Print
We've seen quite a wide range of opinions concerning Diablo III's newly revealed auction house, but it came part-and-parcel with another dark cloud that completely lacks a silver lining. See, plenty of games get released sans official mod support, but Diablo's devil is in the details. Diablo III mods, says Blizzard, are “expressly prohibited.”
“For a variety of gameplay and security reasons, we will not be supporting bots or mods in Diablo III, and they’ll be expressly prohibited by our terms of use for the game,” reads an official FAQ provided by the mega-developer.
It's a bit odd, too, seeing as this is the same Blizzard that took StarCraft II's title literally and gave players tools robust enough to craft actual, honest-to-goodness stars. That said, this whole online-only push seems incredibly misguided to us. Blizzard's flying the banner of “full player control” with its auction house (as opposed to developer-driven microtransactions), but snatching away standbys like modding and, well, single-player.
To which you probably reply, “Activision!” To which we definitely reply, “Nope.” Blizzard's got two of gaming's most mind-obliteratingly gigantic cash cows in its stable. Honestly, with its entire one remaining popular franchise (Call of Duty), Activision's not in any position to be making demands. For now, then, we're just going to keep watching Blizzard and making that face dogs use when they're confused.
Comments are closed on this article
Nimrod
August 02, 2011 at 4:23pm
Many games that have historically had extremely popular mods never "supported" mods in any shape way or form what so ever. But people found a way and threw them in.
The idea of preventing modding goes against everyhting PCgaming stands for. And no, it will not prevent people from cheating and hacking and exploiting so dont bother with that idiot like of reasoning.
Blizzard here isnt saying that they wont support mods. They are expressly trying to forbid them. There is a gigantic difference between those two things. MW2/3 is the same way. And because of that, i pirated it and will never buy one of those games again. Custom maps on MW1 however were one of my favorite points, and yes i paid full price for that title.
There is a not all to disguised pattern to my spending habits and im not the only one.
Darkside2984
August 02, 2011 at 10:41am
While I understand the fundamental difference between WoW and Diablo, I can't help but imagine what my WoW experience over the past 6 years would have been like if someone had installed a true "bot" or "mod" over the interface. I can tell you that I probably would have rage quit permanently as soon as I realized the playing field was uneven.
Occassionally I notice that the gold farmers are altering the AH economics or that someone has cornered the market on a particular good but that abates itself within a week or two and the farmers go back to killing boars or whatever it is they do. My point here is that if you allow for the mods and you allow for offline play you make a stupid risk. I guarantee this same magazine and other video game sites would say how silly Blizzard was for allowing for offline play and how broken the game is now that cheats made it into the system.
Just like there are private WoW servers there will be private Diablo servers. They will suck as they always have, but for the 1% who actually really enjoy this, they will be out there. Additionally people will try to exploit the game like they did in Diablo II and I sincerely hope that Blizzard will be able to contain these turds as well as they have been able to in WoW. I for one have nerdgasms all the time playing the games that Blizzard makes sans Mods.
Though to play devil's advocate here, I use about 20 interface mods on WoW and they deeply enhance my enjoyment of the game. Whether I will want/need those mods in Diablo is up for debate. In the meantime I will continue to salivate like a dog when Blizzard rings the bell.
Marthian
August 02, 2011 at 10:34am
yes because all the mods for Diablo are just bots and cheats...
Sheesh.
RedAnt751
August 02, 2011 at 10:22pm
Every thing I have been hearing about Diablo lll lately makes me "NOT" want to buy this game. No offline play/online DMR, Blizzard auction house and no mods. Sorry this is a NO Sale for me. thank god for tourchlight and Guild Wars 2, I hope they dont mess them up too.
Sorry Blizzard you will not see my money ant time soon.
D00dlavy
August 02, 2011 at 9:23am
MaximumPC: At this point, the comment system for your website has rerouted untold numbers of posts into the void. Do some real testing. Spend a goddamn week on it. Do what it takes to fix this problem. I have no idea what your site traffic is, but it seems your content -> comment ratio is down in contrast to other sites.
