Let me explain Diablo 3

BeansnBread · May 2012

Originally posted by MikkelB

Originally posted by colddog04

Originally posted by zymurgeist

Originally posted by colddog04

Originally posted by zymurgeist

Originally posted by colddog04

Originally posted by expresso

Why didn't they have an option for offline play but not let those toons online?

To achieve this Blizzard would have to run a mini version of their server on the client machine, this will open up the security and techniques used in the online version and hacks will be so much easier to develope and test.

This part is really just stupid bullshit.

Yes, the client would have to have gear/characters exist locally in order to support a solid single player experience, but obviously this doesn't increase how easy it is to create a hack in order to change your equipement on their server.

Basically, realize he is uneducated to the point where you should not respect his opinion. I haven't even bought the game, but he is obviously not educated in the way that client/server relationships work.

Giving access to code, any code, gives insight into server processes. Diablo has had more than it's share of hacks in the pastSo no it's not stupid bullshit. The things you dismiss as obviously untrue aren't. There are exploits other than changing the equipment on the server. This is really just a logical extension of the policy of not telling the client anything it doesn't need to know.

You are also uneducated about it. You've probably been playing MMOs all your life and you still don't understand.

Yes, exploits can happen. They will happen whether or not there is an offline portion of the game. The offline portion of a game will not effect the ability to access their servers.

Is it possible to hack in every online game? Yes. Is it more possible because you have an offline portion? No.

I've been playing computer games since it required a PDP-10 to play them. The more you know about how a game works the easier it is to duplicate and understand the processes. Period. Until you can actually refute that fact instead of resorting to petulant namecalling your input is worthless.

I think what you just said might make more sense if I had actually called you a name.

I literally do not know your background, but what you are saying is bullshit. Understanding the processes to hacking their servers has nothing to do with offering a single player experience.

The main flaw with your argument is, that the "always online"-part does not mean that the game can't be exploited, right? Following that logic you say that if they can't guarantee it that the game won't be exploited, they can just modify the game so that it supports offline singleplayer. That's like giving the key to your house to a criminal, so he can inspect it and if given enough time, make a working copy of it. You just make it easier for exploiteres to make exploits.

Your logic is just silly here. Fact is, the more data exploiters have, the easier it is to create exploits. You talk about hacking servers and the like. Do you know what you're talking about? It would be far easier to code a program that manipulates drops then it is to "hack their servers". That's what happened in Diablo 2 and mainly because the exploiters had access to all the relevant data. This time, with Diablo 3, this isn't the case. Sure, they can probably filter out some information about how the kind of data that gets send and recieved by the client, but it's way harder to do something constructive with this data.

I'm not saying that there won't be exploits, but it's harder to create them now, because the exploiters have less information. But you're correct in one thing though. Hacking servers and offering an offline single player experience are two different things. With one thing in common though, they're both unlikely to happen anytime soon

No, I know it's possible there will be exploits. Actually I believe it to be likely with the way they have it set up even right now.

You don't know what you're talking about though. It's painfully obvious. You have to put the item on your character in their database which means you do indeed need to hack their servers.

Just... think for a bit on it. Go read some wikis or whatever people do to get educated about this stuff.

Edit: I guess the really funny part is that you are basically saying that the system is perfectly hackable as it is. If that were true, if it was so easily done, why are you defending the system at all?

I know it's not as easy as changing the drop rates. They obviously have control over that variable on their servers. But you guys are just so basic with your understanding that you are blind to it... why?

dubyahite · May 2012

Dude that thinks he knows more than everyone else: you have offered nothing in the way of actual information to prove your point. If he is so wrong, tell us what's right? Explain it like an adult.

If you actually know why he is wrong, and what the truth is why wouldn't you make your case?

Because the truth is that he is correct. The game's content IS hosted server side. The server controls this stuff, not the client. A person can it edit the files on his computer to creat items, for example, because the server performs checks to prevent these things.

Does it prevent hacking/exploiting completely? Of course not. It does, however prevent the client from being the point of failure.

This isn't just about storing data in the client, however. The important thing to remember is that the server software has the last say in many things (item drops, health/resources, stats, etc) and a game company can be pretty sure that their server software has not been tampered with.

Let me give you a good example of why allowing the client to have too much responsibility is a very bad thing.

There was a game called Earthrise last year. The developers had left a lot of things client side. It was terrible develolment actually. Rookie stuff.

The scripts that the game ran were stored in the game folder, completely uncompiled. They were available in plain text to anyone who browsed to the game folder. Even worse, there were no server side checks to prevent tampering with these scripts. They were not compared to a server side file at all.

