Blizzcon

[Humodour]

Because the focus of Diablo 2 was never its single player.

 

Still, Diablo 1 managerd to have seperate death systems for SP and MP. One could argue Diablo 1 was designed for SP play, though.

[GreasyDogMeat]

The focus may not have been on single player, but would it really have been a ton of work to add in a seperate Diablo I style system to Diablo II SP? Would have made the single player so much more enjoyable. Diablo 1 managed to have some real tension and danger because you couldn't just widdle down a bosses health without a real cost in portals and healing supplies. Diablo II you can just respawn and keep going at it until you win. Sure you lose some XP but that can EASILY be gained back by replaying sections.

 

I really wanted to like Diablo II. The cutscenes and settings are gorgeous, the game has all the makings of the perfect sequel but they absolutely killed it for me with the respawn system. Not just that but with enemies popping back up in previously cleared areas. I'm not really into Diablo II multiplayer mode either, so there is very little that has me excited about Diablo III if its going to be like Diablo II.

[alanschu]

If their focus for the game was MP, I can understand why the SP doesn't have save/load functionality.

 

If it wasn't designed from the start to support Save/Load, then yes, it would have been a fair bit of work to add it.

[Humodour]

The focus may not have been on single player, but would it really have been a ton of work to add in a seperate Diablo I style system to Diablo II SP? Would have made the single player so much more enjoyable. Diablo 1 managed to have some real tension and danger because you couldn't just widdle down a bosses health without a real cost in portals and healing supplies. Diablo II you can just respawn and keep going at it until you win. Sure you lose some XP but that can EASILY be gained back by replaying sections.

 

I really wanted to like Diablo II. The cutscenes and settings are gorgeous, the game has all the makings of the perfect sequel but they absolutely killed it for me with the respawn system. Not just that but with enemies popping back up in previously cleared areas. I'm not really into Diablo II multiplayer mode either, so there is very little that has me excited about Diablo III if its going to be like Diablo II.

 

Yeah, I agree with you. You can replay Diablo 1 these days and still have a ton of fun because the fundamental dynamics of the game haven't aged (and the atmosphere is awesome, and the music and sound are amazing). I wish they'd kept a lot of that for Diablo 2.

[Aristes]

As I recall, Bliz said that they expected the majority of players to play the game in single player mode but that the multiplayer crowd was generating most of the buzz. I might be wrong. I mean, no one go gonzo because I said that. I'm either right or wrong, but drawing your six shooter and going message board cowboy on me doesn't really change much. I played hours and hours of Diablo with friends. I played a lot of Diablo 2 with friends, but not nearly so much. It's just ironic that I played more of the game that was ostensibly more heavily invested in single player with friends and spent way more hours playing Diablo 2 single player when it was clearly crafted to keep the mulitplayer crowd happy. Go figure.

 

Hell, I even think a lot of folks play MMORPG alone, which is to say the majority of the time they're not grouped. I know I used to play the game that way a lot. I don't know how many, and probably not the majority, but I'm sure there is still a group who play the game single player.

 

I think Bliz designed the game as multiplayer, but made enough concessions to the single player crowd to keep it fun for everyone. I was rather offput by the lack of save in D2, but otherwise the game rocked.

 

Both are great games and I don't care what the bent is for Diablo 3 as long as I don't have to count on my friends losing interest in their other multiplayer game interests.

[Humodour]

As I recall, Bliz said that they expected the majority of players to play the game in single player mode but that the multiplayer crowd was generating most of the buzz. I might be wrong. I mean, no one go gonzo because I said that. I'm either right or wrong, but drawing your six shooter and going message board cowboy on me doesn't really change much. I played hours and hours of Diablo with friends. I played a lot of Diablo 2 with friends, but not nearly so much. It's just ironic that I played more of the game that was ostensibly more heavily invested in single player with friends and spent way more hours playing Diablo 2 single player when it was clearly crafted to keep the mulitplayer crowd happy. Go figure.

 

Hell, I even think a lot of folks play MMORPG alone, which is to say the majority of the time they're not grouped. I know I used to play the game that way a lot. I don't know how many, and probably not the majority, but I'm sure there is still a group who play the game single player.

 

I think Bliz designed the game as multiplayer, but made enough concessions to the single player crowd to keep it fun for everyone. I was rather offput by the lack of save in D2, but otherwise the game rocked.

 

Both are great games and I don't care what the bent is for Diablo 3 as long as I don't have to count on my friends losing interest in their other multiplayer game interests.