If you cannot make your comment system practical and secure, you may as well consult someone who can.
Cade795
August 02, 2011 at 7:08am
Just curious but is it possible that this always on drm is something being pushed from the marketing department? Hey here is a good idea, lets have players have to be logged in and attached to a unique account so we can mine the data related to their playing habits. Again we are talking about very small bits of data. Just a thought and perhaps im just being overly paranoid.
Honestly I don't care if they require an internet connection or not. I can't think of any time when I actually played Diablo II while not connected to battle.net. The driving factor for any purchase should be fun factor and with a game like Diablo (or any game from Blizzard) you are also more likely to get more playtime out of it than most other games that cost the same. The reason behind that additional playtime typically is associated with....you guessed it multiplayer, which in this day and age typically means internet not LAN.
As for the whole modding thing, its different strokes for different folks. It's not like Blizzard is suddenly evil because they actually support modding in other games like StarCraft/Warcraft etc. Now, you might be able to say they were evil if they were to remove support for modding and include language in their ToS which would allow them to ban accounts for the next episode of StarCraft II. I doubt that will happen, and you could probably count on a few angry gamers showing up at hq with pitchforks and torches if it ever did.
Now for all the Brewskie's out there who say they may never play another game from Blizzard because they did xyz there are probably just as many people who would not purchase those same games because Blizzard did not do xzy to prevent hacking/cheating etc. So no offense to you Brewski, you were just a convenient example, Blizzard probably is not overly concerned. Simply put you cant have your cake and eat it too.
Side note, if you have a problem with data caps then perhaps you should take it up with your ISP not the gaming industry.
HeartBurnKid
August 03, 2011 at 7:01am
"Honestly I don't care if they require an internet connection or not. I can't think of any time when I actually played Diablo II while not connected to battle.net."
Maybe you can't. I didn't even have an internet connection when I played Diablo II.
"As for the whole modding thing, its different strokes for different folks. It's not like Blizzard is suddenly evil because they actually support modding in other games like StarCraft/Warcraft etc. Now, you might be able to say they were evil if they were to remove support for modding and include language in their ToS which would allow them to ban accounts for the next episode of StarCraft II. I doubt that will happen, and you could probably count on a few angry gamers showing up at hq with pitchforks and torches if it ever did."
And we can also count on people like you to make excuses for them if and when they do so.
"Now for all the Brewskie's out there who say they may never play another game from Blizzard because they did xyz there are probably just as many people who would not purchase those same games because Blizzard did not do xzy to prevent hacking/cheating etc. So no offense to you Brewski, you were just a convenient example, Blizzard probably is not overly concerned. Simply put you cant have your cake and eat it too."
If those people want a gimped experience because OMGWTFBBQCHEATERS!, then they can have it. I'm with Brewski. And plenty of games allow mods *and* prevent cheating; for example, everything Valve has ever made.
Cade795
August 03, 2011 at 12:03pm
"Maybe you can't. I didn't even have an internet connection when I played Diablo II."
The fact that you made this post should be evidence enough that an internet connection being required should not be an issue. The state of games and the expectations that comes with them has significantly changed over the last decade or so. Also, in regards to your Valve comment, have fun playing TF2 without an internet connection. Now I'm sure there are people who have done it, and a few who lie and say they did, how many people actually played a character to max level/gear in single player mode only? Blizzard probably has a fairly acurate metric which breaks down their player base and the overwhelming majority is looking for some multiplayer love and therefore they are going to cater to that crowd. Did you expect anything different? Honestly we are talking of a fantastic company who has made money hand over fist doing exactly that with WoW. Love WoW, hate WoW, it really does not matter because the fact is the game has been a cash cow and while it will be surpassed one day, it is not likely to happen very soon, and most likely will be surplanted by another Blizzard title.
"And we can also count on people like you to make excuses for them if and when they do so."
