Diablo 3 Releases Soon, But...

I clicked on an ad that said Diablo 3 releases 5/15/2012. But it said you had to join Battle.Net to maybe download this game from the internet! That sucks! Then I noticed all the usual places to buy online games -- none of them have Diablo 3 for a download sale!

So it seems the only place to get a download copy of this game is straight from Blizzard. Blizzard Entertainmentiablo III
And I don't want to join Battle.net!

Otherwise, it's old fashioned buy a dvd install disc from the store! Unless you people know where to buy a download from online?

 

I believe you must log in to play no matter where you buy it.

so no battle.net = no play

ofc there will be privated version and emulated server etc that allow single player w/o battle.net but other wise no battle.net = no play

 

Not to burst any bubbles, but the way D3 is designed there won't be any decent pirated version for a long time, if ever. All NPCs, monsters, dungeons, etc are generated and managed by the server. The data literally does not exist client side. In order to play you must be logged into battle.net and connected to the servers. This is just like WoW.

The only option for pirates is an emulated server, but WoW is 8 years old and emulated servers are questionable at best and no where near retail. The best pirates will be able to do short term is spawn your hero in an empty world where you cannot enter dungeons.

As for this guys question, you can buy from the store but to play you will still be making a Battle.net account and need to have a constant connection to the Diablo 3 server.

 

One Battle.net account that all your Blizzard Entertainment games are tied to is how things are done now. It should be much more convenient to have one account instead of one for each game, so I don't see the problem.

 

Yup, it's like steam basically. If you buy Modern warfare 3 from retail or steam, you still have to use steam in the end. Same goes for battle.net

I don't see why you are so adverse to bnet? It's fine aside from the always online restriction. It's super easy to join too :/

 

Either make a battle.net account or don't play Diablo 3. That's pretty much your options. Since the game RUNS and PLAYS on battle net.

 

Dude, you have to try the multiplayer with Diablo 3. Atleast after you gone through the game solo.

It was very fun with multiplayer on diablo 2

 

for the people who have beta, do you think we will end up downloading it again? I mean beta is already 15GB, maybe it is the full release?

 

Beta just said it required 15, it was actually less than 3 installed. You will need to download the full client, Blizzard already has a downloader available to preload it.

 

yupp just figured it out and started download wanna play it 12:00pm hits on 15th of May

EDIT: epic download speed!! 2mb/s

 

Battle.net is required for game play; the game downloads in real time server generated data about the environment and your enemies.

 

Why wouldn't you just create a Battle.Net account? It's not like Blizzard is going to use it to spy on your personal life. Seriously though. Seriously though. What's the big deal? Are you just complaining to complain?

 

I agree. I only trust VALVe's steam and Blizzard's Battle.net. I don't really trust Origin anymore ever since I read somewhere that Origin keeps track of what you do on your computer (or something similar).

 

Then I present to you: The Warden.

 

If that EULA specifically limits Blizzard's rights to these specific activities and they haven't broken that EULA it is fine with me. This isn't much different than Valve's VAC and is designed to keep multiplayer online games honest. There's nothing worse than a bunch of cheaters ruining the online experience for other paying customers.

Origin, on the other hand, (1) does not include such limiting language in their EULA, (2) scans far more than just running DLLs and API hooks (i.e. your entire hard drive to look for marketing opportunities and content not related to the game you purchased), (3) has banned players from single player content despite no customer violations of the EULA, and (4) claims to want to foster a competitive digital distribution environment while simultaneously locking their games exclusively to Origin.

 

For those that have played the beta, how much bandwidth does the game suck up? Here in Canada, we have bandwidth caps and i have to pay extra if i go over 100gigs per month

 

From what I understand it downloads information about item drops, enemies, and that sort of stuff. That can't take a whole lot of data...certainly not enough for a 100GB cap to be of concern.

 

ok good..cause i have a feeling i will be playing a ton of D3 when it comes out lol

 

How do you live with 100G/month with a real machine ?

I easily download 5-10G per day ~~

 

I have options if i need more bandwidth, but right now, 100gigs is all i need. I don't download much anymore.

I have options: We have unlimited plans or 300gig a month plans...i just haven't bothered to switch

 

I haven't played a Blizzard game in a LONG time... Last was Diablo 2 or Warcraft, not the online version. So I didn't know anything about Battle.net

But it would be such an enormous gaming hassle if every video game company made you join their server / account just to play their game. Steam, Origin, and Ubisoft are enough. I hate Gamespy or others...

 

I am not saying that the Origin is better or equal, just that similar services were already employed by Blizzard. And that we can't be sure for what they were or were not used. All we have is Blizzard's word I guess (worth nothing in my book), but at least they don't treat their customers like garbage, like EA does. When I played SWTOR I actually had Origin running within a Sandbox environment, but had left the game since and don't plan to buy any EA game any time soon.

Valve seems like OK company, but even with Steam -- whenever I have the opportunity to buy a game avoiding Steam, I do it. For an end user like me, Steam is a completely pointless application. I can run my games through Windows Shortcuts just fine.

 

Money

commercial = money
statistic = money
market share = money

and more which I cant think of now

 

@OP I hope you know Diablo 3 is online only, there is no offline option, even when playing solo.

So you pretty much have to login with your battle.net account every time to play.

 

Unfortunately that seems to be the trend and the future of big companies games.

I don't see Blizzard ever comming back to offline gaming.

 

I played the open beta and while it was fun to play I won't be getting this game because I don't think you should be connected to a server to play a single player game.

 

oh man, you will so buy this game..

 

D2 multiplayer (coop or arranged pvp) was fun... when it didn't have anything to do with people from battle.net.

