Recommended Posts

So you are mad at blizzard for forgetting your password and your secret question answer?

Actually, I somewhat recently had to retrieve my Battle.net password, and the process is nearly impossible. I eventually had to call Blizzard and spend hours on the phone. Their customer support in general really needs some work, and trying to get support through their website is horrible; it's like a seemingly never-ending circle jerk in Hell.

Actually, I somewhat recently had to retrieve my Battle.net password, and the process is nearly impossible. I eventually had to call Blizzard and spend hours on the phone. Their customer support in general really needs some work, and trying to get support through their website is horrible.

I got mine in less than a minute.

why should you have to log in and possibly wait in a que to play a Single Player game? not to mention the fact that if you lose internet at any time while playing you get kicked out (still talking about single player here)

It's not a single player game though. If it were single player you wouldn't need an always on internet connection. That's what people aren't seeing, the game isn't single player. It's multiplayer with the option to play alone (online).

there are online elements of the game you know, you can group with up to 4 people from the "internets" in "single player".. there's battle.net, the auction house.. and it's not done to combat piracy it's done to delay it so people will buy it at launch, every game gets cracked eventually...but as yet d3 has not

It's not a single player game though. If it were single player you wouldn't need an always on internet connection. That's what people aren't seeing, the game isn't single player. It's multiplayer with the option to play alone (online).

Or is it a single player game with the option to play with friends? Diablo, to me, should be that.

Actually, I somewhat recently had to retrieve my Battle.net password, and the process is nearly impossible. I eventually had to call Blizzard and spend hours on the phone. Their customer support in general really needs some work, and trying to get support through their website is horrible.

Wait, so did you not have access to your email address the account was setup with or what? I would've thought it'd be as simple as an email being sent to you to reset it.

Actually, that's exactly what I did with my old WoW account. Mine got compromised since it didn't have an authenticator on it (stopped playing the account in BC). I recently got it unbanned by submitting it through their online ticket form. Took 2 hours total between waiting for a GM to handle my ticket, sending them proof of identity, and unbanning the account. Maybe they had a high volume the day you called? :s

It's not a single player game though. If it were single player you wouldn't need an always on internet connection. That's what people aren't seeing, the game isn't single player. It's multiplayer with the option to play alone (online).

It's single player with coop.

It's single player with coop.

The way it's designed with emphasis on the online, with the battle.net friends, and such. Also the way the server is written, and the online elements. it's not. It is an always online game, just you either have people playing with you or not.

All "single player" game in D3 are fully online games. It's up to you to allow others to join, or if you want to join another game. As no "co-op" mode must be entered, it isn't single player with option to co-op. It's fully online the option is to lock your game or not.

User score of this game reflect the whole debacle of the need of an "online connection" on a single player game....

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/diablo-iii

The game itself its a downgrade in every single aspect, the art seems like WOW with better graphics, the skills and customization its dumbed down, and annoying DRM dont help neither, its even worse than SC2.

ZmCme.png

IuZge.png

Kotaku coverage:

http://kotaku.com/5910662/when-it-comes-to-diablo-iii-error-3003-is-the-new-error-37

http://kotaku.com/5910480/last-nights-diablo-iii-debacle-demonstrates-the-problem-with-always+online-games

http://kotaku.com/5910995/diablo-iiis-error-37-dont-call-it-a-comeback

Destructoid:

http://www.destructoid.com/metacritic-user-reviews-tear-diablo-iii-apart-227545.phtml

As many said before vote with your wallets do not buy this.... i avoided starcraft 2 and i guess i pass on this one too, the lack of self dignity and current industry trends its killing the gaming, we have to stop this now or this will only get worse....

The way it's designed with emphasis on the online, with the battle.net friends, and such. Also the way the server is written, and the online elements. it's not. It is an always online game, just you either have people playing with you or not.

All "single player" game in D3 are fully online games. It's up to you to allow others to join, or if you want to join another game. As no "co-op" mode must be entered, it isn't single player with option to co-op. It's fully online the option is to lock your game or not.

which is what everyone is saying they don't like, we're not arguing how it is, we're arguing that it shouldn't be the way it is

the fact that if my internet is down for one reason or another or i'm on the go with my laptop and don't have access to the internet I won't be able to play a game by myself that i bought with my own money is just stupid any only hurting us

The way it's designed with emphasis on the online, with the battle.net friends, and such. Also the way the server is written, and the online elements. it's not. It is an always online game, just you either have people playing with you or not.

All "single player" game in D3 are fully online games. It's up to you to allow others to join, or if you want to join another game. As no "co-op" mode must be entered, it isn't single player with option to co-op. It's fully online the option is to lock your game or not.

Well of course it?s an always online game, that?s what people are complaining about. The gameplay (sans the real auction house) doesn?t require the game to be always online. It was a design decision made for financial reasons, not player experience.