It didn't take an engineer to figure out how to exploit that. The best example was that players were able to modify quest rewards. That quest that used to give 1,000 credits could now give 1,000,000 credits per turn in. And the quest item needed could just be duped.

Hey, not happy with the amount of health you have or damage you are doing? Just turn it up!

Now, this is a very extreme example, but it shows you what is possible. Any single player offline game is susceptible to attacks like this. Even if thy aren't total morons and actually compile their code (unlike the Earthrise devs).

Any game that uses a proper client/server architecture like an mmo, IS inherently more secure than one that doesn't. That is a fact. It won't be invulnerable, but nothing is.

And again, its not jus about where the data is stored (although that is a factor) it is also because the server can perform checks to ensure that the data has not been manipulated by an outside source.

No company should ever think that their technology is completely secure from all forms of attack, but this kind of setup allows for lot more confidence that certain data is not being manipulated.

In Diablo, even if the data for an item was stores offline in the client, say for items, the server is the final authority on the legitimacy of that data. If your game.

Blizzard can't be sure you haven't tampered with game files, but they can be very confident that their server has not been tampered with.

MikkelB · May 2012

Originally posted by colddog04
You don't know what you're talking about though. It's painfully obvious. You have to put the item on your character in their database which means you do indeed need to hack their servers.

Just... think for a bit on it. Go read some wikis or whatever people do to get educated about this stuff.

Edit: I guess the really funny part is that you are basically saying that the system is perfectly hackable as it is. If that were true, if it was so easily done, why are you defending the system at all?

I know it's not as easy as changing the drop rates. They obviously have control over that variable on their servers. But you guys are just so basic with your understanding that you are blind to it... why?

Quoting on my phone is a pain in the ass, so forgive me if this reply looks like ass. Anyway, Diablo 3 is basically setup as a MMO. I can't remember any situation that the WoW servers got hacked. Accounts, sure, but not the servers. But that's basically what you're suggesting here is going to happen with Diablo 3. Like I said, Diablo 2 was different and therefor it was easier to exploit it. Hacking, as in database manipulation is not as easy to do. Blizzard will be on their toes to prevent and combat the hackers, if they want to make the RMAH a success.

By the way, I did not suggest that their service is easily hackable now. The silly, old way of offline singleplayer system of Diablo 2 that some poster want to reintroduce is perfectly exploitable. If anything, the Diablo 3 method is much more secure, to not perfect I bet.

EDIT: Sigh, reply looks like ass. I will do a retouch later at home. Bloody phones...Done

Puremallace · May 2012

Why people insist on debating with Blizzard fans dead set in their positions is just beyond me? Just let them rant on about whatever and move on.

BeansnBread · May 2012

Originally posted by MikkelB
Edit: I guess the really funny part is that you are basically saying that the system is perfectly hackable as it is. If that were true, if it was so easily done, why are you defending the system at all?

I know it's not as easy as changing the drop rates. They obviously have control over that variable on their servers. But you guys are just so basic with your understanding that you are blind to it... why?

Quoting on my phone is a pain in the ass, so forgive me if this reply looks like ass. Anyway, Diablo 3 is basically setup as a MMO. I can't remember any situation that the WoW servers got hacked. Accounts, sure, but not the servers. But that's basically what you're suggesting here is going to happen with Diablo 3. Like I said, Diablo 2 was different and therefor it was easier to exploit it. Hacking, as in database manipulation is not as easy to do. Blizzard will be on their toes to prevent and combat the hackers, if they want to make the RMAH a success.

By the way, I did not suggest that their service is easily hackable now. The silly, old way of offline singleplayer system of Diablo 2 that some poster want to reintroduce is perfectly exploitable. If anything, the Diablo 3 method is much more secure, to not perfect I bet.

Right, the always online is more secure.

The other guy was arguing that adding a single player experience would make the game more hackable. It would cause there to be dupes.

Single player -> Your character is never allowed to go online ever for anything. Everything is stored locally on your PC.

Multiplayer - Exists exactly as it does now. Everything is on their servers.

Diablo 2 WAS different. That is what I was saying. Characters and gear were stored locallly and then you were able to go to battle.net with them.

But that doesn't mean that they can't easily separate the two from each other. You can have secure servers for everyone that wants to play multiplayer and get gear together, while still having a completely offline mode that is single player.

Single player does not equal more hacking than already could potentially exist.

Ramonski7 · May 2012

Originally posted by colddog04

Originally posted by MikkelB
Edit: I guess the really funny part is that you are basically saying that the system is perfectly hackable as it is. If that were true, if it was so easily done, why are you defending the system at all?

I know it's not as easy as changing the drop rates. They obviously have control over that variable on their servers. But you guys are just so basic with your understanding that you are blind to it... why?