Nope, as I said before, your purchasing decision should be based on the fun factor of a game. If a game on its own merits without modding is not fun then don't buy it. Personally I have more fun with the SC2 mods than I do the original game, knowing that, if they removed support for the modding I'm not likely to buy the next episode.
Don't get me wrong, I'm sure all you hipsters love to fight the system and shake your fist at "the man" but at the end of the day the game industry is in the business of creating games while at the same time putting money in the pockets of their shareholders. Games cost money to make and the developers have every right to protect their investment.
"If those people want a gimped experience because OMGWTFBBQCHEATERS!, then they can have it. I'm with Brewski. And plenty of games allow mods *and* prevent cheating; for example, everything Valve has ever made."
I'm going to reach here but it is just to make a point. Was Super Mario a gimped experience because you could not mod it? No, and it did not stop it from being one of the most beloved games of all time. Yes it was a console and we are talking about a pc game and for that matter Diablo II was not an overly modded game and if I recall correctly it was not "supported". What percentage of players actually installed a mod for D2? Would D2 be considered a gimped game by the gaming community if mods were "prohibited"? The simple truth is that you are and Brewskie are outliers trying to hold onto some misguided principle of what a game must have before it is considered "legit".
I'm willing to make a wager, Diablo 3 will be one of the most successful games of 2011/2012 (it better release or I'm hosed) despsite what you or Brewskie have to say. If not I'll send you the retail cost of the game.
HeartBurnKid
August 03, 2011 at 8:48pm
"The fact that you made this post should be evidence enough that an internet connection being required should not be an issue"
I have an internet connection right now. I don't have an internet connection all the time (at least until I get that 4G radio implanted at the base of my skull). This may shock and surprise you, but some of us like to game away from home.
"Also, in regards to your Valve comment, have fun playing TF2 without an internet connection."
The difference being, TF2 is designed from the ground up as an online multiplayer game. It's not a single-player game that forces you to be online.
"Now I'm sure there are people who have done it, and a few who lie and say they did, how many people actually played a character to max level/gear in single player mode only?"
So if I didn't max out my character, I don't matter?
"Nope, as I said before, your purchasing decision should be based on the fun factor of a game. If a game on its own merits without modding is not fun then don't buy it."
Why thank you. I'm sooooooo glad I have your blessing. *eyeroll*
"Don't get me wrong, I'm sure all you hipsters love to fight the system and shake your fist at "the man" but at the end of the day the game industry is in the business of creating games while at the same time putting money in the pockets of their shareholders. Games cost money to make and the developers have every right to protect their investment."
Thanks for the business 101 lesson as well. Here's another lesson: pissing off your core consumer base is not a good way to get sales. Of course, these tards will just blame piracy, like they always do.
"I'm going to reach here but it is just to make a point. Was Super Mario a gimped experience because you could not mod it? No, and it did not stop it from being one of the most beloved games of all time."
I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the wants and needs of the audience for a console game in 1984 and for a PC game in 2012 are vastly different.
"I'm willing to make a wager, Diablo 3 will be one of the most successful games of 2011/2012 (it better release or I'm hosed) despsite what you or Brewskie have to say. If not I'll send you the retail cost of the game."
I don't give a flying fuck at a rolling doughnut if it's "successful" or not. I know I won't be buying it. I built a gaming PC for a reason, and it wasn't so I could buy games that cater to absolutely none of the PC platform's strengths. I'll stick with Torchlight.
Cade795
August 04, 2011 at 10:39am
I'm not going to pretend that I have the facts sitting in front of me, but I trust Blizzard when it comes to knowing their own players. If the player base for Diablo 2 was someone looking to play while relaxing on the beach enjoying a cold one, then I'm sure they would not have made it a requirement to be connected to the internet. Although you could still do that if you wanted. If Blizzard did not understand their customer base then they would not be as successful as they are, its just that simple.