 

Um, no offence, but your post reads like a rant at someone, yet but nobody has even responded to your previous 2 posts in this thread. Nor was anybody getting angry or going 'message board cowboy' over the things you mentioned. O.o

[alanschu]

He was scared of me disagreeing with him

[Aristes]

No offense, alan, but you don't scare me.

 

Anyhow, I wasn't ranting. I was merely commenting on how Diablo changed from Diablo 2, but I still found it quite fun. ...And I was also commenting on how game design tends to favor multiplayer sometimes even if the publisher or developer think the game will primarily be a single player platform.

 

Moreover, Krezak, if you didn't find anything worth reading in my previous post, it was pretty pointless to respond to it in the first place. Just an observation.

Edited August 26, 2009 by Aristes

[Magister Lajciak]

Actually you can play it on LAN, just everyone needs a copy and you need to validate on Battle.net before you can play.

 

At least you can SC II, I presume D3 will use the same system.

 

Where have you read this? Last time I checked Blizzard said multiplayer can only be played on Battle.net. Then again, I haven't been following the issue for about two months now, so it could have changed, but can you link me to the source? Thanks!

[Aristes]

Actually you can play it on LAN, just everyone needs a copy and you need to validate on Battle.net before you can play.

 

At least you can SC II, I presume D3 will use the same system.

 

Where have you read this? Last time I checked Blizzard said multiplayer can only be played on Battle.net. Then again, I haven't been following the issue for about two months now, so it could have changed, but can you link me to the source? Thanks!

That's not a done deal. ...And since it was short and only to correct me, Purkake's response to my post doesn't count.

 

http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/60156

 

There's the link above. I don't know if we can count that as LAN. I'm thinking a game where can play independent of an internet connection. *shrug* Actually my point was only that it wouldn't matter. Even if we all share a T1 connection, we'll be just fine. The big thing is being able to have a private room for five or six people.

[Purkake]

Actually you can play it on LAN, just everyone needs a copy and you need to validate on Battle.net before you can play.

 

At least you can SC II, I presume D3 will use the same system.

 

Where have you read this? Last time I checked Blizzard said multiplayer can only be played on Battle.net. Then again, I haven't been following the issue for about two months now, so it could have changed, but can you link me to the source? Thanks!

That's not a done deal. ...And since it was short and only to correct me, Purkake's response to my post doesn't count.

 

http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/60156

 

There's the link above. I don't know if we can count that as LAN. I'm thinking a game where can play independent of an internet connection. *shrug* Actually my point was only that it wouldn't matter. Even if we all share a T1 connection, we'll be just fine. The big thing is being able to have a private room for five or six people.

 

That's pretty much what I was talking about. It's LAN with DRM.

[Magister Lajciak]

Actually you can play it on LAN, just everyone needs a copy and you need to validate on Battle.net before you can play.

 

At least you can SC II, I presume D3 will use the same system.

 

Where have you read this? Last time I checked Blizzard said multiplayer can only be played on Battle.net. Then again, I haven't been following the issue for about two months now, so it could have changed, but can you link me to the source? Thanks!

That's not a done deal. ...And since it was short and only to correct me, Purkake's response to my post doesn't count.

 

http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/60156

 

There's the link above. I don't know if we can count that as LAN. I'm thinking a game where can play independent of an internet connection. *shrug* Actually my point was only that it wouldn't matter. Even if we all share a T1 connection, we'll be just fine. The big thing is being able to have a private room for five or six people.

 

That's pretty much what I was talking about. It's LAN with DRM.

 

OK, well, it is an improvement over the no-LAN-at-all possibility, but it still sucks in a major fashion. Better than the previous policy I guess.

[Aristes]

Considering your sig, I'm not surprised you feel that way. I'm kind of mixed on DRM. If this no-LAN thing is simply a security measure, I think that's too bad, but as I understand it they just didn't want to invest the time or resources to LAN up the game. I know there was somewhat of a community effort to get it in, so this is probably the compromise. I don't mind DRM per se, since I figure it's a company's prerogative to protect their investment. At least there will be something and the WoW expansion, of course, needs no DRM. Hell, they're perfectly happy to have you let someone else use the same disks, last I heard, since you're still subscribing to the service. I've installed the same disks several times between my wife's computer and my desktop and laptop without any problem playing either account.

[Humodour]

t Aristes, they specifically said they are removing LAN to "combat piracy". Look up Bashiok's post on it.

[Aristes]

Ah. I wasn't sure in the earlier thread. This article was pretty clear. I mean, why worry about LAN and DRM unless the DRM impacts the LAN? Seemed like anti-piracy must be the reason. DRM hasn't hurt me personally, but I know some folks in these parts hate it with a passion.