Quoting on my phone is a pain in the ass, so forgive me if this reply looks like ass. Anyway, Diablo 3 is basically setup as a MMO. I can't remember any situation that the WoW servers got hacked. Accounts, sure, but not the servers. But that's basically what you're suggesting here is going to happen with Diablo 3. Like I said, Diablo 2 was different and therefor it was easier to exploit it. Hacking, as in database manipulation is not as easy to do. Blizzard will be on their toes to prevent and combat the hackers, if they want to make the RMAH a success.

By the way, I did not suggest that their service is easily hackable now. The silly, old way of offline singleplayer system of Diablo 2 that some poster want to reintroduce is perfectly exploitable. If anything, the Diablo 3 method is much more secure, to not perfect I bet.

Right, the always online is more secure.

The other guy was arguing that adding a single player experience would make the game more hackable. It would cause there to be dupes.

Single player -> Your character is never allowed to go online ever for anything. Everything is stored locally on your PC.

Multiplayer - Exists exactly as it does now. Everything is on their servers.

Diablo 2 WAS different. That is what I was saying. Characters and gear were stored locallly and then you were able to go to battle.net with them.

But that doesn't mean that they can't easily separate the two from each other. You can have secure servers for everyone that wants to play multiplayer and get gear together, while still having a completely offline mode that is single player.

Single player does not equal more hacking than already could potentially exist.

It seems like you're not understanding what HE was saying. If Blizzard allowed users to use their SAME characters for offline as they did for online, it WOULD make hacking their servers easier. As they would have to have a version of the server program running on every users pc (That's why he SAID mini server). Having a copy of their server program in any way shape or form IS inviting hackers to have at it.

Also if they kept offline charcters seperate from online characters it WOULD be easier to hack than having online characters only (That's exactly what happened in D2). Again it would mean that code is accepted to a point where it's telling the server which characters are not allowed online (think about it.)

But having online characters only at all times does NOT give hackers an edge that the two scenerios above would. Since everything is handled server side. Hence the reason that items do disappear eventually.

Yamota · May 2012

Originally posted by zymurgeist
Originally posted by colddog04

Originally posted by zymurgeist

Originally posted by colddog04

Originally posted by expresso

Why didn't they have an option for offline play but not let those toons online?

To achieve this Blizzard would have to run a mini version of their server on the client machine, this will open up the security and techniques used in the online version and hacks will be so much easier to develope and test.

This part is really just stupid bullshit.

Yes, the client would have to have gear/characters exist locally in order to support a solid single player experience, but obviously this doesn't increase how easy it is to create a hack in order to change your equipement on their server.

Basically, realize he is uneducated to the point where you should not respect his opinion. I haven't even bought the game, but he is obviously not educated in the way that client/server relationships work.

Giving access to code, any code, gives insight into server processes. Diablo has had more than it's share of hacks in the pastSo no it's not stupid bullshit. The things you dismiss as obviously untrue aren't. There are exploits other than changing the equipment on the server. This is really just a logical extension of the policy of not telling the client anything it doesn't need to know.

You are also uneducated about it. You've probably been playing MMOs all your life and you still don't understand.

Yes, exploits can happen. They will happen whether or not there is an offline portion of the game. The offline portion of a game will not effect the ability to access their servers.

Is it possible to hack in every online game? Yes. Is it more possible because you have an offline portion? No.

I've been playing computer games since it required a PDP-10 to play them. The more you know about how a game works the easier it is to duplicate and understand the processes. Period. Until you can actually refute that fact instead of resorting to petulant namecalling your input is worthless.

Agree 100% with this. Ofcourse it is easier to hack a game if you have all the code running on the client. This is so obvious that it should not even be discussed.

Shien · May 2012

Hey double rainbow unicorn dude...your long lost cousin common sense is knocking on the door. Put it this way, let's say the fastest and the legit way to that rainbow of yours is by unicorn, one could get there without but it takes longer. To protect your pot of gold and as owner of that unicorn, do you let your unicorn fraternize with bunch donkeys and hope for the best?

adam_nox · May 2012

uh, in D2, characters and gear were stored online, as well as some other data was passed back and forth, while the servers generally 'trusted' your client. You could still get lagged out, stuck in place, disconnected, etc.

Anyways, besides making it easier to find vulnerabilities in the server code, providing an offline mode would just give the game to a bunch of freeloaders who don't want to pay for it, so screw that.

WhiteLantern · May 2012

Originally posted by Shien
Hey double rainbow unicorn dude...your long lost cousin common sense is knocking on the door. Put it this way, let's say the fastest and the legit way to that rainbow of yours is by unicorn, one could get there without but it takes longer. To protect your pot of gold and as owner of that unicorn, do you let your unicorn fraternize with bunch donkeys and hope for the best?

