Blizzard VP Surprised By Reaction to ‘Diablo 3′ Online Requirement

Aug 5, 2011 by  

Blizzard VP Surprised By Reaction to Diablo 3 Online Requirement

We live in an age of constant interactivity. Sites like Facebook and Twitter are constantly used by many people around the world – so it’s almost impossible to not meet someone new on the Internet. In the world of gaming, this means an increased focus on online play and interaction – to the point where if your game doesn’t have some online features, it’s pretty much dead in the water.

Naturally, the Diablo series was built on online play but the recent revelation that Diablo 3 needs a constant online connection, thereby preventing the use of mods, hasn’t gone over well with the fanbase. Now, the Vice President of Online Technologies for Blizzard has responded to the outcry.

The VP, Robert Bridenbecker, said that he was surprised that fans reacted so negatively – since online play is the main focus of the game. After all, Blizzard has always featured online gaming for the past decade – and further said that the constant online connection for Diablo 3 had more advantages than disadvantages:

“I’m actually kind of surprised in terms of there even being a question in today’s age around online play and the requirement around that. We’ve been doing online gameplay for 15 years now…and with ‘World of WarCraft’ and our roots in Battle.net and now with ‘Diablo 3,’ it really is just the nature of how things are going, the nature of the industry. When you look at everything you get by having that persistent connection on the servers, you cannot ignore the power and the draw of that.”

While not the first controversy to face Diablo 3, fans already have their own explanation for the online connection – asserting that Blizzard is attempting to stop gaming piracy, much like other companies have in recent months. Bridenbecker responded by saying that copyright protection never came up when discussing the game, and that he actually thinks that most of the DRM solutions are pretty stupid:

“Internally I don’t think [DRM] ever actually came up when we talked about how we want connections to operate. Things that came up were always around the feature-set, the sanctity of the actual game systems like your characters. You’re guaranteeing that there are no hacks, no dupes. All of these things were points of discussion, but the whole copy protection, piracy thing, that’s not really entering into why we want to do it. I’m a huge purveyor of online sites and from my standpoint, I don’t look at DRM solutions and go, ‘Wow, those are awesome.’ I look at those and say, ‘Wow, those kind of suck.’ But if there’s a compelling reason for you to have that online connectivity that enhances the gameplay, that doesn’t suck. That’s awesome.”

Diablo 3 Release Date 2012

So why make the game online only if it’s not to prevent digital piracy? Bridenbecker explained that creating an offline-only mode would create an entirely different set of users, and that there probably wouldn’t be that many interested in an offline experience – especially with the Diablo 3 possibly heading to consoles.

Furthermore, he mentioned the fact that the offline characters of Diablo 2 couldn’t be used for Diablo 3, and explained that the whole point was to put everyone on equal footing, rather than offline players coming in with an advantage over online players. He explained, however, that private servers were still a possibility, and that you didn’t have to play with other people if you didn’t want to:

“There seem to be folks that believe that because you have to be connected, it’s like you’re on Facebook or out there with the rest of the world. That’s really not the case. Yes, you’re going to have a connection, yes, your character will be stored on a server, but it doesn’t mean you have to socialize with people. It doesn’t mean you have to do anything but play the game by yourself. You’ll still be able to have a private game. You’ll still be able to go off and play the game solo and adventure solo. You can opt to bring other people to your world if you want, but that’s up to you.”

Do you think Bridenbecker made the right decision in making Diablo 3 online only? Will you still play the game despite this?

Diablo 3 is now believed to be heading for a release in 2012 for the Xbox 360, PS3, and PC.

Source: MTV

Tags: Blizzard, Diablo 3, PC, PS3

9 Comments

Post a Comment

  1. I think it’s a perfectly reasonable move. If you’re on a plane and you can’t play Diablo 3, maybe you should pick up reading books. Meh.

  2. I just don’t see why it’s necessary. I do agree that many many people will play online. I don’t make single player Diablo characters any more, because inevitably, I want to go online to trade items, or play with friends, or what have you.

    That being said, I don’t see a reason to remove that option. Sometimes I take my laptop places there is no internet (or no good, stable internet). Sometimes I *want* to use mods.

    And the “everyone has a ‘net connection” thing is a bit elitist. There are still a sizable number of people who don’t have unlimited, consistent internet. Heck, I have days where my internet connection is up and down, to the degree that I give up on online games and just play SP stuff. I would like to be able to include D3 in that.

    • The reason it’s necessary (and this is just my guess) is their new auction system so that people can sell in game items for real money. If someone were to find out a way to hack and dupe items that are identical to the ones in game (same item id etc) then people would just hack and dupe weapons in to make real money. I think honestly it’s to keep the integrity of their new auction system. The system would totally fail if people could easily make their own items.

  3. I think this is great move, not only does it make players play the game vanilla, which allows them to experience D3 the way it was meant to be experienced, it also gives them the freedom of when and if they want help or just to go adventuring with friends they can. Though there is the downside of always needing that internet connection, which might decrease how many people will buy the game as not everyone can keep a steady connection, or just don’t have internet altogether.

  4. This is sucky news. When my internet goes down, I immediately got to warcraft 3 or diablo 2. Why? Because I have no internet to play another game (I know, hardcore thinking to make that bridge). I want D3 to be me new go to game, but now that its only one way…

  5. They say its to keep the offline playres from getting advantages when they switch to online. I have an idea how about if you play offline there is no way to switch unless you start with a new character. No transfers from Offline to online. Like they did for D2. There is a Single player and a Multiplayer way of playing. Problem solved.

  6. yep, im still getting this no matter what >< There are other offline games that are great when im not online (go indie ppl XD)

  7. so why not make an offline mode for people to play who dont have a constant connection or no connection at all and then save that character locally and disable it from ever being able to play online? they are losing a small customer base who would want to play if they dont have a connection at all and would just like to play alone. Single player offline move saved locally and have it disabled for online play would, im sure, raise theor consumer base a lot more than just REQUIRING a net connection… do what they did in sc2 ffs.

  8. This guy sounds like a moron. Just because Borderlands has online, does that mean it’ll be closed to you if you don’t have online? And ‘offline only mode will create a different set of gamers’…Really? Wow. Activisions logic of a five year old must have been part of the acquisition.

Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.


If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it.