My concept for Blizzard saying that it should be online only to prevent folks from hacking items to sell on the auction house is to have offline characters and online characters and only allow you to use the auction house with items from online characters. and give the user the choice of which type of character they want to make at the beginning. This would help people that dont want to use any of the online functions.

However, I like the idea of being able to say "Hey want to help me with this quest?" and a friend can jump right into the game with me. However, i dont think they should force you to do it.

The way it's designed with emphasis on the online, with the battle.net friends, and such. Also the way the server is written, and the online elements. it's not. It is an always online game, just you either have people playing with you or not.

All "single player" game in D3 are fully online games. It's up to you to allow others to join, or if you want to join another game. As no "co-op" mode must be entered, it isn't single player with option to co-op. It's fully online the option is to lock your game or not.

So Saints Row 2 + 3, Fable 2 + 3 and Gears of War 1, 2 + 3 aren't single-player games because your friends can join you without entering a special Co-Op mode?

My concept for Blizzard saying that it should be online only to prevent folks from hacking items to sell on the auction house is to have offline characters and online characters and only allow you to use the auction house with items from online characters. and give the user the choice of which type of character they want to make at the beginning. This would help people that dont want to use any of the online functions.

However, I like the idea of being able to say "Hey want to help me with this quest?" and a friend can jump right into the game with me. However, i dont think they should force you to do it.

Ya, im growing to like this mode a little more.

First, the game you make is private, except friends can pop in and out. You have the option to make it public though.

Last night while playing, I found a good stat yellow chest peice for a Demon Hunter. I was level 21, and this armor peice was for around lvl9. Well, just so happened to be a friend on who was a Demon Hunter and Level 9. I told him, " hey, when you get the chance , hop into my game and ill give you this awesome armor. And boom, he jumped in, grabbed it, and jumped out to go back to his story. It is a good thing to be able to just join friends so easily. There are downsides, but I found at least a plus side to this :)

Wait, so did you not have access to your email address the account was setup with or what? I would've thought it'd be as simple as an email being sent to you to reset it.

Actually, that's exactly what I did with my old WoW account. Mine got compromised since it didn't have an authenticator on it (stopped playing the account in BC). I recently got it unbanned by submitting it through their online ticket form. Took 2 hours total between waiting for a GM to handle my ticket, sending them proof of identity, and unbanning the account. Maybe they had a high volume the day you called? :s

Oh, yes, I had access to my email address. The problem was, in order to get my password reset, I had to log into customer support with my email address and password. Effing retarded lol. It took a couple days of me messing around with their ****ty website before I called, and then most of that time was spent on hold; once I actually got to talk to a person I had a password reset email sent within like 2 minutes.

what i hate about the 'always connected' thing, is i'll be 90% of the way through a level, and the server will drop me, and when i log back in, i'm alllll the way back at the last checkpoint, with nothing completed! UUGGHHH

That exact thing just happened to me! lol

"OMG Diablo wants me to be online all the time?! No way, I say! My time is important to me - I want to pretend like I still have dial-up!"

I swear, people bitch about the dumbest things. Granted, I too was skeptical about the so-called "DRM" about Diablo, but then I grew

up. What's wrong with having to be online to play it? This isn't the 90s anymore.

So the launch was screwed up... surprise? This is a Blizzard game, folks. They're notorious for underestimating server load, how many players they have, and how popular their games are. But if there's one lesson to be learned from it all, it's this: wait a while and try again. Epic, I know.

So the launch was screwed up... surprise? This is a Blizzard game, folks. They're notorious for underestimating server load, how many players they have, and how popular their games are. But if there's one lesson to be learned from it all, it's this: wait a while and try again. Epic, I know.

I totally heard that in Deckard Cain's voice. :laugh:

"OMG Diablo wants me to be online all the time?! No way, I say! My time is important to me - I want to pretend like I still have dial-up!"

I swear, people bitch about the dumbest things. Granted, I too was skeptical about the so-called "DRM" about Diablo, but then I grew

up. What's wrong with having to be online to play it? This isn't the 90s anymore.

like i said in a previous post, i have no problem with having to be online when it starts to do a check, but having to repeat 30+ minutes of game play because their server drops me is NOT fun...

While I think Blizzard should have done what he suggested earlier in the video of have two characters one stored on your computer for single player and one stored on the server for multiplayer (just like D2) I also think that these server issues are just a disadvantage of having your characters in the cloud however I prefer the advantage of knowing that my character will always be there.

If for whatever reason my HDD dies and I find out everything is gone then I would have lost all of the effort I have put into games and most probably would give up and not play them... However with characters stored on the cloud you just login and you're good to go.

But the problem is Blizzard don't give us that option which yeah I agree is kind of stupid queuing for a single player game!