I would be more than happy to let my donkey fraternize with a unicorn, but I'm not sure what that has to do with this thread.

MikkelB · May 2012

Originally posted by Aori
Pretty good post expresso, to bad it will still not get through to most of the "intellectuals".

Yes, agreed. Because of RoboRainbowUnicorn I forgot to say that his post was good. Needed too, if I may add. It gets tiring to say the same thing in multiple threads. In particular when it feels like you're shouting against a wall. Still, I'm suprised to see that a lot of people in this thread at least understand how Diablo 3 exchanges data in comparison to previous games. There're pro's and con's for the old Diablo 2 situation and the way Diablo 3 works. It's a nice change to see a fine discussion going on about that for once, without slandering Blizzard all the time

BeansnBread · May 2012

Originally posted by zymurgeist
Originally posted by adam_nox

uh, in D2, characters and gear were stored online, as well as some other data was passed back and forth, while the servers generally 'trusted' your client. You could still get lagged out, stuck in place, disconnected, etc.

Anyways, besides making it easier to find vulnerabilities in the server code, providing an offline mode would just give the game to a bunch of freeloaders who don't want to pay for it, so screw that.

You mean through an increased understanding making it easier to build server emulators? If so you have grasped it completely.

It makes it easier to build server emulators. It does not make it easier to hack their servers or dupe items on their servers. If you understand that, you have grasped it completely.

HassanPL · May 2012

Well i personally think that this DRM that Blizz put into D3 is not that good.

TBH pirates will always find a way. Rember AC2? Milions upon milions of

dolars wasted into making ultimate DRM and after a few weeks one could

easly play whole game offline thanks to server emulation. Diablo 3 will not be

diffrent.

Give it a month and fully working offline mode will be made.

BeansnBread · May 2012

Originally posted by zymurgeist
Originally posted by colddog04

Originally posted by zymurgeist

Originally posted by adam_nox

uh, in D2, characters and gear were stored online, as well as some other data was passed back and forth, while the servers generally 'trusted' your client. You could still get lagged out, stuck in place, disconnected, etc.

Anyways, besides making it easier to find vulnerabilities in the server code, providing an offline mode would just give the game to a bunch of freeloaders who don't want to pay for it, so screw that.

You mean through an increased understanding making it easier to build server emulators? If so you have grasped it completely.

It makes it easier to build server emulators. It does not make it easier to hack their servers or dupe items on their servers. If you understand that, you have grasped it completely.

You're still wrong. Unless they create a completely different set of processes for the single player game it will give insight into processes running on the servers themselves. Never a good thing. I'm still waiting for you to provide any refutation of the point beyond nuh-uh.

You (and a few others) are just too stubborn at this point. I made it very clear and then you come up with this ambiguous reply.

What processes give insight into how to hack their servers and then dupe items on their servers? The AI? The monster list? The procedural terrain generator?

What are you even talking about now? Sillyness.

GrayGhost79 · May 2012

Originally posted by zymurgeist
Originally posted by colddog04

Originally posted by zymurgeist

Originally posted by adam_nox

uh, in D2, characters and gear were stored online, as well as some other data was passed back and forth, while the servers generally 'trusted' your client. You could still get lagged out, stuck in place, disconnected, etc.

Anyways, besides making it easier to find vulnerabilities in the server code, providing an offline mode would just give the game to a bunch of freeloaders who don't want to pay for it, so screw that.

You mean through an increased understanding making it easier to build server emulators? If so you have grasped it completely.

It makes it easier to build server emulators. It does not make it easier to hack their servers or dupe items on their servers. If you understand that, you have grasped it completely.

You're still wrong. Unless they create a completely different set of processes for the single player game it will give insight into processes running on the servers themselves. Never a good thing. I'm still waiting for you to provide any refutation of the point beyond nuh-uh.

I love these back and forths considering there are already 2 private D3 servers up and running lol.

MikkelB · May 2012

Originally posted by GrayGhost79
Originally posted by zymurgeist

Originally posted by colddog04

Originally posted by zymurgeist

Originally posted by adam_nox

uh, in D2, characters and gear were stored online, as well as some other data was passed back and forth, while the servers generally 'trusted' your client. You could still get lagged out, stuck in place, disconnected, etc.

Anyways, besides making it easier to find vulnerabilities in the server code, providing an offline mode would just give the game to a bunch of freeloaders who don't want to pay for it, so screw that.

You mean through an increased understanding making it easier to build server emulators? If so you have grasped it completely.

It makes it easier to build server emulators. It does not make it easier to hack their servers or dupe items on their servers. If you understand that, you have grasped it completely.

