Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

Why Online Single-Player Games Are A Bad Idea

2»

Comments

  • WarmakerWarmaker San Diego, CAPosts: 2,231Member
    Originally posted by jpnz
    Originally posted by Theocritus
    Originally posted by Warmaker

    I've always thought the basic idea of having a constant internet connection for ALL gameplay was a terrible idea.  Yes, for multiplayer, it's natural.  But for single-player?  That's asanine.

    I even have problems with those 3rd party programs that you purchase and run a game through.  Stuff like Steam.  They supposedly feature offline support, but I've run many problems with Steam in particular over the years to run in offline while travelling abroad.

    Yes people, believe it or not, there are places out in the world where fast internet connection isn't possible.  Or *gasp* no internet at all.  Oh noes!  Too bad for some of you that do some extensive travelling to far away places, and can't use those cool games that are on your laptop.

    I do miss the simple days where you acquired the game via download or a physical CD, and it was YOURS, and you were free to play it anytime, anywhere, as long as your computer can run.

    I've never acquired a pirated game in my life.  All my games are legit and I buy lots of games in the course of a year, yet game companies are setting out to make life more miserable for legitimate purchasers.

             Well said...Ive had some issues over the years with Steam also....

    If you purchase something digitally, is it safe to assume that you have an internet connection?

    You may have had an internet connection at that time when you acquired the download.  But at the place where you're moving through or staying at for varying periods of time, short and long?  Not a guarantee.

    Think about it next time when you try to be a smartass.  Some of us had to deal with more angles out there than you did.

    "I have only two out of my company and 20 out of some other company. We need support, but it is almost suicide to try to get it here as we are swept by machine gun fire and a constant barrage is on us. I have no one on my left and only a few on my right. I will hold." (First Lieutenant Clifton B. Cates, US Marine Corps, Soissons, 19 July 1918)

  • jusomdudejusomdude Somewhere, KSPosts: 2,401Member

    Diablo 3 is a multiplayer game with optional single player... big difference. Would you rather they make it strictly multiplayer? Will that quiet all the whining about this?

  • RoqocoRoqoco CrewkernePosts: 22Member

    The choice is simple either PC users learn to accept games with inconvenient DRM or no high budget PC games get made. You can write multiple walls of text, but that's what it boils down to.  DRM is not designed to punish purchasers, it's designed to deter piracy, the inconvenience to genuine users is just collateral damage that can't easily be avoided. And in a world where so many feel entitled to freeload off the work of others things don't seem likely to get better any time soon. Perhaps when we have a free and egalitarian world we won't have to lock our doors any more..., perhaps not.  

  • jpnzjpnz SydneyPosts: 3,529Member
    Originally posted by Warmaker
    Originally posted by jpnz
     

    If you purchase something digitally, is it safe to assume that you have an internet connection?

    You may have had an internet connection at that time when you acquired the download.  But at the place where you're moving through or staying at for varying periods of time, short and long?  Not a guarantee.

    Think about it next time when you try to be a smartass.  Some of us had to deal with more angles out there than you did.

    Not sure why the defensive tone and why the projection on mine post.

    If a company sells a digital product, would it be safe for that company to assume the customer has an internet connection?

    Answer for me is 'yes'. I think it is safe to assume the customer has an internet connection since the product is a digital product.

    Should it cater for a small niche where the person goes on holiday/move/fly?

    I can see why certain companies do not cater for that niche.

    You don't have to agree and vote with your wallet.

    I accept the 'always on' online checks when I buy games digitally as I am okay with the company not catering for that niche.

    Gdemami -
    Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.

  • dzoni87dzoni87 BelgradePosts: 541Member

      I had read somewhere and i strongly believe that the 'second fall of video game industry" is at hand. The top of tragedy is that Sony announced that their PS4 will no have any kind of optical reader. It will be mandatory to use internet to purchase, let alone play games. Basically, you will not own anything except console.

      This being said, i blame publishers only partially. Gamers with mentallity 'i will buy it only because it is sequell to Diablo/Heroes of Might and Magic/Assassin's Creed/Mass Effect/whatever" will lead to this fall as well. I am not discussing anything about games themselves at this point, some of them are great, some are pretty good, some are bad, its not the point.

