You are wrong Servant of the Lord, Diablo 3 client doesn't contain the server-side code, it's pointless. The game logic runs on Blizzard owned server (just like WoW), so you cannot easily / quickly crack it. You have to recode a whole server, which is definitly possible, but takes much more time. I know it happened with WoW and it will happen with D3, we just don't know how long (definitly more than 1 week).
JTippetts: Just a quick question, why do you think you need to pay real money to play the game ? Personally I'm not very far, so I don't know, but my friend is playing inferno currently and while difficult, it's doable without cash (obvisouly since the cash AH is not up yet)
Diablo 3 representing the future of Anti- piracy?
D3 in particular will probably be a nightmare for pirates to crack due to the amount of random encounters and items there is. I don't like always-online as an anti-piracy measure, but I don't really mind it for a game like Diablo which I consider to be a multiplayer game anyway, even though it can be played in singleplayer.
Author
D3 in particular will probably be a nightmare for pirates to crack due to the amount of random encounters and items there is
[/quote]
Yes, it will be a nightmare and some people will lose hope about the crack if it doesnt appear in 2 weeks and they will eventually buy the game.
Plus i wanted to share this link with you guys.
http://me.ign.com/en/news/1057/Man-Dies-After-Playing-Diablo-III-for-72-Hours
A man died playing diablo 3 for 72 hours, I am a diablo fan too, Just warning you.
JTippetts is angry.
Anyway, any game with enough client side code can be cracked, given enough time.
It's called server emulation.
This kind of always-online cracks take usually between one to two months, compared to the usual 48-hour lapse of regular DRM. The record is at 1 year, by the way.
So, give it time. Diablo III hasn't been out there for two weeks yet.
Whether this is healthy for the industry, or whether this practice helps making games profitable, that's a different story.
But technically? come again in one month, then in another month. And then back in a year. But crack-proof? Laughable.
Place your bets on how long it will take to break the system.
Systems like Gaikai or OnLive are at better position of being crack-proof. The whole thing is streamed through the net. Only input and a basic network communication sits on the client side; at the expense of compression artifacts and lag (depending on where you live and time of day).
Anyway, any game with enough client side code can be cracked, given enough time.
It's called server emulation.
This kind of always-online cracks take usually between one to two months, compared to the usual 48-hour lapse of regular DRM. The record is at 1 year, by the way.
So, give it time. Diablo III hasn't been out there for two weeks yet.
Whether this is healthy for the industry, or whether this practice helps making games profitable, that's a different story.
But technically? come again in one month, then in another month. And then back in a year. But crack-proof? Laughable.
Place your bets on how long it will take to break the system.
Systems like Gaikai or OnLive are at better position of being crack-proof. The whole thing is streamed through the net. Only input and a basic network communication sits on the client side; at the expense of compression artifacts and lag (depending on where you live and time of day).
Well while I agree with JTippets, the reason I asked for and got my money back was the fact it runs on a server system. I had no idea about this before I bought the game, I just assumed the usual bnet / solo separation. I physically cannont play the game, so no, any company that does this wont be getting my money. I can play WoW fine though, but I'm not going back there.
A single player game requiring permanent internet connection is a reason that makes me wish this world fucking ended.
I'm getting used to the fact that I'm the kind customer that nobody cares of in almost all cases, but I can't stomach too much of this shit.
living in a country where the net is not stable? - Go fuck yourself
Cannot afford stable net? - Go fuck yourself
64 dollars is your weekly salary and no chance to take it back when you are rightly fed up with the product? - Go fuck yourself
Interested in single player campaigns? - Go fuck yourself
Interested in music the masses aren't interested about? - Go fuck yourself
rant over, back to happy mode.
It is luck that I don't actually play games. I'm okay with playing DotA Ai map or Open Transport Tycoon over and over again. Luckily there are people in the world you don't want to make money of every minute of programming, and luckily they are willing to produce awesome things free or easily/cheaply available. Hopefully the "big guys" don't want to do something about it...
I'm getting used to the fact that I'm the kind customer that nobody cares of in almost all cases, but I can't stomach too much of this shit.
living in a country where the net is not stable? - Go fuck yourself
Cannot afford stable net? - Go fuck yourself
64 dollars is your weekly salary and no chance to take it back when you are rightly fed up with the product? - Go fuck yourself
Interested in single player campaigns? - Go fuck yourself
Interested in music the masses aren't interested about? - Go fuck yourself
rant over, back to happy mode.