You're still wrong. Unless they create a completely different set of processes for the single player game it will give insight into processes running on the servers themselves. Never a good thing. I'm still waiting for you to provide any refutation of the point beyond nuh-uh.

I love these back and forths considering there are already 2 private D3 servers up and running lol.

Why would I want to play on a private server? I could've done that too with WoW and the likes, but it's not like the Blizzard servers. People may bitch and moan about Blizzard, but when the server are stable (they're now for me at least) then a private server wont come even close to the service provided by Blizzard. Just a subpar experience.

Besides, it wont fix the problems the "offline singleplayer"-crowd has.

GrayGhost79 · May 2012

Originally posted by MikkelB
Originally posted by GrayGhost79

Originally posted by zymurgeist

Originally posted by colddog04

Originally posted by zymurgeist

Originally posted by adam_nox

uh, in D2, characters and gear were stored online, as well as some other data was passed back and forth, while the servers generally 'trusted' your client. You could still get lagged out, stuck in place, disconnected, etc.

Anyways, besides making it easier to find vulnerabilities in the server code, providing an offline mode would just give the game to a bunch of freeloaders who don't want to pay for it, so screw that.

You mean through an increased understanding making it easier to build server emulators? If so you have grasped it completely.

It makes it easier to build server emulators. It does not make it easier to hack their servers or dupe items on their servers. If you understand that, you have grasped it completely.

You're still wrong. Unless they create a completely different set of processes for the single player game it will give insight into processes running on the servers themselves. Never a good thing. I'm still waiting for you to provide any refutation of the point beyond nuh-uh.

I love these back and forths considering there are already 2 private D3 servers up and running lol.

Why would I want to play on a private server? I could've done that too with WoW and the likes, but it's not like the Blizzard servers. People may bitch and moan about Blizzard, but when the server are stable (they're now for me at least) then a private server wont come even close to the service provided by Blizzard. Just a subpar experience.

Besides, it wont fix the problems the "offline singleplayer"-crowd has.

I never claimed they would fix any problems.

I never said they were better, good or anything at all.

I simply pointed out that they existed. Their very existence is enough to undermine the defense being presented for the Online Only decision.

Karahandras · May 2012

Originally posted by Teikk
Originally posted by expresso

I'll wait till it's hacked so I can play offline.

See above, yes someone *could* create a pirates server (in time) but just like WoW it will have no content, it will be up to the pirates to create the content, the beta was out for 8 month's and I have yet to hear of any one creating a pirate server, there was a mapviewer developed but that was it.

Bottom line don't hold out for a hacked version I would say there a less than 1% chance one will show up.

meh to bad the crack is already released and working , just like settlers 7 the only people enjoying the game are the ones that got the crack already so they could play without the DRM shit. Its sad when you buy a game and then have to wait for someone to hack it to play the thing.

Zorgo · May 2012

Originally posted by colddog04
Originally posted by Zorgo

Originally posted by colddog04

Originally posted by Zorgo

Originally posted by colddog04

Originally posted by coretex666

Originally posted by colddog04

Originally posted by expresso

Believe it or not, people can use the term "stupid bullshit" and still be intelligent.

Ok then. You are smart. But that doesn't keep you from being a giant a-hole. Intelligent people apparently can be jerks too. But you aren't very smart when it comes to civil discourse. Obviously you are uneducated to the point where one should not respect your opinion. I have bought the game, but apparently this guy is not educated in appropriate civil discourse for me to respect his thoughts.

Jesus, people are sensitive about the word bullshit.

People are sensitive about being called uneducated and not worthy of having their opinion respected. I thought you were smart......

I never claimed to be smart. Educated about this, yes. And I don't think that using the term stupid bullshit takes away from someone's ability to be intelligent.

You know, because it doesn''t.

Oh yeah? It's the only thing highlighted. Oh I'm sorry, I'll split that hair for you....my mistake, you insinuated that you were intelligent.

Bottom line is that you could have responded to that post in a civil manner. He may have been incorrect, but he wasn't malevolent, hateful, deceptive....nothing to say his opinion wasn't worthy of respect. But this is way off topic, and bordering on baiting on my part, so I'm gonna back off. I really need to remember to just hit the report button. People aren't overly sensative. Just remember if one treats people like a jerk, expect people to call you a jerk.

MikkelB · May 2012

Originally posted by GrayGhost79
Originally posted by MikkelB

Originally posted by GrayGhost79

Originally posted by zymurgeist

Originally posted by colddog04

Originally posted by zymurgeist

Originally posted by adam_nox

uh, in D2, characters and gear were stored online, as well as some other data was passed back and forth, while the servers generally 'trusted' your client. You could still get lagged out, stuck in place, disconnected, etc.

