Diablo III requires constant net connection even for playing single player..

Annoymous Broccoli · 08-01-2011, 10:33 AM

http://uk.pc.ign.com/articles/118/11...#disqus_thread

So anyone without a net connection is screwed. And not everyone plays Diablo online even if they could if they wanted to. Would it really be that hard to impliment an offline character ONLY option and an online character ONLY option?

rayvio · 08-01-2011, 03:30 PM

it gets worse

get an advantage by spending more real life money than other players... big negative in my opinion. but admittedly I was never much of a Diablo fan to begin with

zane · 08-01-2011, 06:08 PM

hmm, well the online-only part doesnt bother me at all. IMO the only reason to play D2 was multiplayer.
The money thing is tricky.... If what they said is true, and the real life money exchange is player-to-player only, then i dont think i have a problem with it. In fact, it would mean theyr providing a solution for somthing players would do anyway and often get cheated by scammers. At least now they can regulate it. Im betting they'll take a small fee on transactions though.

Crunchy in milk · 08-01-2011, 09:42 PM

Read ID didn't survive the backlash so i'm interested to see if this does. I can see them caving and making it optional. If you want to play in a solo sandbox without any multiplayer. Not even local, thats ok.

Lasus · 08-03-2011, 10:37 AM

If they really do what they are saying then I will not buy the game. I don't understand why someone would buy items in a game. But thats just me.

Axelfish · 08-04-2011, 09:41 AM

Still looking forward to it. The number of hours I've sunk into Diablo 2 is beyond count.

Although it's true,ever since World of Warcraft's overwhelming success, Blizzard has been getting increasingly greedy. How much can you feed the insatiable money cow that is WOW? Oh, well. Their games are quality though, and are thoroughly play-tested and optimized pre-release and that all that matters, eventually. (Can't vouch for WOW, though: never had any interest in MMOs)

I would really love if they continued their Lost Vikings franchise , and also made a sequel for Blackthorne: those games were ace!

08-01-2011, 10:33 AM	#1
Annoymous Broccoli Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 87	Diablo III requires constant net connection even for playing single player.. http://uk.pc.ign.com/articles/118/11...#disqus_thread So anyone without a net connection is screwed. And not everyone plays Diablo online even if they could if they wanted to. Would it really be that hard to impliment an offline character ONLY option and an online character ONLY option? Share Share this post on Twitter

08-01-2011, 03:30 PM	#2
rayvio Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: UK (I miss Belgium!) Posts: 509	it gets worse get an advantage by spending more real life money than other players... big negative in my opinion. but admittedly I was never much of a Diablo fan to begin with Share Share this post on Twitter __________________ Playing: Edna & Harvey: The Breakout non-adv: Oblivion (very heavily modded), Planescape Torment recently finished: Gray Matter, Alter-Ego, Whispered World non-adv: Dragon Age: Origins again and again... Melody Gloucester Pegasus

08-01-2011, 06:08 PM	#3
zane Schattenjäger Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 572	hmm, well the online-only part doesnt bother me at all. IMO the only reason to play D2 was multiplayer. The money thing is tricky.... If what they said is true, and the real life money exchange is player-to-player only, then i dont think i have a problem with it. In fact, it would mean theyr providing a solution for somthing players would do anyway and often get cheated by scammers. At least now they can regulate it. Im betting they'll take a small fee on transactions though. Share Share this post on Twitter __________________ Currently focussing on: Book of unwritten tales On deck: lone survivor Recently finished: donna: avenger of blood, machinarium, botanicula, grim fandango, corpse party

08-01-2011, 09:42 PM	#4
Crunchy in milk delusions of adequacy Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 1,403	Read ID didn't survive the backlash so i'm interested to see if this does. I can see them caving and making it optional. If you want to play in a solo sandbox without any multiplayer. Not even local, thats ok. Share Share this post on Twitter

08-03-2011, 10:37 AM	#5
Lasus Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Hiding from RL Posts: 26	If they really do what they are saying then I will not buy the game. I don't understand why someone would buy items in a game. But thats just me. Share Share this post on Twitter __________________ Support Bacteria, its the only culture most people have.

08-04-2011, 09:41 AM	#6
Axelfish Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Posts: 57	Still looking forward to it. The number of hours I've sunk into Diablo 2 is beyond count. Although it's true,ever since World of Warcraft's overwhelming success, Blizzard has been getting increasingly greedy. How much can you feed the insatiable money cow that is WOW? Oh, well. Their games are quality though, and are thoroughly play-tested and optimized pre-release and that all that matters, eventually. (Can't vouch for WOW, though: never had any interest in MMOs) I would really love if they continued their Lost Vikings franchise , and also made a sequel for Blackthorne: those games were ace! Share Share this post on Twitter

User Name		Remember Me?
Password