"Blizzard VP 'Surprised' Over Fan Reaction To 'Diablo 3' Online Requirements"

[kane_magus]

Yeah, color me not surprised that Blizzard is surprised by this. As I already said, it's becoming increasingly obvious that Blizzard is simply out of touch with its customers these days.

And yeah, I totally believe that VP guy when he says anti-piracy wasn't a factor. Right. Just like I believed every other asinine stuffed suit who has ever claimed the exact same thing while simultaneously trying to ram through some idiotic DRM scheme.

"Let's say we want to create an offline capacity," he explained. "You're introducing a separate user flow, a separate path that players are going to go down. And, at the end of the day, how many people are going to want to do that?"

I do! I want to do that! I did that in Diablo 1 and I did that in Diablo 2 and I had zero problem with it! So why, all of a sudden, would you think I'd have a problem with that in Diablo 3?! Seriously out of touch, I say.

"Yes, you're going to have a connection, yes, your character will be stored on a server, but..." No I'm not and no it won't, since because of this... *clears throat*

I WON'T BE BUYING THE GAME AT ALL.

Really, truly, amazingly out of touch.

"I think it's not just 'Diablo 3' but with our games as a whole we're tying everything into Battle.net these days...We can provide a much a much more stable, connected, safer experience than we could if we let people play off-line."

All that right there deserves is a simple Flat What.

What.

Well, whatever. Thanks ever so much for giving me a reason to never buy another Blizzard game ever again.

Comments

[owsf2000.livejournal.com]

You know, a part of me feels this is just the next cog in the slippery slope that game companies have been going down. You know, where they test something out, if it sticks, they go a little further.... repeat for the last 20-30 years.

This is why people should have bitched about this online requirement tactic back when it was first attempted with (I believe) Ubisoft.

I'm glad I'm not buying a 3DS or Vita, or PS4, or 720, or Wii HD, etc etc whatever they end up being called in cases where I'm BSing names.

[kane-magus.livejournal.com]

"You know, a part of me feels this is just the next cog in the slippery slope that game companies have been going down. You know, where they test something out, if it sticks, they go a little further.... repeat for the last 20-30 years."

Oh it is most definitely that. Once "always connected" becomes "accepted" and "normal" (and you know it will, no matter what anyone says or does) I shudder to think what next horror they'll unleash on us.

As for people complaining about Ubisoft, well, most of the Internet as well as everyone I know personally with an interest in such things did complain about it. There were some idiotic yes-men here and there doing their idiotic yes-men thing as they are wont to do, but for the most part nobody outside of Ubisoft thought this was a good idea. Did it stop Ubisoft from using it? Nope. Did it stop them from retardedly claiming it to be a "success" afterwards? Not at all. Did it lead to other companies, such as Blizzard here, adopting a "me too" stance and implementing it themselves? Sure did, sadly and frustratingly. (At the very least, though, Blizzard is still marginally embarrassed enough by it to try to lie about it and claim that it's not about DRM at all, despite it obviously being so. Whatever it is, it's definitely not in the best interests of their customers though, I don't care what bullshit they try to spout to the contrary.) And now, a lot of people are looking at Blizzard doing it and going "Gee, I guess it won't be so bad. Maybe this is okay after all," which is just depressing as shit.