Anyways, besides making it easier to find vulnerabilities in the server code, providing an offline mode would just give the game to a bunch of freeloaders who don't want to pay for it, so screw that.

You mean through an increased understanding making it easier to build server emulators? If so you have grasped it completely.

It makes it easier to build server emulators. It does not make it easier to hack their servers or dupe items on their servers. If you understand that, you have grasped it completely.

You're still wrong. Unless they create a completely different set of processes for the single player game it will give insight into processes running on the servers themselves. Never a good thing. I'm still waiting for you to provide any refutation of the point beyond nuh-uh.

I love these back and forths considering there are already 2 private D3 servers up and running lol.

Why would I want to play on a private server? I could've done that too with WoW and the likes, but it's not like the Blizzard servers. People may bitch and moan about Blizzard, but when the server are stable (they're now for me at least) then a private server wont come even close to the service provided by Blizzard. Just a subpar experience.

Besides, it wont fix the problems the "offline singleplayer"-crowd has.

I never claimed they would fix any problems.

I never said they were better, good or anything at all.

I simply pointed out that they existed. Their very existence is enough to undermine the defense being presented for the Online Only decision.

Nope. The only thing it undermines is the DRM function. I don't think that the "always online"-need has much to do with pirating. Cracking a game doesn't seem that hard, if you look at how soon after release it happens. MMO's and Diablo 3 are in general better "protected" against pirates, because you can't just load up the game and play. You need to go through all sorts of hoops to be able to play. Also, my experience with private servers has not been that good.

So I wish these pirates a lot of fun on their borked, emulated servers. From what I've read, some maps don't even load in properly and others are empty. Sounds fun

GrayGhost79 · May 2012

Originally posted by MikkelB
Originally posted by GrayGhost79

Originally posted by MikkelB

Originally posted by GrayGhost79

Originally posted by zymurgeist

Originally posted by colddog04

Originally posted by zymurgeist

Originally posted by adam_nox

uh, in D2, characters and gear were stored online, as well as some other data was passed back and forth, while the servers generally 'trusted' your client. You could still get lagged out, stuck in place, disconnected, etc.

Anyways, besides making it easier to find vulnerabilities in the server code, providing an offline mode would just give the game to a bunch of freeloaders who don't want to pay for it, so screw that.

You mean through an increased understanding making it easier to build server emulators? If so you have grasped it completely.

It makes it easier to build server emulators. It does not make it easier to hack their servers or dupe items on their servers. If you understand that, you have grasped it completely.

You're still wrong. Unless they create a completely different set of processes for the single player game it will give insight into processes running on the servers themselves. Never a good thing. I'm still waiting for you to provide any refutation of the point beyond nuh-uh.

I love these back and forths considering there are already 2 private D3 servers up and running lol.

Why would I want to play on a private server? I could've done that too with WoW and the likes, but it's not like the Blizzard servers. People may bitch and moan about Blizzard, but when the server are stable (they're now for me at least) then a private server wont come even close to the service provided by Blizzard. Just a subpar experience.

Besides, it wont fix the problems the "offline singleplayer"-crowd has.

I never claimed they would fix any problems.

I never said they were better, good or anything at all.

I simply pointed out that they existed. Their very existence is enough to undermine the defense being presented for the Online Only decision.

Nope. The only thing it undermines is the DRM function. I don't think that the "always online"-need has much to do with pirating. Cracking a game doesn't seem that hard, if you look at how soon after release it happens. MMO's and Diablo 3 are in general better "protected" against pirates, because you can't just load up the game and play. You need to go through all sorts of hoops to be able to play. Also, my experience with private servers has not been that good.

So I wish these pirates a lot of fun on their borked, emulated servers. From what I've read, some maps don't even load in properly and others are empty. Sounds fun

Only thing that would make it worse is if they couldn't log in ..... lol

NightCloak · May 2012

Originally posted by colddog04
Originally posted by zymurgeist
Originally posted by colddog04
Originally posted by zymurgeist
Originally posted by adam_nox
uh, in D2, characters and gear were stored online, as well as some other data was passed back and forth, while the servers generally 'trusted' your client. You could still get lagged out, stuck in place, disconnected, etc.

Anyways, besides making it easier to find vulnerabilities in the server code, providing an offline mode would just give the game to a bunch of freeloaders who don't want to pay for it, so screw that.

You mean through an increased understanding making it easier to build server emulators? If so you have grasped it completely.

It makes it easier to build server emulators. It does not make it easier to hack their servers or dupe items on their servers. If you understand that, you have grasped it completely.

You're still wrong. Unless they create a completely different set of processes for the single player game it will give insight into processes running on the servers themselves. Never a good thing. I'm still waiting for you to provide any refutation of the point beyond nuh-uh.

