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?
Singleplayer games have no reason to require an internet connection to be able to play the game.
If it’s a strictly multiplayer game, fine.
If not, that’s just DRM, and it should die in a fire.
If it’s single player games, there should be ZERO reasons to have it requiring online connectivity 24/7. No buy for me. There will be times where your internet goes offline for ISP related issues or Xbox Live or PSN experiencing server issues. How am I going to play those games?
If a single player game requires online connection im not buying it.
This. If I’m gonna gave to get a pirate version in order for it to work, I’m donating to the crackers that fixed it, not the publishers that deliberately broke it.
There seem to be two Diablo IV games.
One is a single player or co-op offline RPG where you’re running around killing monsters and collecting loot so that you personally can save the world. Seeing other players running around just breaks the illusion.
The other is some online multi-player thing where you can run around and team up with other people in the quest to min-max your build, where you pay stupid amounts of money to make your character look the same as all the other people who paid for the same skin.
I like the first game, have no interest in the second, and I resent where the mechanics designed for the second game interfere with the first.
I fuckin hate it. Total bullshit
Well, games that are inherently built for an online social presence, like an MMORPG, makes perfect sense to require being always online. World of Warcraft, Star Wars: The Old Republic come to mind.
Even though you can quest solo on those games, it doesn’t make sense from a core-concept standpoint that you just walk around an empty world where there’d otherwise be players doing their own thing.
If it’s a game that has little to nothing to do with online as a core part of its concept (like a single-player campaign where you can’t have any sort of online co-op), then yeah that seems rather silly.
I flat out refuse to buy games that require a constant internet connection. It’s annoying for multiplayer games but the need for always online with a single player game is ridiculous.
I think it might be a good anti-piracy measure. But it’s really sad for the accessibility of these games as a whole, especially when it is possible to play the game without any online features.
I’m a big fan of the Steam Deck and Nintendo Switch ability to simply turn into sleep mode, which allows me to pause very easily games. But I guess that’s not possible with online games :/
If the game actually does something useful with that connection, I don´t have a problem with it. Examples:
- MSFS does the processing of the terrain and it´s details off site. Also things like live weather and traffic obviously need a connection.
- Souls games allow you to leave messages and read messages from other players. Also you can help or attack other players in their game, which is super useful and fun.
However, sometimes the always on is just a way for the devs to battle piracy. In which case its hurting the actual gaming experience.
I´m not familiar with Diablo 4 to be honest. So, in my understanding, the fact that it need an internet connection alone can´t be the reason for not being able to pause the game, right? There must be some real time interaction going on between your “world” and the worlds of others.
EDIT: Hm, I read up on it for a second and it seems like there is a portal that you can use to teleport to a safe place? A town? Supposedly you can even do that from within a dungeon AND even teleport back to the same place?
The fact that it need an internet connection alone can´t be the reason for not being able to pause the game, right?
Yeah I don’t think so (see the next part however for my thoughts on the full reasoning why there is no pause) - D3 also was always online (sans console editions) and you could pause with a few exceptions.
There must be some real time interaction going on between your “world” and the worlds of others.
There definitely is a shared world state component, in that you seamlessly matchmake with others who can appear near you, and engage alongside you - this also grants you some extra XP (“Nearby Player Bonus”) while someone else is close. It becomes even more apparent during world events, such as world boss fights or Legion Events (which you can think of as a mini world boss fight).
I think this is where the true cost of not being able to pause comes from - since they didn’t add in a private vs public mode (in D3, you couldn’t pause when you had the game set to public, or when friends were in your game). If it existed, and you were to pause as it is, you’d need some sort of immunity buff or such, as another player could cause enemies to come near you, and either kill you outright, or right when you resume the game.
Hm, I read up on it for a second and it seems like there is a portal that you can use to teleport to a safe place? A town? Supposedly you can even do that from within a dungeon AND even teleport back to the same place?
Yep - this is nice to have (though you cannot use it in a boss fight AFAIK) though it’d really be nice to be able to actually pause still, but I suppose it’s better than nothing.
Definite no from me. Applies to all apps, really: there should always be an offline mode unless always-on is absolutely required (i.e., accessing a website/API is the app’s sole purpose).
This is a big problem for me with mobile games, since developers seem to have forgotten that cell service is not universal, capable of failure, and often metered.
Of course, there are still annoying edge cases. A bunch of apps I have don’t strictly require always-on connection, but they have a check-in at startup. They skip the check if you have no service at all, but if you have service without data, they just sit there without timing out.
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.
How am I supposed to play an always online video game on the plane
Hate it as I have a Steam Deck so I just wouldn’t play it if it needed an online connection as I play a lot when travelling.
Happened when I was away with some mates and we tried to play FIFA which needed an initial online connection to Origin. Was infuriating trying to get it work with bad mobile connection
Imagine playing FIFA after knowing all the crap they’ve done.
Yeh that’s fairs, haven’t played seriously on FIFA for years now, only ever play when with some of my mates. Don’t get how people shell out >£50 each year for a game that is basically the same year on year
If a game has a single player mode without features that require internet, and isn’t accessible without wifi, thats just lazy design imo.