      My biggest annoyance is that publishers say "Oh look, here is a great game but we will not sell it to you, we will only rent it to you to play it and we can take it away from you whenever you want and all that will be left to you is useless pieces of plastic. But hey you could play freezbie with it still. You should be thankfull for it" and largest ammount of Gamer community said "Okay, thank you for releasing this fabulous sequel, kind sir".

      "Shut up and take my money" mentallity will kill video game industry once again. Dont shut the big guys up and react to their b.c. with more common sense. Like E.T. wasnt enough to make people learn stuff.

    My opinion, have a nice day,

    Dzoni87

    Main MMO at the moment: Guild Wars 2
    Waiting for: Pathfinder Online

  • BrenelaelBrenelael Warren, MEPosts: 3,996Member
    Originally posted by jpnz
    Originally posted by Rockhide

    Between DLC microtransactions and what Diablo III does, this is the future of all PC titles made by the major commercial developers IMO.  People may give Diablo III a pass because of Blizzard's intentions of making it an online community-based game, but it also promotes tacking on an "integral" multiplayer feature to slip always-online DRM in the back door.

     

    Anyway, while many people might agree it's a bad idea that has the possibility of greatly inconveniencing the player, the fact of the matter is that 3.5+ million people are expected to play Diablo III this year.

     

    The number of people who won't purchase the game because of its online requirement is negligible (As in 'one.' Me.).

     

    Realistically, voting with your wallet will do nothing. The vote was cast years ago when players decided they'd tolerate more than just EULA restrictions to their gameplay. Complaining about it now is pretty disingenous IMO...the crazies warned the gaming community that this was coming and time and again we told them off. As the saying goes, you made your bed, now you have to lie in.

     

    Besides, if Diablo IV came out tomorrow with the exact same online requirement, everybody would be in line at 'Gamestop' waiting for the doors to open (quality not withstanding).

    The 'online requirement prevents me from buying' doesn't ring true for most people now due to Steam.

    Not exactly true. I use Steam but keep it in "Offline Mode" most of the time. I play Steam games 90% of the time with no Internet connection what-so-ever on my laptop. You don't need to be online all of the time to play Steam games.

     

    Bren

    while(horse==dead)
    {
    beat();
    }

  • BizkitNLBizkitNL NetherlandsPosts: 2,280Member Common

    Online-only singleplayer? Sure! As long as you have the backend to "back it up" :).

    Seriously, thats all there is to it.

    10
  • jpnzjpnz SydneyPosts: 3,529Member
    Originally posted by Brenelael
    Originally posted by jpnz
     

    The 'online requirement prevents me from buying' doesn't ring true for most people now due to Steam.

    Not exactly true. I use Steam but keep it in "Offline Mode" most of the time. I play Steam games 90% of the time with no Internet connection what-so-ever on my laptop. You don't need to be online all of the time to play Steam games.

     

    Bren

    You must be the rare creature I've heard about in legends past.

    You are someone that got the Steam Offline mode to WORK?!

    Gdemami -
    Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.

  • BrenelaelBrenelael Warren, MEPosts: 3,996Member
    Originally posted by jpnz
    Originally posted by Brenelael
    Originally posted by jpnz
     

    The 'online requirement prevents me from buying' doesn't ring true for most people now due to Steam.

    Not exactly true. I use Steam but keep it in "Offline Mode" most of the time. I play Steam games 90% of the time with no Internet connection what-so-ever on my laptop. You don't need to be online all of the time to play Steam games.

     

    Bren

    You must be the rare creature I've heard about in legends past.

    You are someone that got the Steam Offline mode to WORK?!

    Umm.... Yeah. You just have to be smart enough to restart it in Offline Mode while you are connected to the Internet before you try to play offline. An ounce of forethought goes a long way. LOL

     

    Bren

    while(horse==dead)
    {
    beat();
    }

  • zymurgeistzymurgeist Pittsville, VAPosts: 5,211Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by jpnz
    Originally posted by Brenelael
    Originally posted by jpnz
     

    The 'online requirement prevents me from buying' doesn't ring true for most people now due to Steam.

    Not exactly true. I use Steam but keep it in "Offline Mode" most of the time. I play Steam games 90% of the time with no Internet connection what-so-ever on my laptop. You don't need to be online all of the time to play Steam games.

