this post was submitted on 13 Jun 2023
139 points (100.0% liked)

Gaming

1495 readers
1 users here now

From video gaming to card games and stuff in between, if it's gaming you can probably discuss it here!

See also Gaming's sister community Tabletop Gaming.


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I'm currently playing Diablo IV (and having a blast with it) but finding one small gripe which I only think is going to get worse and probably stop me playing it completely in the long run.

My girlfriend is currently pregnant. This means in 6 months time we'll have a newborn. With this in mind I'm expecting to only be able to grab a few minutes at a time to game and even when I think I'll have longer I may end up jumping off at short notice. This means I'll almost certainly come to rely on games which I can pause. Unfortunately this isn't possible with Diablo IV since it requires an always online connection even though I'm essentially playing it as a single player game.

What are other people's thoughts?

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

The only reason to require an Internet connection for a game is if it's primarily multiplayer.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

An always online requirement is just another form of DRM. If a game has DRM, I simply don't buy it.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

definitely a turnoff for me.. years ago when I first discovered Diablo 2 on an old computer at a place I was house-sitting at, I had no internet whatsoever.. nothing
that game kept me sane in so many ways
eventually several months later I managed to leech some web access from an old construction yard or something behind the place, but that's a story for another time..

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

I don't like it. I play with a Steam Deck from my bed and the Wi-Fi connection is pretty bad from there. I easily loose connection every five minutes.

That means I can't play any games that require constan online connection, which is a bummer.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

I hate the "always online, always changing, sudo-mmo"- genre that's becoming the norm with certain publishers. Avoid anything GaaS-like unless it's something I feel the need to experience. In this case I just play Grim Dawn or some other great arpg whenever I get the itch for the genre! Lets me play multiplayer when I want to, and just play real singleplayer whenever I want to.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Never was a fan of the change. I grew up before internet was common place in many households. Only thing you had to worry about was if the game cartridge had too much dust lol.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Gotta love the OG multiplayer split screen. Or even better 2 players on the same screen... I'm looking at you TMNT!

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

I refuse to buy always-online games. Not being able to pause is just dumb (and probably could be fixed if Blizzard would still give a damn). But not being able to mod the game is a deal-breaker for me, an ARPG that can't be modded is not worth my time.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

I don't like it and try not to play games where it's a requirement. Especially in single player games.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I think I prefer games that require being allways on-line to those with bad Denuvo implementation that kills the performance.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

@Parellius I prefer games that I can play offline if I need to, but I have been a Diablo fan for over 20 years. Of course I purchased Diablo 4.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

In case of Diablo IV in my opinion Blizzard has a good track record of keeping game servers online for years and years.

That being said, the game does have some weird server hopping mechanic that you can't turn off, meaning it seems to switch servers while you're playing, which isn't always as seamless as you'd hope it would be. Also, at least for me, it sometimes selects servers with >100ms latency, which is quite noticeable of course.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

I try to avoid games with always online as much as possible but sometimes you don't have choice. If you want to play Diablo IV there's not much else you could do. But at least Diablo has some form of multiplayer. If you have a solely single player experience with always online, it's just bullshit. The DRM is only punishing players that pay for the game. If you insist to implement this kind of DRM then please go ahead but then you also have to run the servers forever. If you don't then why should I buy your game?

[–] aerir 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I have accepted the fact that this would be the new normal since Diablo 3 and the infamous error 37. It was a problem back then when good internet is hard to come by. But at 2023, unless there's zero online elements in a particular game, I have no issue with always online requirement.

Good that we still have great titles from Nintendo eg. TotK

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

I absolutely refuse to buy any game that requires being online for single player. That is a line I will never cross.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

Personally it's never effected me but it feels like a really dumb decision made by ignorant suits. The fact that pirates get a better product than paying customers is pretty sad.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

My internet access is through metered connections, so I find it quite agrivating to be forced to burn precious cap space on a game that could totally be local only.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I really dislike it, but it won't stop me from buying a game. I was recently without internet and went to play a game on my Steam Deck and was surprised to find a game I had been playing required access.

What bugs me most about it is that it seems like everything these days is tilted towards the companies. If a game doesn't require the internet, the only reason it's there is to collect data on what you're doing and maybe to help enforce DRM. It's bad enough that I can only rent games from Steam (although bless Valve for making gaming on Linux so good), now I can't even play the games I "own" if I don't have a pipe back to the company? Ugh.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

it requires an always online connection even though I’m essentially playing it as a single player game.

That is awful. What are their reasons for that?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It prevents the most obvious cheating like savegame editing, save scum item duplication, and similar. If the game has PvP, an item shop or leaderboards while still allowing your game character to be taken online when you feel like it, it makes technical sense.

