Tralf, all I know is that every time I asked about why people playing on a client game would give them a better understanding of how to hack the online side you came up with nothing. Every response you gave was just like the other guys, a pointless and uninformed load of nothing instead of giving an actual answer and yet now you claim you knew the answer all along you just never said it because you felt surely I must have known it even though the answers you did give were vastly more simple. All one has to do is look back at your posts to see you was just as clueless as I, if not more.
Your clearly lieing now, you clearly never knew and have next to no knowledge on client + server architecture so please stop making yourself look more pathetic than you already do and either admit you was unaware (like me) and that you hopefully learnt something here or just stop responding and continue living in ure bubble of denial.
Or if I am wrong about this please explain why you avoided it every time I asked that question and instead chose to give a simplistic and mostly wrong response about things completely different to what I was actually asking?
And the ultimate low that people go to when they get to this point in order to try and convince people of their lies, make up a fake degree and job that uve been in for years centered around the subject at hand. Uve truly dug ureself into a hole of which there is no escape now.
Unplayable? I don't remember that.
Maybe it's because I had the option of playing offline by myself, over LAN's, or over TCP/IP with my friends.
Do you know how many options you have when the D3 servers are offline or when they are sending your latency over 300 (which is a common occurence in EU)? One: Esc--> Quit. Awesome.
I hear ya and it sucks. I know when I wanted to play with some of my "friends" on battle.net and there were 3 minute lag spikes it was pretty horrible as well. If Blizzard went with off-line only architecture I'd be fine with that too. The only objection I have in them straddling the line and providing both features just because it logistically doesn't work. They'd be spending the majority of their time combating all of the issues with battle.net rather than focusing on any sort of game development.
This is an old and un-winnable fight, though. It's just not gonna happen, so no point in re-hashing it in forums.
Pretty much this ^
We've fought this battle for years before D3 came out. Even before we even had the slightest hint that the game could be online-only there were already some of us making posts about how much an "online only" experience would hurt a legit player. And we lost, for reasons we will never know 100%.
This is an old and un-winnable fight, though. It's just not gonna happen, so no point in re-hashing it in forums.
Maybe you should do yourself a favor and not bring it up then? The majority of the thread was debating the topic of DRM. I didn't once espouse that Diablo 3 should or shouldn't be online only. I only stated that there are other applications than just seeing the $$$ such as security.
So, don't pull that shit where you attack someone by saying they don't have any backbone and when they respond you pull the "Oh, this topic has been done to death so it isn't worth discussing" card. That is absolutely juvenile and completely lacking any sort of backbone, ironically.
Your clearly lieing now, you clearly never knew and have next to no knowledge on client + server architecture so please stop making yourself look more pathetic than you already do and either admit you was unaware (like me) and that you hopefully learnt something here or just stop responding and continue living in ure bubble of denial.
Or if I am wrong about this please explain why you avoided it every time I asked that question and instead chose to give a simplistic and mostly wrong response about things completely different to what I was actually asking?
Lol, sounds like I struck a nerve.
I hear ya and it sucks. I know when I wanted to play with some of my "friends" on battle.net and there were 3 minute lag spikes it was pretty horrible as well. If Blizzard went with off-line only architecture I'd be fine with that too. The only objection I have in them straddling the line and providing both features just because it logistically doesn't work. They'd be spending the majority of their time combating all of the issues with battle.net rather than focusing on any sort of game development.
We've fought this battle for years before D3 came out. Even before we even had the slightest hint that the game could be online-only there were already some of us making posts about how much an "online only" experience would hurt a legit player. And we lost, for reasons we will never know 100%.
Maybe you should do yourself a favor and not bring it up then? The majority of the thread was debating the topic of DRM. I didn't once espouse that Diablo 3 should or shouldn't be online only. I only stated that there are other applications than just seeing the $$$ such as security.
So, don't pull that shit where you attack someone by saying they don't have any backbone and when they respond you pull the "Oh, this topic has been done to death so it isn't worth discussing" card. That is absolutely juvenile and completely lacking any sort of backbone, ironically.
If this is in reference to me, I apologize. It is very hard to detect sarcasm on the internet sometimes. :-/