Diablo 3 Requires Constant Internet Connection

[bp9801]

From the sound of it, it does appear that you log into your b.net account when you start the game up and then you can play single or multiplayer without issue. Hopefully it is like Trapt says, that once you log into b.net you can go offline, so to speak, and just play your character through the single player portion. If it actually does require an Internet connection at all times, even after log in, well, that may be an issue for some people and kind of sounds like the Ubisoft DRM.

[ClayMeow]

Like stated about, I don't think people will have to play online. It will have single-player, but you just have to be logged into B.Net to play. Much like how Steam has you log in to play any of your games. Yes, you can play offline, but it still has you log in. They just don't want people playing a game that is not linked to their account. I see/have no issue with that.

From the sound of it, it does appear that you log into your b.net account when you start the game up and then you can play single or multiplayer without issue. Hopefully it is like Trapt says, that once you log into b.net you can go offline, so to speak, and just play your character through the single player portion. If it actually does require an Internet connection at all times, even after log in, well, that may be an issue for some people and kind of sounds like the Ubisoft DRM.

 

Yes, the way it works with SC2 is that you do still log into your B.Net account every time you launch the game, but it doesn't actually have to contact the B.Net servers except for once per month. Think of your account as a profile - it's keeping track of your progress so it knows what you've unlocked, completed, etc.

 

Now whether that's how it will be for D3 is unknown, but I don't see why they would change it when it's using the same B.Net infrastructure.

 

That being said D3 is a completely different beast than SC2. I can see them requiring a connection every time for the simple reason of preventing item hacks....everything is easier to manipulate when you don't have servers checking against that. So I guess we'll see what happens.

 

For me personally, even when I played single-player in D2, I played on the B.Net (US East) server, not offline.

[Deathmineral]

Well I read all of the comments on this thread but if I were to respond to them all like I would like to, I would probably need more than just a single post, plus I don't feel like spending the time to respond to something when I already know that I'm in a minority group that will automatically be shunned because that's how society works.

 

I will however say my feelings on the issue, I think it's 100% wrong.

 

I believe DRM shouldn't hurt the customer, that's what this does, if I bought the game, I would find it less enjoyable because I would only want to play single player most of the time, and if I can't connect to the internet, all I have is a useless box on the shelf, that's it, that's what the game turns into if you can't access the internet for whatever reason.

 

I have a lot more I could say on the subject but I'm pretty confident most people on here won't even have the kindness to get this far into my post, I believe most people will see my second sentence and automatically call me stupid for having a different opinion.

[bp9801]

There's a reason why I don't own many Ubisoft games on the PC, because of the draconain DRM scheme it feels its games should have. Why must a game, a single player game, require an Internet connection? Makes no sense. If you move and don't get Internet set up for a few days, you can't play that game since it won't be able to authenticate with the servers. If you install the game on your laptop and travel somewhere with a poor WiFi connection that drops every so often, you can't play the game.

 

You paid money for a game, so there should be some way for you to play that game even when there is no Internet available. I know, tons of people have Internet, but it may not always be the most reliable option. What are you supposed to do with a $60 game that you can't play? Like Death said, it just becomes a box on the shelf, a box that you can't do anything with because your Internet isn't always there to let you play the game.

 

I don't care for games of any kind, no matter what the game is, that require a constant Internet connection. The developers can talk all they want about it cuts down on piracy, well I call bullshit because every game, no matter the DRM scheme, and thats what this is from Blizzard, every game gets pirated at some point in time no matter how intense the DRM may seem.

[Locutus]

Another reason (besides bugs/glitches and price) to wait awhile to get D3.

 

I will guarantee that within a few months of release there will be a hack that seamlessly integrates integrates into the game.

 

Don't get me wrong, they mean well with this, they just don't understand how many people they're going to alienate.

I can guarantee you that the bug/glitch number is going to be substantially lower than most games. It is Blizzard, after all. They strive for perfection and that's why D3 has been in development despite looking completely polished and finished as of 3 years ago.

[ClayMeow]

I don't care for games of any kind, no matter what the game is, that require a constant Internet connection. The developers can talk all they want about it cuts down on piracy, well I call bullshit because every game, no matter the DRM scheme, and thats what this is from Blizzard, every game gets pirated at some point in time no matter how intense the DRM may seem.

As I said above, if the game requires a constant Internet connection, although I'm sure piracy played a role in the decision, I can almost assure you that it wasn't the sole reason, or even the main one. I'm willing to bet that the main reason for such a move is the potential for hacking, which was a big problem in D2, but would be an even bigger one in D3 with the planned auction house.