Most of the battle.net crowd would join your game, town kill you (or try)without ever having come anywhere near you and leave game. Pretty much playing with battle.net people was a race to see whose hacks were more up-to-date.

Note, it was so bad the kiddies who tried townkilling you would whine when their cheats didn't insta-kill you. /facepalm

Battle.net is the worst community computer games have ever had and its not getting better any time soon.

I am simply hoping the cheats are fixed or at least that they can make a password-locked game that stays locked.

 

Well, trading on bnet was fun and I think it was part of D2 online success. (Looking at the reallife money auction house.............)

 

Doing quests over and over was fun for my friends and I on Diablo 2 HC mode. I rarely PvPed or traded, also, why was a new thread made. ._.

 

At least for now I think they're doing it not because of their desire to implement DRM, but because of a need to prevent hackers cheating the system that allows you to share characters between single player and multiplayer modes.

I'll never understand it myself but apparently the core fanbase for the Diablo series enjoy MP more than SP but hated having two sets of characters (one online stored server side to prevent hacking, on offline to do whatever you wish). Blizzard set out to appease them while minimally affecting SP playability.

 

Actually, I think the biggest reason for the always on DRM is the RMAH (Real Money Auction House). The RMAH is a MAJOR part of the of the business model for Diablo 3 and I am guessing the revenue it generates for Blizzard will surpass the sale of the game in only a few weeks (They take $1/15% cuts of items sold on the RMAH). Blizzard has to maintain the integrity of the game for this RMAH to work. For this reason, I don't ever see this online requirement removed.

 

Seeing how photoshop might require semi permanent internet connection i am not surprised diablo does.

 

I haven't been following the business model behind Diablo 3, but is each copy of the game region-locked with regards to the available servers?

E.g. I buy the game in SE Asia on May 15th, but in September I start University in W. Europe. Does that mean my copy of the game still tries to connect to the SE Asia/US servers like it did when it first validated the game?

 

No, it's a "global" version. You can change servers through the options menu.

 

Hopefully that's something that the global beta keeps when it changes to the full version, a colleague of mine would like the game when it releases on the 15th however I couldn't buy a copy for him since I was afraid his copy would be locked until local servers go online around October.

 

I am a bit disappointed that you need a constant internet connection and not a semi-persistent one. Steam is nice because you can play most things offline as long as you have everything installed. I travel frequently and don't always have access to the internet, so as much as I would like to play D3, it looks like I won't be able to make it my travel companion game. Bummer.

 

The game is global, it's not just beta:

 

Nonsense. Have you read Steam's privacy policy and the subscriber agreement?

(Spoiler: It's pretty damn similar to Origin's).

 

but nothing, im buying it and playing it for the next 10 years

 

This is a good read if you're interested.

 

I like RPS for their PC coverage, but that's an outdated article and bks1987's claim is hearsay and/or FUD.

The Origin EULA (pdf) has been updated and reworded since then and here's what it reads now:

It's now practically identical to what Valve has said in its privacy statement since time immemorial (2004?):

This is just the two services' privacy statements.

If you dig into other parts of their respective EULAs, you'll find horrible legal verbage about users effectively leasing a service that can be removed at the drop of a hat (Gaben's oft mentioned but rarely cited promises are nice but not close to having any legal meaning).

Digital download services (Steam included) are generally pretty bad in terms of protecting and upholding consumer rights. Amazon occasionally sells games without any DRM and there's GOG, of course, but beyond that it's all horrible.

Strongly disliking Origin while simultaneously praising heap on Steam for doing the exact same thing is a pretty damn illogical double standard.

Steam's many, many great features and its sales might make the tradeoffs worthwhile for many (myself included), but it's folly to claim that it's somehow better than Origin in this respect.

 

I think that regardless of the wording, what matters eventually is how companies treat their customers. EA has certainly not done well in that area.

I only plan to play Diablo3 on the Battle.Net so I don't mind. Plus it doesn't require a separate software installed like Steam Client.

 

In general as a company or with Origin specifically? The poster's issues seems to be with the download service.

I thankfully haven't had to deal with the tech support from either company, but anecdotal stories I've read suggests that EA actually has a fully staffed support desk that answers tickets in a timely manner and that Steam's seems to be staffed by roughly one dude who's answering support mail from 9:00 to 10:00 every other Thursday.

 

im more annoyed at the price from battlenet 45 pounds!?

 

Origin support is very good. If you use their phone support it is an American call center and they call you back, no waiting on hold. You put in a ticket, a nice native speaker calls back, your problem gets resolved.

I have only used them once but I was totally impressed. Steam is generally OK, but it is like send an email and wait 1-2 weeks and pray they fix it. Not nearly as nice as getting a call back in 20 minutes and the problem being fixed.

Quite honestly I don't understand Origin hate. In my experience their download speeds are better, their support is better, and their application is unremarkable but fine. They don't do as many deals and such, but I don't have any problem using them for the Origin exclusive games.

 

Mostly with Origin and then there's the day1 dlc from mass effect 3... and then there's giving away items BF3 weapons if you purchased through stores like gamestop. They've been digging their own grave in my eyes for a while now and I have exactly zero interest in supporting them.

 

Do you guys think i could get a solid 20fps on minimum settings/800x600 on an amd c-50?

 

Noob question. How do I see the fps in my games? Do I need to install a program for that?

 

I've never been bothered by DRM or having to register with somebody before playing a game, be it GFWL, Steam, Origin, or Battle.net. It's quick, it's easy, and nothing bad has ever happened to me because of it.
But, then, I don't read the agreements. Maybe there's something nasty in there, and I owe someone my firstborn without even realizing it.
Who knows. Guess I live life on the edge.