Diablo III shows us how digital-rights management damages gaming

Default_picture
Wednesday, May 16, 2012
EDITOR'S NOTEfrom Rob Savillo

Sean's concerns over Diablo III is one reason why I'm exicted that GOG.com (formerally Good Old Games), an online retailer that sells DRM-free releases, has recently shifted focus to include the new as well as the old. At the very least, I know I can play games purchased from there whenever I want.

Before the west coast clock hit midnight on May 15, gamers across the globe flooded social networks in excitement over the launch of Diablo III. Many years and numerous teaser trailers later, this was the grand experience many of us had waited for. And when the moment finally arrived: silence...followed by another social media flood cursing Blizzard's name.

Who could blame everyone? It's pretty ridiculous when you're attempting to start a single-player session and you can't even create a character because you're stuck at the login screen. Sadly, this was (and still is) just one of the problems experienced by players.

Diablo's digital-rights management (DRM) comes in the form of a required persistent Internet connection, and these past few hours with the game feature the worst encounters we've ever faced. It might not say much, but it's still interesting how Metacritic user ratings involve negative feedback because of these login errors. So not only are we unable to play one of the most anticipated games of the year, but we're offered samples of many potential errors that we'll see in the future.

 


Changes since the last Diablo: All items now replaced with errors.

 

As for the actual game, well...that's pretty hard to rank when you can't even start the damn thing. This is exactly why DRM harms the industry more than it helps.

But really, we knew this was coming. One of the biggest DRM backlashes occurred when PC users expressed discontent over Assassin's Creed 2 similarly requiring a constant Internet connection. The fact that it was a single-player game requiring users to remain online was enough to detract from the PC version's popularity. What's scary is how most big name titles still require Internet connections and special accounts, with some restrictions being much worse than Ubisoft's back in 2010.

Although consumers are given an option to vote with their dollar, it seems like most are ignoring the privilege. After all, these games are damn good, and we absolutely need them even if we can't play them.

Enough publishers don't realize this yet, but heavily enforced DRM implementations will cost them greater amounts of money over time. If they thought quarterly loss reports were frightening before, just wait until they discover that their pirate-hindering plans were actually thwarting innocent consumers. After all, so many gamers will only put up with so much....

Aside from a much different "Hell" than we expected from Diablo III, what were some of the most horrifying DRM moments you've faced and which games did they involve? Do you personally believe DRM helps combat copyright infringement?

 
Problem? Report this post
BITMOB'S SPONSOR
Adsense-placeholder
Comments (10)
Bmob
May 16, 2012

I'm not afraid to admit that my first real experience with Football Manager was on a pirated copy. It was as easy as 1,2,3 to download and install. I became pretty addicted, and although I was living in a hostel at the time, I bought the next iteration when it was released. My circumstances what they were, I had no internet connection, so had to use the phone. I had to input an absurd amount of 8-digit codes (my admittedly flawed memory suggests 15) on my phone, and then repeat the process (with a few more added in) on the PC. One mistake and the whole thing had to be restarted. My month's worth of credit was gone, and I still couldn't play.

Everywhere I've lived since, I've had intermittent access to the internet, and I can't be the only one.

Default_picture
May 16, 2012

Every single game that requires G4WL is pretty horrible, and Steam sometimes become a pain in the ass when trying to play offline. A lot of the times if I try to play anything offline on steam it says steam needs an update but has no internet connection and can't launch. So this kind of thing has its stink all over pc gaming.

Me04
May 16, 2012

100% agree with this. But DRM isn't just bad from a quality/user experience perspective, but a from preservation one too.

You know things are screwed up when, to simply protect gaming's history and heritage, archivists have to fall foul of the law on a daily basis just to make sure that a record of these games exists, and continues to do so. The way PC gaming DRM interacts with your hardware and the OS is so secretive that even in the future when we're on totally different hardware, it may be impossible to emulate these titles (or even run them in a VM) when these shackles are implemented. DRM-free, using only the proper OS APIs, is the best way to ensure that these games will be playable in the future.

Diablo III prevents this since much of the game's content is run from the servers. When Blizzard decides they've had enough of running these services, there will be no simple crack or patch to remove this always-online DRM. The game is lost forever. For a title that is essentially a single player dungeon crawler with a 4 player co-op option, this restriction is completely unnecessary for many of the game's functions, which can be completed with solo play.

This may seem like a wooly issue from a contemporary perspective, but looking into the future, possibly long past our lifetime, this kind of short-sightedness will be looked upon as a tragedy, just as we lament the loss of old movies, books and music, regardless of quality.