You (and a few others) are just too stubborn at this point. I made it very clear and then you come up with this ambiguous reply. You've made nothing clear. You've just said "nuh-uh" in fancy ways.

What processes give insight into how to hack their servers and then dupe items on their servers? The AI? The monster list? The procedural terrain generator? The monster list is stored client-side. You have all the art assets. Diablo style naming has always been a more random thing. But what are we talking about here. You're the one that insinuates having technical expertise of how games work and yet your statements here seem to show an ignorance to what is even being talked about. In fact, your question of what processes help tells me you are either really trolling hard by not understanding what is being said or trolling by catching a technicality on wording. Either way, the time has come to provide some of this "intelligence" or "knowledge" you are suggesting you have or wander back under a bridge.

What are you even talking about now? Sillyness.

It isn't them who are stubborn. They've all provided examples and methods to counter, argue or contest your points. You've done nothing but refute or as zymurgeist states, say "nuh-uh".

I'll spell out what they've said for you. Please use some for of actual counter-arguement or fact-based explanation rather than general denial, strawman or well-done trolling.

The all-online helps a better play experience by maintaining the same set of characters for both single-player and multi-player experiences. So there are not two-sets of characters.Having the same character with the ability to do both is too risky and everyone agrees.

The over-simplified term "mini server" in your client suggests that the overall same code or large portions of the same processes and logic on managing and running the game in every aspect would be duplicated on your client as well as on the server. This would give insight on the server vulnerabilities and increase risk of hacks being developed or exploits (which by definition are not hacks but rather advantages derived from unexpected results of existing game code). This overall same code, logic or processes being similiar would make programs to exploit or "hack" them online with Blizzard servers easier to create and test.

Providing client versions of game management and content will allow emulators to be more easily created and piracy to occur.

I know nothing of programming other than basic VBA excel macros.

The reasons for no single-player offline experiences is tied with many other aspects of the business decisions made and are only minorly supported by the technical aspects. The naming of a single technical aspect in which you've devoted an incredible amount of effort to dispute or refute is more of a benefit of the real reasons being dollars and cents to name two.

So please, enlighten us on how providing a copy of how the game is run to the client does not help or benefit in any way the development and testing of a program used to exploit, hack, alter, confuse or in any way "cheat" on the server-side multiplayer experience?

NightCloak · May 2012

Originally posted by GrayGhost79
Originally posted by MikkelB
Originally posted by GrayGhost79
Originally posted by zymurgeist
Originally posted by colddog04
Originally posted by zymurgeist
Originally posted by adam_nox
uh, in D2, characters and gear were stored online, as well as some other data was passed back and forth, while the servers generally 'trusted' your client. You could still get lagged out, stuck in place, disconnected, etc.

Anyways, besides making it easier to find vulnerabilities in the server code, providing an offline mode would just give the game to a bunch of freeloaders who don't want to pay for it, so screw that.

You mean through an increased understanding making it easier to build server emulators? If so you have grasped it completely.

It makes it easier to build server emulators. It does not make it easier to hack their servers or dupe items on their servers. If you understand that, you have grasped it completely.

You're still wrong. Unless they create a completely different set of processes for the single player game it will give insight into processes running on the servers themselves. Never a good thing. I'm still waiting for you to provide any refutation of the point beyond nuh-uh.

I love these back and forths considering there are already 2 private D3 servers up and running lol.

Why would I want to play on a private server? I could've done that too with WoW and the likes, but it's not like the Blizzard servers. People may bitch and moan about Blizzard, but when the server are stable (they're now for me at least) then a private server wont come even close to the service provided by Blizzard. Just a subpar experience.

Besides, it wont fix the problems the "offline singleplayer"-crowd has.

I never claimed they would fix any problems.

I never said they were better, good or anything at all.

I simply pointed out that they existed. Their very existence is enough to undermine the defense being presented for the Online Only decision.

The defense that was presented and defended here is purely a technical one when it is such an integral part of many other aspects of the game.

RMAH: How does the RMAH work? It works by players using it. Blizzard takes a cut and boom, free money. How to exploit the free money? Make sure everyone has access to it. How do you do that? Give it to the people who don't care to coop as well. But they dont play online.... How to fix that? All online.

DRM: DRMs are purely anti-piracy, which is again business and not technical. Its to help prevent the game from being played without being paid for. This also allows more players access to the F2P micro-transaction store thats brilliantly disguised as the RMAH.

Anti-cheat: The MMO client-server setup has proven to be far more reliable in terms of anti-cheat than any other popular method. A strong perception of anti-cheat must also be provided given the IP's history of being riddled with cheats and hacks. More so than other titles.