It is luck that I don't actually play games. I'm okay with playing DotA Ai map or Open Transport Tycoon over and over again. Luckily there are people in the world you don't want to make money of every minute of programming, and luckily they are willing to produce awesome things free or easily/cheaply available. Hopefully the "big guys" don't want to do something about it...
64 dollars is your weekly salary and no chance to take it back when you are rightly fed up with the product? - Go fuck yourself
You are fucking yourself by buying a $60 game on a $64/week salary to begin with.
blahhh forget it.
just one thing: for long, I had about 100 dollars weekly salary which is not bad in my country. now I can hope about 250 per week. And I would still buy things I want to enjoy. If that alone means that I am fucking myself, then fuck yourself
just one thing: for long, I had about 100 dollars weekly salary which is not bad in my country. now I can hope about 250 per week. And I would still buy things I want to enjoy. If that alone means that I am fucking myself, then fuck yourself
I think most people misunderstand what Diablo 3 and Batle.net 2.0 are. Chindril seems to have an important part of it down, but didn't really elaborate to the topic at hand, so I will. I'm not going to try to change anyone's opinion on the matter, but hopefully more people can see things how they really are rather than what they are perceiving them to be.
To start out, I'll list some points of interest that my explanation is based upon. I'm not going to fully elaborate each point, but just give enough for readers to hopefully see where I am going with it.
1. DRM simply does not work for the masses. Short term or long term, it's been shown time and time again. In the end, the paying customers suffer the most, while the illegitimate users benefit the most. Some companies are finally getting the picture, while some are not.
2. Writing the functionality for a single player version, a multiplayer version, and a lan version of a game, in addition to the multiplayer server, is impractical when all you have to do is write a multiplayer client and a multiplayer server (more on this later).
3. In this digital age, selling digital products has been increasingly more difficult due to piracy. The business model of selling digital goods is going down the drain. The foreseeable viable alternative is to sell access to a service instead.
4. We, as a society, are experiencing a digitally driven social revolution. Facebook, twitter, reddit, and many other services are now a part of everyday life in ways that social media never was imagined a decade ago.
Now, how are all these points relevant to the discussion at hand? Consider if you were Blizzard:
"If we write a single player game, it will get pirated and we will lose money. If we add DRM, we will be vilified and cause even more people to pirate the game."
"If we write a SP/SP-LAN/MP version of the game, we are doing a lot more work and have a lot more security concerns as we did with D2, which also will cause us to lose a lot of money"
"if we don't legitimize official item selling via RMAH, someone else will capitalize on the market, like in Diablo 2, and that money will not be going to us."
"We need a way to add social elements to the game to stay relevant and allow people to enjoy the game with friends easily."
The only solution is a client-server model for the game. Let's eliminate single player altogether so people have nothing to crack/pirate. Cut down on all the extra security and maintenance required for SP/SP-Lan/MP versions of the game so we only have to deal with a non-authoritative client and an authoritative server. Let's add a GAH/RMAH so people can safely do what they always wanted to while allowing us to capitalize on our own IP. Sure, people will go outside our system, but our system will be of the most safe and convenient for users. Finally, let's add some more social features to the game via Battle.net 2.0. Friends should be able to easily join each others games at the click of a button. Match making should be seemless and require no effort for people to join new games and complete quests with strangers.
This is what I truly think Blizzard's logic was for the design of Diablo 3. To maximize profits, minimize costs, and be in as much control as possible over their game. Isn't that the ultimate goal of any business? I can't say I blame them for trying to financially survive in these times.
With all that being said, the designs of Diablo 3 and Battle.net 2.0 are not so much about anti-piracy as much as just being the one stone that kills many birds, so to speak. It's not a silver bullet, obviously, but it addresses the main concerns with making a new blockbuster game and I think it is the future of major games.
However, where Blizzard has failed is the actual implementation of everything I just said.
I was a part of the beta since late last year. Each major test had the same connectivity issues experienced on login. Quite literally, they had the same problem for at least 6 months and were unable to fix it by the time of launch. The launch day problems did not surprise me, but given the amount of time Blizzard had to address the problem, obviously they failed pretty hard. Likewise with random disconnects, another issue that was going on since beta.