[RPGmasterBoo]

Ah. I wasn't sure in the earlier thread. This article was pretty clear. I mean, why worry about LAN and DRM unless the DRM impacts the LAN? Seemed like anti-piracy must be the reason. DRM hasn't hurt me personally, but I know some folks in these parts hate it with a passion.

 

Its not piracy, its keeping the tournament scene under Blizzards thumb. There are a lot of pro tournaments that Blizzard gets nothing from because of LAN, and thats why they ditched it. The piracy argument makes no sense whatsoever.

[Aristes]

See, this is what I mean. I trust both of you to know more about it than me. Although, quick question, wouldn't that basically mean that they consider having unsanctioned tournaments as somehow the equivalent of piracy, if not by law then in effect? I mean, they must feel that they'd lose revenue if they can't sponsor and control the tournament.

Edited August 26, 2009 by Aristes

[RPGmasterBoo]

The trick is you cant have unsactioned tournaments anymore because it will all go through battle.net now. As for before in SC times, when they were a fledgling studio they encouraged people to "spawn" multiple copies of SC to play on LAN. No one had any idea just how popular SC would become, hence, years later, they were probably crying over all the Korean tournaments they couldnt milk for cash. Now they are looking to capitalize on this as well, so they are ditching the LAN and the entire old setup and effectively "outlawing" all tournaments that arent hosted on bnet..

[Lare Kikkeli]

I'm sure there will be a crack for the online check two weeks after the game is released. Not that I mind, I don't plan on playing D3 lan or offline, but I'm sure it will be possible.

Edited August 26, 2009 by Lare Kikkeli

[Humodour]

I'm sure there will be a crack for the online check two weeks after the game is released. Not that I mind, I don't plan on playing D3 lan or offline, but I'm sure it will be possible.

 

It's not an online check - there's simply no LAN capability. If you want MP play, you need to go through B.net.

[Magister Lajciak]

I'm sure there will be a crack for the online check two weeks after the game is released. Not that I mind, I don't plan on playing D3 lan or offline, but I'm sure it will be possible.

 

It's not an online check - there's simply no LAN capability. If you want MP play, you need to go through B.net.

 

That's what they said originally and I too thought it hadn't changed, but apparently it might have. Read the article linked above.

[Lare Kikkeli]

I'm sure there will be a crack for the online check two weeks after the game is released. Not that I mind, I don't plan on playing D3 lan or offline, but I'm sure it will be possible.

 

It's not an online check - there's simply no LAN capability. If you want MP play, you need to go through B.net.

 

The way I understood it (without reading the article) is that you can play in a closed network, you just have to have everyone authenticate their copies in Bnet. If that is the case there will be a crack for it, at most 1 month after release. If you have to play multiplayer through Bnet, I'm sure there will a tool to cheat the game and create your own Bnet clones a few months after release. This is why these so called anti piracy measures that only make paying customers lives more difficult are useless; hackers will find ways around them in a few months, and Blizzard has to direct manpower to patching these hacks unuseable. It's a waste of time and money.

[Purkake]

The way I understood it (without reading the article) is that you can play in a closed network, you just have to have everyone authenticate their copies in Bnet. If that is the case there will be a crack for it, at most 1 month after release. If you have to play multiplayer through Bnet, I'm sure there will a tool to cheat the game and create your own Bnet clones a few months after release. This is why these so called anti piracy measures that only make paying customers lives more difficult are useless; hackers will find ways around them in a few months, and Blizzard has to direct manpower to patching these hacks unuseable. It's a waste of time and money.

 

That's my understanding as well.

 

As for cracking it, I don't see why. How often do you have a LAN situation, but no internet connection? I'm sure the single player will be cracked, but the battle.net stuff will probably take a while.

Edited August 26, 2009 by Purkake

[Lare Kikkeli]

The way I understood it (without reading the article) is that you can play in a closed network, you just have to have everyone authenticate their copies in Bnet. If that is the case there will be a crack for it, at most 1 month after release. If you have to play multiplayer through Bnet, I'm sure there will a tool to cheat the game and create your own Bnet clones a few months after release. This is why these so called anti piracy measures that only make paying customers lives more difficult are useless; hackers will find ways around them in a few months, and Blizzard has to direct manpower to patching these hacks unuseable. It's a waste of time and money.

 

That's my understanding as well.

 

As for cracking it, I don't see why. How often do you have a LAN situation, but no internet connection? I'm sure the single player will be cracked, but the battle.net stuff will probably take a while.

 

I don't know, I'm going to play D3 exlusively on battle.net. Some people did complain about not being abled to play it without connecting to the internet and my post was mainly aimed to them.

[Purkake]

They wouldn't be reading an internet forum, now would they?