     

    Bren

    You must be the rare creature I've heard about in legends past.

    You are someone that got the Steam Offline mode to WORK?!

     That's more of an argument against the implementation than the idea. Clearly steam could be made to work that way properly.

    "Strong and bitter words indicate a weak cause" ~Victor Hugo

  • Angier2758Angier2758 Mt. Prospect, ILPosts: 1,011Member

    Why?

     

    Easy - Can't have 1 hit kill style bosses then have server lag...

     

    Talk about peeved lol.

  • SSJGotenx268SSJGotenx268 Freehold, NJPosts: 63Member
    Originally posted by stragen001

    Companies with excessive DRM or requiring a constant internet connection are just pissing off legitimate customers, like the previous poster said. They are more concerned with making sure that people dont get an illegal copy of their game, than making actual customers happy.

    This is wrong.

    When the DRM interferes so badly with a legitimate customers experience that they stop playnig the game because of it, things have gone too far.

    I would say that about 75% of the people that get a pirate copy of a game WOULD NOT have purchased it anyway, the other 25% are people that are just pirates. If people want to buy a game, then they will buy the game. If they are not sure, then they might pirate it........

    Remember demos for single player games? what ever happened to demos? They used to help people make their mind up.

    The reason why I really hate this whole online authentication thing though, is what if I want to play the game I bought in 10 years time, when the servers have shut down and the company has gone bust? I wont be able to. There are a select few games that are THAT good, but I still semi regularly play the original civilisation, and UFO: Enemy Unknown because they are such great games. With online authentication I just would not be able to do that. 

    I'm sorry, how is that wrong? A company wanting to make money and make sure assholes around the world don't make a ripped copy of their game and distribute it, allowing less income? Makes sense I suppose.

    As for this whole online-only debate, I'm going to have to agree with the people that stated you knew this before you bought it. 

    As for 10 years down the line? I'm sure I'll be playing something else. Would I maybe come back to it? Sure, there's always that possibility. But down the line I'm sure something else will grab everyones attention. A lot of people claim "this isn't what I thought it was going to be" so I'm sure they won't be playing past the first month. 

  • GdemamiGdemami Beau VallonPosts: 7,860Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by lappas
    +1 Intelligent thread by the OP. Clearly he has no right to be on these forums lol.  

    Just because it is long does not make it intelligent...

  • DamonDamon Naples, FLPosts: 165Member

    I didn't know people could copy & paste articles written by other people on other sites.  Though, it is thoughtful of you to link the original location of everything you just copied & pasted here.  Matt Miller and GameInformer might be a little upset that you just bypassed their website and advertisers.  I think you should remove the copied article and add some thoughts of your own.  Even something as simple as "I agree with this article 100%" would be better than just taking the work of someone else, in my opinion.

    image
  • VorthanionVorthanion Laguna Vista, TXPosts: 2,117Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by fadis

    Again... if you don't like it - don't buy it.

     

    Blizzard obviously has their reasons - most of which are financial - and they have every right to run things the way they want... and they will do so... until finacial reasons make them change their minds.

     

    * And this has nothing to do with pissing off legi customers... what WILL piss off legit customers is if Blizzard stops making top games.  As long as their games are the best... some % of people can happily pitch fits and boycott or whatever... and they are easily replaced by new gamers. 

    And in the end... most of those boycotters will be right back playing anyway.  When you make the best games - you get to make the rules!

     

     

    So, what is the answer to customers when they shut down the servers at the end of it's life span, but they want to keep on playing, as many still play Diablo I and Starcraft I to this very day?

    image
  • AusareAusare adamstown, MDPosts: 850Member

    Most likely when the game runs its course they will shutdown the AH and remove the onlline need.

  • GenghasGenghas knoxville, TNPosts: 13Member

    move on games are getting better and better

  • AticusWellesAticusWelles Beverly hills, CAPosts: 152Member
    Originally posted by fadis

    Again... if you don't like it - don't buy it.

     

    Blizzard obviously has their reasons - most of which are financial - and they have every right to run things the way they want... and they will do so... until finacial reasons make them change their minds.