"I don't give a flying fuck at a rolling doughnut if it's "successful" or not. I know I won't be buying it. I built a gaming PC for a reason, and it wasn't so I could buy games that cater to absolutely none of the PC platform's strengths."
Ok well I guess the load times will suck the graphics will be dated and I'll be limited on what input device I can use. Do I need to keep going?
"So if I didn't max out my character, I don't matter?"
My comments were not an attack on you, I'm just saying that a majority of the players i.e. Blizzards player base were not overly concerned with single player play to begin with.
chipmunkofdoom2
August 02, 2011 at 6:50am
I've been saying since before SCII came out, when word first surfaced about its horrid DRM and 3-part-cash-grab strategy, that Blizzard was sellling out hardcore. Not sure how many more blows they have to make to dedicated fans before people start waking up.
bling581
August 02, 2011 at 10:00am
I definately noticed it when I was playing WoW and they started introducing in-game items on the Blizzard store. The prices for things like digital pets and mounts is pretty outrageous, but plenty of people buy them. So they started putting out more and more. It doesn't surprise me they're planning to do similar things with Diablo.
Danthrax66
August 02, 2011 at 6:43am
FUCK THIS STUPID SITE AND THEIR FUCKING SPAM FILTER. YOU THINK YOU WOULD HAVE LEARNED THAT NONE OF THESE SHITTY FILTERS WORK.
I had a real post but you seem to have reimplemented the spam filter.
DoctorX
August 02, 2011 at 6:29am
I think the always on connection is a problem. As with ubisoft, they have to do somehting with the servers or they go down... so do you. Why not do the same like Starcraft 2? that isnt that bad. I am now on the fence on this. I think I will wait for the reviews on this one.
Blizzard... you are losing your fanbase here.
jonnyohio
August 02, 2011 at 5:56am
Not every game needs modding to keep it alive. I dont think diablo needs it now or ever did. Hopefully they can prevent the hackers/cheaters from ruining the game, thats what im more concerned with.
XoRn
August 01, 2011 at 11:27pm
I hate how people pin me as a bad guy when I say this but I'm saying it anyways. I don't care. I don't care that D3 wont support mods. I don't care that CODMW3 of BF3 wont have mod tools, I don't care if ANY GAME has mod tools or not. When I purchase a game, it's for the game the developers made. If someone can make additions to that game that I enjoy, bonus. It's amazing how black and white people can be on the subject of mod tools. If a game doesn't have it, that game blows because such and such game does have mod tools automatically making it better. If everyone purchased games based on content that hasn't even been made for them then why the hell are developers pushing so hard to make a good game in the first place? It doesn't matter. That's why.
Don't get me wrong. It's always nice to have mod tools available. It will NEVER sway my opinion on a game if mod tools aren't there though.
Nimrod
August 02, 2011 at 4:17pm
This is kind of a stupid statement on your part. Most games historically that have had extremely popular mods never "supported" mods in any shape way or form what so ever.
Blizzard here isnt saying that they wont support mods. They are expressly trying to forbid them. There is a gigantic difference between those two things. COD is the same way. And because of that, i pirated it and will never buy one of those games again. Custom maps on MW however were one of my favorite points, and yes i paid full price for that title.
There is a not all to disguised pattern to my spending habits and im not the only one.
bling581
August 02, 2011 at 10:05am
I'll still buy a title that interests me even if there is no mods, but mod support is definately a plus. Depending on the mods that are developed, they can add a tremendous amount of replay value to a game, sometimes even transforming it completely into something new. I recently got into Elder Scrolls Oblivion, and I'm still on my first character with over 65 hours of play time. I can't even imagine how many more hours I'll have after installing some of the major mod overhauls that exist.
In short, for some people mod support must exist to make it worthwhile for them to spend their hard earned money. They want maximum replay value, and that's what mods give.