Next, the state of their GAH is just a mess. I find it totally unacceptable, after all this time and testing that they have to take 1/2 of it down and rework it while the other 1/2 is unstable the majority of the time. To think that the RMAH was going to work in the same way, I see now why it has been delayed for a while, which is totally disappointing, all things considered. I don't expect anything to be flawless, but I do expect a certain level of quality in a game like this, and that level has not been met.
Their "social" aspects of the game are just quite pitiful. Their match making is akin to blind or speed dating. You get no choices on who you might get grouped with, group sizes were low for a while, and trying to play the game with randoms who had really bad gear is no fun at all. I can't tell you how many times I joined people who had 6k hp in Hell with hardly any resists, and had to carry them through everything. Have you ever been in a group with all of the same class? It can be quite annoying. When I play my Witch Doctor, I prefer to be in a group with a Monk or Barb at least. If I play my wizard, I'd like to be with a Barb or Witch Doctor. So on and so forth.
Their biggest mistake though, is failing to establish a real identity for the game. The name "Diablo" is what carried the game. So much changed in the beta from the time I started trying it until May when it shut down from launch. PvP was shelved and who knows when that will be added. The AH, as mentioned before, is a mess. The state of Inferno and the itemization of items in game show clear design flaws that make you ask, "what were they thinking?" Honestly, it feels like they ran out of time and had to put out something for the money, and will be spending the foreseeable future, "finishing the game".
I myself hated the beta with a passion. I thought I'd never play the game based on what I saw. However, the idea of the RMAH intrigued me and I'm a sucker for the "Diablo" title, so I decided to give it a go. I figured I could play a little and when the RMAH comes out, see if I wanted to stick around or not. With the way things have worked out now though, I've stopped playing and will be awaiting the 1.0.3 patch. I've gotten 3 different classes to 60 (which is pretty easy with how the game is setup), but with the way items work and how Inferno is designed (don't get me started on all the flaws and exploits), the game is not only unplayable, but simply unejoyable now. I don't regret the $60 purchase, but after all this time and knowing what types of resources Blizzard has, I find Diablo 3 to be quite disappointing, which is a shame because there's a lot of really nice things about the game that gets overlooked and not talked about either.
To start out, I'll list some points of interest that my explanation is based upon. I'm not going to fully elaborate each point, but just give enough for readers to hopefully see where I am going with it.
1. DRM simply does not work for the masses. Short term or long term, it's been shown time and time again. In the end, the paying customers suffer the most, while the illegitimate users benefit the most. Some companies are finally getting the picture, while some are not.
2. Writing the functionality for a single player version, a multiplayer version, and a lan version of a game, in addition to the multiplayer server, is impractical when all you have to do is write a multiplayer client and a multiplayer server (more on this later).
3. In this digital age, selling digital products has been increasingly more difficult due to piracy. The business model of selling digital goods is going down the drain. The foreseeable viable alternative is to sell access to a service instead.
4. We, as a society, are experiencing a digitally driven social revolution. Facebook, twitter, reddit, and many other services are now a part of everyday life in ways that social media never was imagined a decade ago.
Now, how are all these points relevant to the discussion at hand? Consider if you were Blizzard:
"If we write a single player game, it will get pirated and we will lose money. If we add DRM, we will be vilified and cause even more people to pirate the game."
"If we write a SP/SP-LAN/MP version of the game, we are doing a lot more work and have a lot more security concerns as we did with D2, which also will cause us to lose a lot of money"
"if we don't legitimize official item selling via RMAH, someone else will capitalize on the market, like in Diablo 2, and that money will not be going to us."
"We need a way to add social elements to the game to stay relevant and allow people to enjoy the game with friends easily."
The only solution is a client-server model for the game. Let's eliminate single player altogether so people have nothing to crack/pirate. Cut down on all the extra security and maintenance required for SP/SP-Lan/MP versions of the game so we only have to deal with a non-authoritative client and an authoritative server. Let's add a GAH/RMAH so people can safely do what they always wanted to while allowing us to capitalize on our own IP. Sure, people will go outside our system, but our system will be of the most safe and convenient for users. Finally, let's add some more social features to the game via Battle.net 2.0. Friends should be able to easily join each others games at the click of a button. Match making should be seemless and require no effort for people to join new games and complete quests with strangers.