 

I can guarantee you that the bug/glitch number is going to be substantially lower than most games. It is Blizzard, after all. They strive for perfection and that's why D3 has been in development despite looking completely polished and finished as of 3 years ago.

Aye. Most of Blizzard's patches for games are balance tweaks, not bug fixes.

[bp9801]

Yeah, the auction house is probably another reason for the always on Internet. That way, the Blizzard servers can verify the items you're selling aren't hacked or modded in any way, same goes for buying items. I never bothered with D2 mutliplayer with random people, I was always with a few friends, but I do agree the hacking was quite widespread in D2. So, we have the auction house and piracy as two likely reasons for the switch (possibly) to always requiring an Internet connection.

[IVIYTH0S]

There's a reason why I don't own many Ubisoft games on the PC, because of the draconain DRM scheme it feels its games should have. Why must a game, a single player game, require an Internet connection? Makes no sense. If you move and don't get Internet set up for a few days, you can't play that game since it won't be able to authenticate with the servers. If you install the game on your laptop and travel somewhere with a poor WiFi connection that drops every so often, you can't play the game.

 

You paid money for a game, so there should be some way for you to play that game even when there is no Internet available. I know, tons of people have Internet, but it may not always be the most reliable option. What are you supposed to do with a $60 game that you can't play? Like Death said, it just becomes a box on the shelf, a box that you can't do anything with because your Internet isn't always there to let you play the game.

 

I don't care for games of any kind, no matter what the game is, that require a constant Internet connection. The developers can talk all they want about it cuts down on piracy, well I call bull crap because every game, no matter the DRM scheme, and thats what this is from Blizzard, every game gets pirated at some point in time no matter how intense the DRM may seem.

My sentiments exactly, or what if you have it on a laptop and want to play in the car (without being tethered to the internet).... NOPE!

[Flibo]

I don't see the big deal really. Maybe my internet connection is more stable than most of yours but I seriously have no problem at all with this. I most likely won't even try solo play if it's the same way as it was in Diablo II. Last time I played it on single player was when I had an ISDN connection. There's no point anymore in that. You could play alone in Battle.net if you want, just make an one player game. I never play anything offline anyway.

 

I'm not completely certain but I think this is also meant to prevent duplicating items (which is still very possible in Diablo II) which screws up the economy of the game (Diablo II as an example). I don't know how many of you know, but there's a trading forum called d2jsp.org where you can trade items for forum gold (fg) and vice versa. You can also buy forum gold by donating to the site. The problem is that the site isn't in any way involved to Battle.net, and the single administrator is getting a ton of money for just hosting the trading forum. It was inevitable for Blizzard to invent the market system to rival this (the forum is really that big). But since you can sell items for real money as well, I'm sure there will be over 9000 botters. I really hope Blizzard deals with this because this ruined a lot of fun in Diablo II.

[Deathmineral]

I don't see the big deal really. Maybe my internet connection is more stable than most of yours but I seriously have no problem at all with this. I most likely won't even try solo play if it's the same way as it was in Diablo II. Last time I played it on single player was when I had an ISDN connection. There's no point anymore in that. You could play alone in Battle.net if you want, just make an one player game. I never play anything offline anyway.

 

I'm not completely certain but I think this is also meant to prevent duplicating items (which is still very possible in Diablo II) which screws up the economy of the game (Diablo II as an example). I don't know how many of you know, but there's a trading forum called d2jsp.org where you can trade items for forum gold (fg) and vice versa. You can also buy forum gold by donating to the site. The problem is that the site isn't in any way involved to Battle.net, and the single administrator is getting a ton of money for just hosting the trading forum. It was inevitable for Blizzard to invent the market system to rival this (the forum is really that big). But since you can sell items for real money as well, I'm sure there will be over 9000 botters. I really hope Blizzard deals with this because this ruined a lot of fun in Diablo II.

I never played online much myself, mostly I played single player or LAN in D2 so I'm curious. How did duplicating and trading items ruin the fun?

[Flibo]

I never played online much myself, mostly I played single player or LAN in D2 so I'm curious. How did duplicating and trading items ruin the fun?

Nothing you found on your own had any value anymore. Cheaters duplicated items that are so rare that they drop once in a lifetime. In that forum everything became ridiculously cheap. Not everybody had these duped items but almost anyone could buy excellent items with little forum gold.

[Deathmineral]

Nothing you found on your own had any value anymore. Cheaters duplicated items that are so rare that they drop once in a lifetime. In that forum everything became ridiculously cheap. Not everybody had these duped items but almost anyone could buy excellent items with little forum gold.

So this was mainly a PvP issue then? I guess that's why I never noticed it, I hate the PvP part of games like D2.