Digital-Storm
August 02, 2011 at 2:53am
Nicely said XoRn. I know of no other game out there whos price tag at the store shelf is still 40 dollars after this many years. Diablo 2 was a fantastic game, and always will be. Highly addicting, the joy of starting a new game to discover the new skills, and putting your first few points into them and using them for the first time, exploring the map, and looking at all the detail the game developers put into it. Words can't even describe the feeling of what its like to explore Lut Gholein for the first time, or shoot that new charged lightning spell.
lindethier
August 01, 2011 at 11:10pm
Blizzard already lost me as soon as they announced their bullcrap DRM of having to maintain an internet connection to play the game. Ubisoft did the same thing and guess what, I didn't give a dime to them. Even though they had some games I really wanted to play, that heavy handed DRM will keep me from playing it.
If you would have asked me a week ago what I thought about Diablo 3, I would have told you it is one of my top 3 games I am excitedly waiting for, not so much anymore. I have no interest in it anymore.
Hey Blizzard, I'm out, and I have the feeling I won't be the only one.
tornato7
August 01, 2011 at 9:13pm
Starcraft got old a long time ago, but the mods are still fun as hell and continue to be made and improved! the mods are what made that game.
Digital-Storm
August 01, 2011 at 9:13pm
Diablo 3 is an Action RPG. It was never designed to have custom maps like Starcraft 2, Diablo 2 never had custom maps, Diablo 1 never did. Diablo 2 had mods that people made, but Blizzard didn't support those either. Get off your high horse seriously.
Brewskie
August 01, 2011 at 8:57pm
I'm tossed up on whether I'll buy Diablo III now.
With data caps being implemented by most ISPs constant connectivity requirements in single player games are asinine.
You think I'll waste my precious data on this video game, or any video game, when I want to play single player?
I use my connection for a lot of things, including my businesses. It's called "real life".
If I do buy Diablo III it will be rarely played, to be sure.
The lack of mods may actually put me over the edge on whether I'll spend my money on this game, and if Blizzard keeps this attitude in the future I may never buy another of their games again.
BTW....Torchlight 2 is beginning to look like a better deal to me after reading this article.
icedearth15324
August 02, 2011 at 3:32am
Just to give you an FYI about how the internet works, and how these "constant connected" video game DRMs work, they basically ping a server every few seconds-minute with very Very small amounts of data. If the ping is an average 32 bytes, which it might not even be, 1 gigabyte of data can have 31,250,000 pings. This many pings even if it pings once per second, equals 520,833.3 minutes, or 8680.5 hours, or 361.68 days. So you could have the game running for nearly an entire year straight, and only using 1GB of data, which even with a data cap of 150GB per month, comes out to 1800GB a year.
So deduct 1GB from your yearly 1800GB, and you get to play a game 24 hrs a day the whole year.
So that should leave plenty of bandwidth for your "real life", but still allow you to play a potentially amazing game.
Many people complain about the data caps on bandwidth, and yet they don't understand how much 150-200GB per month even is. I don't know the exact amount, but it's something like less than 10% of the entire U.S. population uses even close to the bandwidth limits each month.
So I hope you have a nice day and read up on how things actually work before making judgements based on incomplete truths.
Have a nice day. =)
Exarkun1138
August 02, 2011 at 5:41am
It's not the amount of data, but the mere fact that if I want to play a SINGLE PLAYER game of D3, I am required to have an account with Blizzard and an open Internet connection! THAT is what I am disgusted about! I can't simply buy the game with MY money, and play it whenever I please without having to have an internet connection AND an account with Blizzard. THAT is asinine!
Adontain
August 02, 2011 at 6:00am
What happens when I want to load one of these games on a laptop? I know it's not ideal, but let's just use it for the sake of the argument.
Hypothetically - I have a plane ride to South Africa. Battery life is not an issue as power ports are available. I will be forced to pay more money to buy the in-flight wifi just to ping servers and may or may not be able to do that. So the activity I had planned to occupy my time over parts of the 13+ hour flight I cannot do.
And if i don't want to pay the extra $30/month for a tethering plan or some sort of 3G/4G hotspot I cannot use it on long road trips either.