     

    * And this has nothing to do with pissing off legi customers... what WILL piss off legit customers is if Blizzard stops making top games.  As long as their games are the best... some % of people can happily pitch fits and boycott or whatever... and they are easily replaced by new gamers. 

    And in the end... most of those boycotters will be right back playing anyway.  When you make the best games - you get to make the rules!

     

     

    What you aren't taking into account is that some of those people that Blizzard pisses off, but still want to play, will set up private servers and pirate the game to do so.

     

    They still get the benefit of playing, only Blizzard doesn't get the benefit of being paid for it.

     

    DRM pisses of legit customers regardless of the company or industry using it, because DRM doesn't stop pirates, it only hampers legit customers the companies are treating like pirates.

     

    BTW Rules are meaningless to pirates.  Ask Hollywood or the record industry.

  • AticusWellesAticusWelles Beverly hills, CAPosts: 152Member
    Originally posted by Vorthanion
    Originally posted by fadis

    Again... if you don't like it - don't buy it.

     

    Blizzard obviously has their reasons - most of which are financial - and they have every right to run things the way they want... and they will do so... until finacial reasons make them change their minds.

     

    * And this has nothing to do with pissing off legi customers... what WILL piss off legit customers is if Blizzard stops making top games.  As long as their games are the best... some % of people can happily pitch fits and boycott or whatever... and they are easily replaced by new gamers. 

    And in the end... most of those boycotters will be right back playing anyway.  When you make the best games - you get to make the rules!

     

     

    So, what is the answer to customers when they shut down the servers at the end of it's life span, but they want to keep on playing, as many still play Diablo I and Starcraft I to this very day?

    There will be private servers long before that happens.

  • eyeswideopeneyeswideopen Fresno, CAPosts: 2,414Member
    Originally posted by Genghas

    move on games are getting better and better

    And the fanbois are getting dumber and dumber.

    -Letting Derek Smart work on your game is like letting Osama bin Laden work in the White House. Something will burn.-
    -And on the 8th day, man created God.-

  • ForTheCityForTheCity Los Angeles, CAPosts: 307Member

    Don't even get the point of online single player because basically you're doing the same thing as being offline. You're still playing against the computer. 

  • WarmakerWarmaker San Diego, CAPosts: 2,231Member
    Originally posted by dzoni87

      I had read somewhere and i strongly believe that the 'second fall of video game industry" is at hand. The top of tragedy is that Sony announced that their PS4 will no have any kind of optical reader. It will be mandatory to use internet to purchase, let alone play games. Basically, you will not own anything except console.

      This being said, i blame publishers only partially. Gamers with mentallity 'i will buy it only because it is sequell to Diablo/Heroes of Might and Magic/Assassin's Creed/Mass Effect/whatever" will lead to this fall as well. I am not discussing anything about games themselves at this point, some of them are great, some are pretty good, some are bad, its not the point.

      My biggest annoyance is that publishers say "Oh look, here is a great game but we will not sell it to you, we will only rent it to you to play it and we can take it away from you whenever you want and all that will be left to you is useless pieces of plastic. But hey you could play freezbie with it still. You should be thankfull for it" and largest ammount of Gamer community said "Okay, thank you for releasing this fabulous sequel, kind sir".

      "Shut up and take my money" mentallity will kill video game industry once again. Dont shut the big guys up and react to their b.c. with more common sense. Like E.T. wasnt enough to make people learn stuff.

    My opinion, have a nice day,

    Dzoni87

    Let the apocalypse come.  The direction things have been going for years now?  It can't happen soon enough.  Because out of the ashes of this collapse, only then can new, refreshing things be done.  The possibility of new visionaries to try something without being strapped down to follow some old, highly travelled road that happens to be littered with the failures of others, rotting to the side.

    If there's one genre in gaming that needs to die first, one single genre that needs it badly for a rebirth and a new chance, are MMORPGs.

    "I have only two out of my company and 20 out of some other company. We need support, but it is almost suicide to try to get it here as we are swept by machine gun fire and a constant barrage is on us. I have no one on my left and only a few on my right. I will hold." (First Lieutenant Clifton B. Cates, US Marine Corps, Soissons, 19 July 1918)

2»
Sign In or Register to comment.