| 230 posts found | |
|---|---|
|
5/17/12 10:00:28 AM#41
I'm just going to come out and say this... Every single argument stating that D3 has to have online singleplayer to prevent cheating and hacking is stupid. Yes, stupid. I'm sorry, it's true. These arguments are dumb. Why are they dumb do you ask? They are dumb because Blizz could have just had oh...you know, SINGLE PLAYER ONLY CHARACTERS. What would have been the problem with this? You have your single player only character that can never enter multiplayer, then you have your multiplayer character that is online only. Both camps would be happy! Why they didn't just do this, and why they saw fit to structure a single/multiplayer game as an MMORPG...I have no clue. All I know is that when I play D3 singleplayer, I have like 300ping, and regularly suffer lag spikes...and that's just a special kind of BS. Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob? |
|
|
5/17/12 10:03:57 AM#42
Originally posted by Boreil
That's right. Brilliant, huh? I knew this before I bought the game, but it's still magnanimously stupid. One of the dumbest things I've ever seen done in a game. There are many other things that could have been done that wouldn't have required this majorly idiotic step. President of The Marvelously Meowhead Fan Club |
|
|
5/17/12 10:07:52 AM#43
The whole point to online only is to prevent people from getting access to the code that allows creation of hacks and mods. It has nothing to do with taking characters online from single player. Everything your doing in the game is server side, you can't access it. And in my opinion that is the right step in making sure there are no hacks/mods. |
|
|
5/17/12 10:08:11 AM#44
Originally posted by Creslin321 How dare you. Blizzard said it was so clearly that must be the case. I mean what other possible motivations would they have? >_> <_< Amazing how some of the same people defending this with D3 have no problems raking other companies over the coals for some of their questionable motivations or actions. Guess it's okay as long as you're the almighty Blizzard. 1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical. 2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself. 3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose. |
|
|
5/17/12 10:14:14 AM#45
Originally posted by Tsuru Oh no not mods! Anything but that! Mods have clearly never brought anything valuable to the game industry. And as for hacks...don't you think this seems like a bit erm...excessive solution? It would be like Microsoft saying that you can only run Windows off the cloud because if they allowed people to install it on their desktop, then well they might just hack it! Oh noes! It's like cutting off your arm to save a finger. The reason they have always online is DRM. That's it. Every other explanation is a bunch of crap. Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob? |
|
|
5/17/12 10:18:40 AM#46
This whole arguement wether D3 should have a separate offline single player separate from online single player baffles me. Did it ever occur to you that Blizzard just does not want any cheating in their game whatsoever. sure, you could say..."hey, who cares if i hack, dupe, cheat. I'm being kept separate from the online community and no one else will see me. " Blizzard doesnt see it that way. They do not want that element in their game at all, simple as that. They have always strived for integrity in their games and I applaud them for doing what they can in D3. So, next time you get your "error 37," blame the fucking criminals, not blizzard. |
|
|
5/17/12 10:18:54 AM#47
Originally posted by Creslin321 Except its not. So far its working. There was a speed hack in Beta. but guess what, didnt take long before that was fixed. (Course i wouldnt call script kiddies/packet minipulation hackers) But the point is its working. And i for one am glad. |
|
|
5/17/12 10:20:29 AM#48
Originally posted by Tsuru
Umm.. They have already hacked into the single player element. How good does your statement sound now? :) |
|
|
5/17/12 10:26:28 AM#49
Originally posted by Kaledus Until i see proof, your statement means nothing. |
|
|
5/17/12 10:27:42 AM#50
Originally posted by Tsuru Yeah because hacks have never existed in MMO's which have server side infrastructure right? This argument still makes no sense... Why didn't they just have single player run a "server" on your machine and you could be the only client...that would work fine. Then you could still have a client/server structure for multiplayer. If you're worried that people will get "the code" of the game if they do this...then consider this. That code is COMPILED. You can't just open it in visual studio and read it. In order to "look at it" you literally have to look at the assembly code that is running as it runs. It's not "easy" to hack a game just based on having access to the compiled code. Some talented people can do it, but I'm sure they are going to find a way to do it with just the client as well. Like I said, there have been plenty of hacks in MMO's before. Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob? |
