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

Gaming

31266 readers
10 users here now

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

Please Note: Gaming memes are permitted to be posted on Meme Mondays, but will otherwise be removed in an effort to allow other discussions to take place.

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 3 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
[–] MobBarley@beehaw.org 5 points 2 years 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..

[–] grizzzlay@beehaw.org 5 points 2 years ago

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.

[–] emergencycall@fedia.io 5 points 2 years ago

I fuckin hate it. Total bullshit

[–] dreadedchalupacabra@beehaw.org 5 points 2 years 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.

[–] rgalex@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years 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.

[–] amanneedsamaid@sopuli.xyz 4 points 2 years ago

If a game has a single player mode without features that require internet, and isn't accessible without wifi, thats just lazy design imo.

[–] Lurra@lemm.ee 4 points 2 years 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.

[–] SmugBedBug@lemmy.iswhereits.at 3 points 2 years ago

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

[–] neo@lemmy.comfysnug.space 4 points 2 years ago

Always online has pretty much always been a terrible idea except for where it's actually required (MMOs)

[–] MyFeetOwnMySoul@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 years 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.

[–] loops@beehaw.org 4 points 2 years 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?

[–] Hdmikojima@lemmy.kemomimi.fans 3 points 2 years ago

Much easier to monetize when the game is a live service, compared to pure offline game where you the player has all the control. It's a disgusting trend.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] GiuEliNo@feddit.it 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I hate it I try to always avoid always online drm but sometimes it's really impossible, i'm gonna be honest and say that i got some issue with my steamdeck for them. (f u ubisoft btw) So if i find that a singleplayer game needs an always online drm i just don't buy it.

[–] loops@beehaw.org 4 points 2 years ago

Same. I really loved the first two Diablos, but I wouldn't touch the new one because of it. I'll just wait a decade or so and emulate it.

[–] jherazob@beehaw.org 4 points 2 years ago

If a game demands always online, I'll avoid it, period. These days I have no interest on stuff like that.

[–] ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 years ago

I have avoided the Hitman series because of their always online requirement. One day I loaded it up only to be told I couldn't play their single player game because their servers were down for maintenance.

I'm not paying $60 for a single player game that I won't be able to play when the company has server issues.

[–] sorenant@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

I wouldn't buy such game. "Would" because so far none of the games that interests me required constant connection. I don't play multiplayer games to begin with so it's easy to avoid.

[–] Nyanix@beehaw.org 4 points 2 years 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.

[–] yozul@beehaw.org 4 points 2 years ago

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

[–] HERRAX@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

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.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] DrLongTRL@feddit.de 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

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?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] withersailor@aussie.zone 4 points 2 years ago

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

[–] April@fedia.io 3 points 2 years 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.

[–] catcarlson@beehaw.org 3 points 2 years ago

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.

[–] Super_Stone@feddit.de 3 points 2 years 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.

[–] ngwoo@beehaw.org 3 points 2 years ago

I probably hate it less than most people but it doesn't excuse bad design. Warframe, for instance, requires you to always be online - but if your instance is set to Solo, you can pause the game.

[–] Rhabuko@feddit.de 3 points 2 years ago

Last month, construction workers did something in our street. I didn't have Landline Internet for a whole week. Always Online is pretty horrible for single player games.

[–] Opteryx@beehaw.org 3 points 2 years 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.

[–] dcooksta26@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

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

[–] tom@feddit.uk 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

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

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Bretzel@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years 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).

[–] Recant@beehaw.org 3 points 2 years ago

Always online games really bug me. For someone like myself that goes out to sea for several weeks as part of my job, I won't have connection during those time periods thus I can't play the game I played.

Additionally, if the company removes the servers that the game connects to once the game has been out for whatever they determine to be "long enough" the game becomes unplayable

I haven't seen an upside for always online games only downsides. Totally understand that games with an online multi-player component need that internet connection but there is no reason, that I have seen, that are single player games or have single player components need always online connection.

[–] 0xc0ba17@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 years ago (3 children)

I like No Man's Sky take on this, that seamlessly shifts from offline to online. I can stop/resume it without an hitch on my Steam Deck, even in multiplayer zones.

With Diablo IV, I get disconnected when there's a light breeze.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Sinfaen@beehaw.org 3 points 2 years ago

How am I supposed to play an always online video game on the plane

[–] Poopfeast420@feddit.de 2 points 2 years ago

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

[–] BlackCoffee@fedia.io 2 points 2 years ago

It made me stop buying games and consoles in the first place.

You have to be online, the game has to be downloaded on the system, there will be bugs and it has to be patched.

Just let me buy a game and play it. I may sound like an old fart but I really enjoyed the days that I could go to a store, buy a game and play it immediately on my console.

Especially the fact that bugs are literally shipped like features now and you just have to accept that your game of 80-90 dollars is ridden with bugs, yeah fuck off really.

[–] Ekis@beehaw.org 2 points 2 years ago

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

[–] aerir@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 years ago

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

[–] Nev3r_Pr0@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

I didn't mind it until I lost my internet connection, but I think I prefer it over bad Denuvo implementation that makes the game a stuttery mess.

[–] mjohanning@beehaw.org 2 points 2 years 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?

[–] Dezi@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years 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)

[–] narc0tic_bird@beehaw.org 2 points 2 years 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.

[–] Parellius@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

Agreed. If I'm honest in this case my concern isn't necessarily that my access will be restricted at some point (or even the very rare dips when it switches servers on entering or leaving an area). It's more around the fact I'm playing the game effectively in single player and unfortunately that's likely to have shelf life due to personal circumstances.

[–] Souvlaki@beehaw.org 2 points 2 years 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.

[–] lionel@toot.coupou.fr 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

@Parellius
I despise them. I only buy them if I'm going to play online with friends but I know at some point if I want to play solo I'm going to have to get a "less connected" version of them...

Now if I only need the solo experience, well...

Another issue arises now that handheld PC gaming is getting more and more popular. Those games will definitely ignore a big part of their potential customer base, and I assume suffer the consequences

[–] raresbears@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 years ago

Hate it with a passion

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›