Default_picture
May 16, 2012

The only problem with this article is that the internet requirement of Diablo III isn't about DRM; it's about the real money auction house. Blizzard wants as many people as possible to be able to at least SEE the auction house and be tempted, "Maybe if I just bought that sword..." or sell, even if they don't buy. If they allowed purely single-player characters (as in Diablo II), then a bunch of people would "miss out" on the auction house (since, for obvious reasons, single-player characters wouldn't be able to sell in the auctions, at the very least, and probably not even buy).

This isn't about rights management, this is about suckering you into paying for the 0's and 1's that make up a helmet. And, from that perspective, I bet Blizzard makes more money this way, problems and all, than they would if they allowed offline single-player. Damages gaming? Blizzard's riding the wave of the $$$ future; any negative feedback they receive from not having enough servers initially is going to be considered acceptable losses.

Default_picture
May 16, 2012

Blizzard's been a fan of the whole CD Key thing and Battle.net registration for awhile, but you're absolutely right. Still, if players experience too many connection problems at one time, they're simply going to give up and leave.

Will this happen with Blizzard or Diablo III? Probably not. Other publishers, however, are likely to screw up similar business models, making their abundance of greed and lack of customer dedication quite transparent. Regardless of the exact reasons, many consumers resent the concept of maintaining connections to a single player game (even if it features online perks). And sooner or later, additional consumers will realize what's happening. If not, gaming as we know it (or knew it) is through.

Default_picture
May 16, 2012

Oh, other publishers that do this are going to get screwed. Diablo, while available to be played single-player, isn't a game that MOST people play offline anyway, and Blizzard at least has the excuse of the RMAH.

But publishers like Ubisoft are going to try it (again) on purely single-player games and get screwed. Remember Spore? People rioted against Spore's DRM. Spore was getting pirated by people who didn't even want to play Spore and just wanted to oppose the draconian DRM. EA flipped quickly and loosened the DRM restrictions.

Default_picture
May 16, 2012

DRM is not the way to go. Beyond frustrating players, it works against game developers / publishers who want individuals to play to their games. I agree with the author that gamers have the ability to "vote with their dollar" but often put up with restricted gaming freedom because what other options are available? I'm trying to remain optimistic and hope that a revolution is on the horizon.

Default_picture
May 16, 2012
When a game has both SP and MP modes...the Single Player mode should be without the requirement of Internet connection. Period. It is the biggest plague that Multiplayer or Online-Multiplayer Only games suffer from. Anything that happens...server side or player side can prevent being able to play. Requiring online for Multiplayer Included modes...is a no brainer, obviously have to have it. I understand why Blizz is doing it with Diablo III, because of the Real Money Auction House that will be implemented...which can be used to sell things for real money, regardless of if they are gotten from plaing solo in SP or online groups in MP. They're trying to regulate things, manage them, and keep them if they can from spinning into pirating items- especially implementing the surcharges and limits they will have in place. But it it nonetheless affects players, who have the backup of Solo play...if something happens...which it did on Release Day of all days unfortunately for all. Note the Downed NonPlayable game was in reality due to a bug, in which many who created a Demon Hunter character tried to equip a NPC Templar follower character with shield or equipment, we're kicked from the servers...so Blizz opted to just close everything to all in order to do Maintenance and fix the issue. I wasnt affected by it...having chosen Witch Doctor, nor were many others, but I their guess thinking was, if that many cannot play and we can fix it readily..lshut it down, fix it, so everyone can play not just a select few who chose another class. BUT in the end...it still points to the DRM involved. Not having it...would mean only those grouping for MP mode would have been affected, and even they could still play SP mode- WHICH MUST be noted that I sincerely doubt anyone would have been in MP at all starting out, but who knows. The real money AH is not even available yet, and to even use the regular AH in general...one has to be out of the game in the Charcter Selection Screen to use it...didn't find any way to use the AH while playing. Basically, even though the reasons were sound for doing what they did, and better off for players in the end...it was a big impact on players and games with DRM in place...as usual. The game was playable at about 6pm EST for all...has had no issues, for me at least...and can say though I hate required Internet connection, the game is truly awesome.
Default_picture
May 17, 2012

Once upon a time, I would have felt that I absolutely HAD to play any game in the Diablo series or any game created by Blizzard. But as I look around me; and as I look at my backlog and recognize all of the games that I still want to play that don't require silly DRM, I honestly don't have a desire to play D3. I really don't. -1 sale 

Default_picture
May 17, 2012

-2 sales actually. I had my fill of this DRM with the Assassins Creed Franchise. My preorder for Torchlight 2 has been placed for the incredible sum of only $20 and I got a free copy of Torchlight 1 to boot! Thanks, but no thanks Blizzard.

You must log in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.