizz) like/dislike, not what we(gamers) want? Don't you think the lack of DRM is percisely why the current d2 bnet is constantly camped by bots ? We don't know the exact methods of their DRM but perhaps by limiting the content of the game to be stored locally, the hackers will have a harder to time to figure out how to mess up the online experience for everyone else. I understand the grief of having to be online to play offline but let's be realistic, Diablo is no longer a single player first, multi second kind of game. In fact that change took place in D2 and that was 10 years ago. It's the multiplayer aspect of the game that has prolonged its shelf life and it's popularity amongst gamers. Thus, it's only logical that they are doing their utmost to protect the multiplayer content of the game.blizz make it sound promising like if they enforce DRM there will be no hack, dupe, bot... come on, look at the current D2 bnet, dominated by bots farming elites & runes. even in the realm lobby is flooded by spambots selling items for cash. also not to forget infamous SOJ duping glitch? Always-online DRM will ensure no hacks, dupes, bots huh? LOL and they did admit, the purpose of DRM is not because of piracy, but to provide a fair gameplay among the players? so whats the point for forcing the single player mode to go DRM? to provide a fair gameplay comparing to who? myself? yes, in mmo it is best to enforce such rules to protect the other players, no botting, duping etc. in single player? what makes te different if i have a lvl10 char with 2 soj? (soj is min lvl29) how unfair would it be?? to the 1st boss blood raven in bloodmoor? now, they are so concerned making it always-online to protect DRM (DIGITAL RIGHTS MANAGEMENT), ensuring no hacking. yet, they would care less about piracy, copy protect. since when piracy isnt one of the the biggest threat against DRM (not only to pc games, also DVD, music album, softwares, the whole digital media industry) if they can live with piracy while talking about DRM, what makes duping an ingame item a DRM concern? damn, what a bullshit. |
|
|
Aug 6 2011, 03:41 PM
|
![]() ![]() ![]()
Junior Member
308 posts Joined: Dec 2004 |
QUOTE(hfi @ Aug 6 2011, 02:31 PM) Don't you think the lack of DRM is percisely why the current d2 bnet is constantly camped by bots ? We don't know the exact methods of their DRM but perhaps by limiting the content of the game to be stored locally, the hackers will have a harder to time to figure out how to mess up the online experience for everyone else. I understand the grief of having to be online to play offline but let's be realistic, Diablo is no longer a single player first, multi second kind of game. In fact that change took place in D2 and that was 10 years ago. It's the multiplayer aspect of the game that has prolonged its shelf life and it's popularity amongst gamers. Thus, it's only logical that they are doing their utmost to protect the multiplayer content of the game. D2 also had the option to play offline. Even in the US there are still people who are having internet/ISP issues. Is blizzard going to "you have internet problems. your fault not mine. Trollololol" If there are people in the US still having problems with internet, what about other countries? What about people who travel cause of business or leisure? You can argue that since they are on business/leisure they should be serious/go out more but then it is their time and they are free to do whatever they want to do. D2 has the option to be able to play the game offline. That is also a selling point. |
|
|
Aug 6 2011, 03:50 PM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
760 posts Joined: Aug 2006 From: coming back through stratosphere |
QUOTE(hfi @ Aug 6 2011, 02:31 PM) Don't you think the lack of DRM is percisely why the current d2 bnet is constantly camped by bots ? We don't know the exact methods of their DRM but perhaps by limiting the content of the game to be stored locally, the hackers will have a harder to time to figure out how to mess up the online experience for everyone else. I understand the grief of having to be online to play offline but let's be realistic, Diablo is no longer a single player first, multi second kind of game. In fact that change took place in D2 and that was 10 years ago. It's the multiplayer aspect of the game that has prolonged its shelf life and it's popularity amongst gamers. Thus, it's only logical that they are doing their utmost to protect the multiplayer content of the game. we all agreed DRM on multi.but what good is forcing single to DRM? it will not hurt the hackers, but only hurting the gamers(customers) that enjoyed single mode, who dont always have a good connection. and why it wouldnt hurt the hackers? because blizz declared they care less about piracy and pirated copy. in other word, blizz put their guard down on the 1st layer of the most crucial DRM defence, ignoring the piracy. then why need a legit serial keys to login to bnet? if they really care about the single mode gamers feeling, they should know the very fundamental reason for solo is that: WE DO NOT WISH TO GO ONLINE AND JOIN THE MASS PLAYER COMMUNITY (sry for caps that is why i feel that blizz has become a cold blooded ignorant developer. they listen to their customers no more. yup auction house for cash thingy is far more important than the merely existence single players population |
|
|
Aug 6 2011, 04:22 PM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
837 posts Joined: Mar 2005 |
This year please
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 6 2011, 04:24 PM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
1,447 posts Joined: Mar 2006 |
yup really hope Blizzard can keep to their word releasing this year.... cant wait to grab my hands on it.