If you don't want to participate in leaderboards and just play single player and maybe co-op or PvP with trusted friends or on a curated server (like people do in Minecraft, Space Engineers, Terraria, old school shooters...), it's just a degradation.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

The always online is bad. The micro-transactions are worse. I'm tired of being told "But it's just cosmetic!" Yeah, well that used to come with the game too. "They need to be able to make more content!" Yeah, it's made over 666 million dollars. They can afford more content. "At least it's not..." That shouldn't exist either.

Games, and expansion packs. That's it. Day one MTX is insulting. "here's your game, pay to unlock more of it" should not be a thing we accept. At this point I half expect a back-slide to pay full price and then a sub to actually play the game. I can not wrap my head around why people defend it, I've stopped buying games with MTX entirely.

Diablo 2 resurrected is quite good, though. Nailed that one.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

I hate that "Games as a Service" are preventing the longevity of games. I worry about all of the incredible stories and experiences that these games provide being very quickly lost to time.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Is there an offline crack yet? I would have assumed piratws would have for sure gotten that done

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Diablo 3 is always online and lets you pause in all single player modes. Always online isn't the issue - the issue is games that are multiplayer only, like Diablo 4.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

It has no place in single player games and turns me off from playing them. There's no real reason they exist other than removing the ability to use cheats (which should be allowed in single players games imo) to obtain items or boosts that are only available on their cash shop. It also ties in to the Game As a Service model which i've come to detest; usually because they have a constant stream of updates that tries to monopolize your free time, whereas i am the kind of player that can say "ok this is done".

Games that offer multiplayer in addition to single player, such as D4, should allow you to have a single player save that's offline, can be paused and anything goes.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

I really don't find it much of an issue in 2023. In the seven years I've lived in my current flat, I think there's been maybe an hour where my internet has gone down.

I do see the issue with games that have no online elements but still require a server but D4 is a kind of psuedo-MMO with it's world elements like world events, bosses, etc so it makes sense there.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

I don’t love it, but I’ve found that it’s been less intrusive than I thought. Generally only feel it when the internet goes out. That said, I’ve got fairly good fiber internet, so I’m a bit privileged in this regard. We used to have absolutely horrendous rural internet and it sucked.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Nah. I don't have a reliable or constant connection. Constant online anything doesn't work.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Doesn't matter to me one way or another, and it doesn't affect my purchasing decisions.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

I started playing D4 two days ago and constantly try to pause the game when I need to give something else attention. It should also be easy to do when you’re alone in a dungeon. There are games that are online but let you pause when you’re alone (though I can’t remember which game I am thinking of right now)

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Absolutely detest them. I still consistently play old games because they're a blast and make me remember when I was a kid. That won't happen for my kids with their games, as the servers will be long gone and close to zero companies are going to spend more time updating the game to not need a server. I'm an old man yelling at my lawn, but games went from trying to entertain to trying to suck every cent they can out of you.

One of my biggest enjoyments is hacking games up as well. You can learn about coding (set ammo to -1 - is it unlimited, 0, or game crashing). Sometimes it's fun to be a god after a stressful day. Sometimes my kids play with me and I don't want to have to tell them no, worry about them dying every couple seconds and getting frustrated, or having to drop it altogether.

I just want to buy a damn game and play it how it entertains me the most - not have to deal with server errors, not have to deal with 12 year olds screaming, not have to deal with people who have far more time than I do being 1000x better.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Same experience as you with D4. Fun game but the always-on requirement is a tad annoying. Not deal-breaking for me, but I have had my fair share of rubber-banding on my SteamDeck, especially with Bluetooth headphones connected. D2R worked well offline, why not have an offline mode here?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Ironically I think GTAV did a pretty decent job of this - you can pause at any time during the single player, however I don't remember if it requires a connection to play single player mode.

Imo if a game has a single player mode, being online for it should never be a requirement.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

The games I play usually don't support online at all lol. So a game being only online is kinda a deal breaker for me lol.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Very bad idea and I don't understand why it is becoming the norm. Let's say you want to play again Diablo 4 in a few years (probably because you will be taking care of your kid) but all the player base has disappeared. If Blizzard cuts the servers to save some money, you will not be able to play the game on an official instance, even if it is only single player. Let's say the servers won't shut down down, another issue remains. Users who want to play in public areas or when travelling won't be able to launch the game (rip steam deck users).

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

I don't buy always online games. Period.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

I dont like always online games, since I have had connection issues for a long time before I moved which made it almost impossible to play multiplayer games for me. And now my W-LAN card on my computer died without the option to use LAN. I am already glad that I can still access Denuvo "protected" games since those need to send some stuff to Denuvos sometimes.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

I think when it makes sense it's fine, but I would only really say that for multiplayer games, if it's a single player game there is a really unfortunate reality, which is that pirating it will result in a better gameplay experience.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›