This is what I truly think Blizzard's logic was for the design of Diablo 3. To maximize profits, minimize costs, and be in as much control as possible over their game. Isn't that the ultimate goal of any business? I can't say I blame them for trying to financially survive in these times.
With all that being said, the designs of Diablo 3 and Battle.net 2.0 are not so much about anti-piracy as much as just being the one stone that kills many birds, so to speak. It's not a silver bullet, obviously, but it addresses the main concerns with making a new blockbuster game and I think it is the future of major games.
However, where Blizzard has failed is the actual implementation of everything I just said.
I was a part of the beta since late last year. Each major test had the same connectivity issues experienced on login. Quite literally, they had the same problem for at least 6 months and were unable to fix it by the time of launch. The launch day problems did not surprise me, but given the amount of time Blizzard had to address the problem, obviously they failed pretty hard. Likewise with random disconnects, another issue that was going on since beta.
Next, the state of their GAH is just a mess. I find it totally unacceptable, after all this time and testing that they have to take 1/2 of it down and rework it while the other 1/2 is unstable the majority of the time. To think that the RMAH was going to work in the same way, I see now why it has been delayed for a while, which is totally disappointing, all things considered. I don't expect anything to be flawless, but I do expect a certain level of quality in a game like this, and that level has not been met.
Their "social" aspects of the game are just quite pitiful. Their match making is akin to blind or speed dating. You get no choices on who you might get grouped with, group sizes were low for a while, and trying to play the game with randoms who had really bad gear is no fun at all. I can't tell you how many times I joined people who had 6k hp in Hell with hardly any resists, and had to carry them through everything. Have you ever been in a group with all of the same class? It can be quite annoying. When I play my Witch Doctor, I prefer to be in a group with a Monk or Barb at least. If I play my wizard, I'd like to be with a Barb or Witch Doctor. So on and so forth.
Their biggest mistake though, is failing to establish a real identity for the game. The name "Diablo" is what carried the game. So much changed in the beta from the time I started trying it until May when it shut down from launch. PvP was shelved and who knows when that will be added. The AH, as mentioned before, is a mess. The state of Inferno and the itemization of items in game show clear design flaws that make you ask, "what were they thinking?" Honestly, it feels like they ran out of time and had to put out something for the money, and will be spending the foreseeable future, "finishing the game".
I myself hated the beta with a passion. I thought I'd never play the game based on what I saw. However, the idea of the RMAH intrigued me and I'm a sucker for the "Diablo" title, so I decided to give it a go. I figured I could play a little and when the RMAH comes out, see if I wanted to stick around or not. With the way things have worked out now though, I've stopped playing and will be awaiting the 1.0.3 patch. I've gotten 3 different classes to 60 (which is pretty easy with how the game is setup), but with the way items work and how Inferno is designed (don't get me started on all the flaws and exploits), the game is not only unplayable, but simply unejoyable now. I don't regret the $60 purchase, but after all this time and knowing what types of resources Blizzard has, I find Diablo 3 to be quite disappointing, which is a shame because there's a lot of really nice things about the game that gets overlooked and not talked about either.
Perhaps because it's possible to both like a game, and hate the way it's been crippled with DRM? (Plus the first buyers are not going to know until after they've bought the game.)
Feels like there's a lot of noise being generated around this, but not much actual "not purchasing the game". Either that or their record breaking sales would have been even better without the drm.
It seems perfectly consistent that more criticism is generated for the most popular games - of course you won't get much noise over a game that no one cares about.
Would not buying really help? Or would they just blame the lower sales on piracy, like they always do? What about games that get lots of sales without this system?
Personally, I don't really care about always online DRM. I care about my experience. My gaming pc is always connected to the internet anyway. If I go out or go away, then I can just not play pc games. No big deal. I have a smartphone to keep me amused and playing a triple A game on a poky laptop screen defeats the purpose anyway.[/quote]Sure, though not everyone has the same views, or circumstances, as you do. And the examples given in the article show problems even when at home.
@[color="#284b72"]JTippetts: Take the game back for a refund, saying you don't agree to the "EULA"? (I'm curious as to whether this actually ever works.)
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