|
|
5/17/12 10:27:52 AM#51
I cannot see what the problem is with having a single player and multiplayer option Single player: prone to hacking and cheating, But your the only one in the game so do as you please. Multiplexer: effectively what you have now, Minus the people that opted out for the single player option. The only major difference is the rmoh wont make a cut on single players, and the chance of piracy - but they wouldn't buy the product in the first place right? |
|
|
5/17/12 10:30:58 AM#52
At the end of the day the complaining doesnt matter. With the amount they have made off this I suspect most game companies will be following suit in the future. I forsee most development studios all going this route. Elder Scrolls, Mass Effect, Grand Theft Auto franchises will all probably do this for future single player experiences. Your options will be deal with it or not be able tp play them. |
|
|
5/17/12 10:31:17 AM#53
Originally posted by wrightstuf <Facepalm> Criminals? Really...criminals? So do you think that "GameGenie" should be considered contraband? And anyone that enters console commands in Skyrim should be arrested? The fact that you think players using cheat codes who play single player only are somehow "criminals" is just...I don't really know what to say. Also...there still IS a way to get powerful items without actually playing the game to get them in D3 (cheating). Except now, it costs real money, and that's really the whole point of this.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob? |
|
|
5/17/12 10:31:34 AM#54
please don't post those links here... |
|
|
5/17/12 10:31:43 AM#55
Originally posted by Creslin321 Its people with your exact mentality thats the very reason. If people would just leave the game code alone and play the way it was intended. you cant be so naive to think it would stop at modding?? dude, what do you think DRM means and why its there? Mods are one thing, cheating is another. I'm sure at some point if blizzard thought modding would lend itself to the game, they would allow it. One only has to go to Curse Gaming site to see the many pages of mods for WoW. All with blizzard's blessing. |
|
|
5/17/12 10:34:43 AM#56
Originally posted by wrightstuf I think the DRM is there to prevent piracy and to protect the integrity of the RMAH so that people can "cheat legitimately." But I guess that's just me lol :). Why do you think it's there? Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob? |
|
|
5/17/12 10:39:13 AM#57
Originally posted by wrightstuf DRM exists because companies are stuck in the 80s blame piracy for declining sales and refuse to change and look into real solution. It's people with your mentality that companies get away with this kind of crap. Crap that has been proven tie and time again to not work ever. It only delays the inevitable. DRM is in the same league as virii and malware in my book. Yet the customer has to pay the price for this crap over and over. |
|
|
5/17/12 10:39:29 AM#58
Originally posted by Creslin321 I most certainly do. cheaters in computer games are no different than anywhere in society. the public needs to be protected from that bad element. they are "criminals" in the pure sense of the word. Not only should blizzard do whatever they can to protect their game and their players from it, they should not stop at bans. those criminals will just go find some other game to offend. They should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. these people are ruining it for everyone. If other games look the other way, then fine. thats their thing. Its not blizzard's and its not mine. |
|
|
5/17/12 10:39:47 AM#59
Originally posted by cscurlock Yep, that's my fear right there. The stupidity won't stop with D3, but will begin seeping into other games as well. The only thing that might prevent it is that when someone else tries it, they won't have the a legion of drones ready to support them the way Blizzard does. Others might fail with the experiment because they will have to deal with gamers who will view it with a more discriminating eye. Blizzard? Not a concern. |
|
|
5/17/12 10:43:04 AM#60
Whatever their reasons for taking this approach, Blizzard's insistance that one can only play even the single player option online means that some people will not buy the game. I know that I refuse to pay for a game that will not allow me to play single player off-line. I do find it odd that people who argue against those who would have liked a single-player offline option often speak of preferring multiplayer online play. The ability for someone else to play single player off-line would not affect them, and yet these posters oppose such. They are not arguing for something for themselves, they are just pushing to exclude others from the game. It would be like me saying that I do not like playing characters with armor, and so no one else should be allowed to do so. When all has been said and done, more will have been said than done. |
|