|
|
|
Aug 6 2011, 05:59 PM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
598 posts Joined: Aug 2006 |
QUOTE(yamato @ Aug 6 2011, 03:50 PM) we all agreed DRM on multi. Everyone knows DRM by default is about combating piracy. But they are just saying that it wasn't piracy that drove them to implement DRM, rather the issue of hackers breaking the online content. Personally, if you can look past all this mumbo jumbo, D3 is pretty much designed to be like an mmo i.e Guild Wars. You can play it solo or coop or competetively but you have to be online. Perhaps they should have just gone out and say that, but we all know they have other cash cow to protect.but what good is forcing single to DRM? it will not hurt the hackers, but only hurting the gamers(customers) that enjoyed single mode, who dont always have a good connection. and why it wouldnt hurt the hackers? because blizz declared they care less about piracy and pirated copy. in other word, blizz put their guard down on the 1st layer of the most crucial DRM defence, ignoring the piracy. then why need a legit serial keys to login to bnet? if they really care about the single mode gamers feeling, they should know the very fundamental reason for solo is that: WE DO NOT WISH TO GO ONLINE AND JOIN THE MASS PLAYER COMMUNITY (sry for caps that is why i feel that blizz has become a cold blooded ignorant developer. they listen to their customers no more. yup auction house for cash thingy is far more important than the merely existence single players population |
|
|
Aug 6 2011, 06:31 PM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
760 posts Joined: Aug 2006 From: coming back through stratosphere |
as u said, protecting their cash cow, by killing the single player offline minority group. small price to pay. how could i not love blizz!
diablo3 designed to be like mmo? no way. it should capped max 8players in a game, or there will be over thousand of players doing the same mephisto run. lmfao |
|
|
Aug 6 2011, 07:10 PM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
598 posts Joined: Aug 2006 |
QUOTE(yamato @ Aug 6 2011, 06:31 PM) as u said, protecting their cash cow, by killing the single player offline minority group. small price to pay. how could i not love blizz! Well Guild Wars is a mmo but it's also as restricted as Diablo, it's heavily instanced so only a handful of people can quest/level together at any given time. The only time people can en masse together is when they are in central hubs which is a lot like a game lobby like in Diablo. And now Diablo has a pvp arena which we've seen in Guild Wars. If you've played GW, you'll know what i'm talking about.diablo3 designed to be like mmo? no way. it should capped max 8players in a game, or there will be over thousand of players doing the same mephisto run. lmfao |
|
|
Aug 6 2011, 07:45 PM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
760 posts Joined: Aug 2006 From: coming back through stratosphere |
QUOTE(hfi @ Aug 6 2011, 07:10 PM) Well Guild Wars is a mmo but it's also as restricted as Diablo, it's heavily instanced so only a handful of people can quest/level together at any given time. The only time people can en masse together is when they are in central hubs which is a lot like a game lobby like in Diablo. And now Diablo has a pvp arena which we've seen in Guild Wars. If you've played GW, you'll know what i'm talking about. no i wouldnt care about GW in the D3 thread. afaik D3 is still an action rpg in single & multiplayer mode, just like old times, not an mmo as you claimed source QUOTE If we use features like big open zones where players encounter each other randomly as they play to define if a game is a MMORPG or not, then no, Diablo 3 is not a MMO. But then neither is Guild Wars, even though most consider it to be one. This post has been edited by yamato: Aug 6 2011, 08:52 PM |
|
|
Aug 6 2011, 09:59 PM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
598 posts Joined: Aug 2006 |
You may not care about GW but clearly it's something Blizzard is looking at to re-emulate - or is Guild Wars taking the idea from D2 /shrug. Not sure of what to make out of that random personal quote of yours. All it proved is that the definition of mmo differs from one person to another. Guild Wars may not be a mmo in a traditional sense but it's still one regardless - albeit a sort of hybrid or niche. You need to get past the old times and start looking at the bigger picture. Games and genres will evolve, and so will titles like Diablo.
This post has been edited by hfi: Aug 6 2011, 10:16 PM |
|
|
Aug 6 2011, 10:48 PM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
760 posts Joined: Aug 2006 From: coming back through stratosphere |
QUOTE(hfi @ Aug 6 2011, 09:59 PM) You may not care about GW but clearly it's something Blizzard is looking at to re-emulate. Not sure of what to make out of that random personal quote of yours. All it proved is that the definition of mmo differs from one person to another. Guild Wars may not be a mmo in a traditional sense but it's still one regardless albeit a sort of hybrid or niche so to speak. You need to get past the old times and start looking at the bigger picture. Genres will evolve and so will titles like Diablo. matey, you said d3 are made to be mmo just like gw, but in fact none of them are. and u still refuse to believe that. stop defending for the sake of defense, face the facts. "GW is something Blizzard is looking at to re-emulate".... blizz has their in-house engine, they have experience dev team with genuine ideas. from the history, they have never copy or re-emulate anything from anyone. i really dont know should i listen to someone that dont even know what hes saying well unless there are more teasers or news release by blizz, i will stfu before ruin everyones interest this thread. enuf said. GLHF This post has been edited by yamato: Aug 6 2011, 10:55 PM |
|
Topic ClosedOptions
|
| Change to: | 0.0285sec
0.30
6 queries
GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 29th November 2025 - 08:03 AM |