"OMG Diablo wants me to be online all the time?! No way, I say! My time is important to me - I want to pretend like I still have dial-up!"

I swear, people bitch about the dumbest things. Granted, I too was skeptical about the so-called "DRM" about Diablo, but then I grew

up. What's wrong with having to be online to play it? This isn't the 90s anymore.

Well, for starters, playing it years down the line may be impossible when Blizzard decides to **** everybody who bought the game and shut down the servers. Probably most people won't care at that point and we'll be playing Diablo 5 or something, but that's not the point.
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • Calling GTA 6 overhyped crap doesn’t make you edgy, it just makes you sound like someone who hasn’t enjoyed anything since the PS2 era.
    • I’m not arguing whether Rockstar likes money. Obviously, they do, they’re a business. I’m saying this isn’t new. They’ve always launched console first. This is just how Rockstar operates.
    • I'm not sure how old the school is, but they've been doing this since GTA 3. Back in those days we'd be lucky for game companies to release on the PC at all. And with the current state of Sony (or Microsoft) their gaming wing won't be getting a penny from me.
    • We now know when and how the Universe may truly end by Sayan Sen Image by Marek Pavlík via Pexels| Not representative A study by physicist Henry Tye of Cornell University suggests that the universe may not expand forever. Instead, it could eventually stop expanding, begin contracting and end in a "Big Crunch" roughly 20 billion years from now. The research, published in the Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, was conducted by Tye, Horace White Professor of Physics Emeritus at Cornell University. Using recent observations from major dark-energy surveys, Tye and his collaborators developed a cosmological model that predicts the universe could have a total lifespan of about 33 billion years. Since the universe is currently estimated to be 13.8 billion years old, the model places it near the midpoint of its existence. According to Cornell University's summary of the research, the study centers on the cosmological constant, a term introduced by Albert Einstein in his theory of general relativity. In modern cosmology, the cosmological constant is commonly used to describe the simplest form of dark energy, the unknown phenomenon believed to be driving the accelerating expansion of the universe. "For the last 20 years, people believed that the cosmological constant is positive, and the universe will expand forever," Tye said in a Cornell University news release. "The new data seem to indicate that the cosmological constant is negative, and that the universe will end in a big crunch." The study draws on data from the Dark Energy Survey (DES) and the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (DESI), two major projects designed to investigate the nature of dark energy. According to Tye, recent observations suggest that dark energy may not behave exactly like a simple cosmological constant. To account for those observations, Tye and his collaborators proposed a model involving an extremely light hypothetical particle that evolves over time. In their calculations, this produces a negative cosmological constant and leads to a future collapse of the universe. The model predicts that cosmic expansion would continue for approximately another 11 billion years before reaching a maximum size, after which the universe would begin contracting and eventually collapse. Scientists have long debated how the universe might end. As explained in an article published in The Conversation by Stephen DiKerby of Michigan State University, several possibilities have been proposed. If dark energy remains constant and positive, the universe could continue expanding indefinitely, gradually becoming colder, darker and more diffuse in a scenario often called the "heat death" of the universe. Other theoretical possibilities include a Big Rip, in which cosmic expansion accelerates so dramatically that galaxies, stars and even atoms are torn apart, or a Big Crunch, in which expansion reverses and the universe collapses back into an extremely dense state. DiKerby notes that the Big Crunch idea itself is not new. What distinguishes Tye's work is that it attempts to use current observational data to estimate when such a collapse might occur and how it could unfold. Much of the universe's long-term evolution remains uncertain. According to current astrophysical understanding, stars will continue to form and die for billions of years. The Sun, for example, is about halfway through its expected lifespan. Galaxies are also expected to continue merging; the Milky Way and Andromeda galaxies are projected to collide several billion years from now. At the same time, the nature of dark energy remains one of the biggest unanswered questions in cosmology. While observations indicate that the universe's expansion is accelerating, scientists still do not know what is causing that acceleration. Future observations may therefore alter current predictions about the cosmos's ultimate fate. Tye emphasized that additional evidence will be needed before firm conclusions can be drawn. DESI continues to collect data, while upcoming observations from missions and observatories including Euclid, SPHEREx and the Vera C. Rubin Observatory are expected to provide more precise measurements of dark energy. "People have said before that if the cosmological constant is negative, then the universe will collapse eventually. That's not new," Tye said. "However, here the model tells you when the universe collapses and how it collapses." For now, the study presents one possible future for the cosmos rather than a settled prediction. Whether the universe ultimately ends in a Big Crunch, expands forever, or follows another path entirely remains an open question that future observations will help answer. Source: Cornell University, The Conversation This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • If you look around on Amazon, some of these are available for $9
  • Recent Achievements

    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      With What earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      570
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      175
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      73
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      68
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!