Acheivements: Funny I'd list this here. But its a social grab. It gets people more involved into the game and groups into it. This needs to be shared and also needs a strong sense of legitimacy surrounding it. Again, better supported by all-online. This ties to the social-networking aspect of gaming that Blizzard has been migrating towards as well. But it isnt required since there are plenty of solo players that go acheivement/badge hunting.

Those are 4 reasons for the all-online single player experience. But most importantly. Money is the biggest reason. By making it all online they are better able to monetize the game and ensure profits.

BeansnBread · May 2012

Originally posted by NightCloak
Originally posted by colddog04

Originally posted by zymurgeist

Originally posted by colddog04

Originally posted by zymurgeist

Originally posted by adam_nox

uh, in D2, characters and gear were stored online, as well as some other data was passed back and forth, while the servers generally 'trusted' your client. You could still get lagged out, stuck in place, disconnected, etc.

Anyways, besides making it easier to find vulnerabilities in the server code, providing an offline mode would just give the game to a bunch of freeloaders who don't want to pay for it, so screw that.

You mean through an increased understanding making it easier to build server emulators? If so you have grasped it completely.

It makes it easier to build server emulators. It does not make it easier to hack their servers or dupe items on their servers. If you understand that, you have grasped it completely.

You're still wrong. Unless they create a completely different set of processes for the single player game it will give insight into processes running on the servers themselves. Never a good thing. I'm still waiting for you to provide any refutation of the point beyond nuh-uh.

You (and a few others) are just too stubborn at this point. I made it very clear and then you come up with this ambiguous reply. You've made nothing clear. You've just said "nuh-uh" in fancy ways.

What processes give insight into how to hack their servers and then dupe items on their servers? The AI? The monster list? The procedural terrain generator? The monster list is stored client-side. You have all the art assets. Diablo style naming has always been a more random thing. But what are we talking about here. You're the one that insinuates having technical expertise of how games work and yet your statements here seem to show an ignorance to what is even being talked about. In fact, your question of what processes help tells me you are either really trolling hard by not understanding what is being said or trolling by catching a technicality on wording. Either way, the time has come to provide some of this "intelligence" or "knowledge" you are suggesting you have or wander back under a bridge.

What are you even talking about now? Sillyness.

It isn't them who are stubborn. They've all provided examples and methods to counter, argue or contest your points. You've done nothing but refute or as zymurgeist states, say "nuh-uh".

I'll spell out what they've said for you. Please use some for of actual counter-arguement or fact-based explanation rather than general denial, strawman or well-done trolling.

The all-online helps a better play experience by maintaining the same set of characters for both single-player and multi-player experiences. So there are not two-sets of characters.Having the same character with the ability to do both is too risky and everyone agrees.

The over-simplified term "mini server" in your client suggests that the overall same code or large portions of the same processes and logic on managing and running the game in every aspect would be duplicated on your client as well as on the server. This would give insight on the server vulnerabilities and increase risk of hacks being developed or exploits (which by definition are not hacks but rather advantages derived from unexpected results of existing game code). This overall same code, logic or processes being similiar would make programs to exploit or "hack" them online with Blizzard servers easier to create and test.

Providing client versions of game management and content will allow emulators to be more easily created and piracy to occur.

I know nothing of programming other than basic VBA excel macros.

The reasons for no single-player offline experiences is tied with many other aspects of the business decisions made and are only minorly supported by the technical aspects. The naming of a single technical aspect in which you've devoted an incredible amount of effort to dispute or refute is more of a benefit of the real reasons being dollars and cents to name two.

So please, enlighten us on how providing a copy of how the game is run to the client does not help or benefit in any way the development and testing of a program used to exploit, hack, alter, confuse or in any way "cheat" on the server-side multiplayer experience?

Obviously.

Ramonski7 · May 2012

Originally posted by colddog04
Originally posted by zymurgeist

Originally posted by adam_nox

uh, in D2, characters and gear were stored online, as well as some other data was passed back and forth, while the servers generally 'trusted' your client. You could still get lagged out, stuck in place, disconnected, etc.

Anyways, besides making it easier to find vulnerabilities in the server code, providing an offline mode would just give the game to a bunch of freeloaders who don't want to pay for it, so screw that.

You mean through an increased understanding making it easier to build server emulators? If so you have grasped it completely.

It makes it easier to build server emulators. It does not make it easier to hack their servers or dupe items on their servers. If you understand that, you have grasped it completely.

Fooling the server into believing you have something you should NOT have IS hacking the freakin server dude! Get a grip! This has happened in two games I can think of that allowed offline and online play:

Diablo 2
Phantasy Star Online

Both games were a haven for duped items and bans were flyin fast and hard.

Howdy, Stranger!

Let me explain Diablo 3

Comments

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Let me explain Diablo 3

Comments