Unsealed Diablo III Proposal
Posted 5 June 2012 by FluxLast week a fan sent in a proposal for what he called Unsealed Diablo III, and asked us to post it for the community to see. I liked the presentation even though I don’t think there’s anything on earth that will influence Bliz to change their online-only DRM for D3. The following quote is from the reader’s email as he explains his motivation and idea, and you should view the infographic’s text which explains things further.
For an extended period of time now spanning both before and after Diablo III’s release I have had thoughts concerning the online-only nature of the game. I of course am among quite a number of people. Ranging from players/critics who tend to argue in various forums with highly emotional or dismissive conjectures and opinions that at average span a couple of sentences, or writers for online publications who report on the issue which in turns leads to more posts in response underneath.
What I am offering is a product of my own work which lays out a proposal for player access to Diablo III. I have been through Blizzard’s Diablo III home page and touched upon areas of concern with both what I have termed Sealed and Unsealed access might bring about, but not too much that it creates a sea of words. Ease of reading and comprehension is what I am attempting to aim for here.
I am aware that 90% of comments will be perhaps in similar vein to the ones I have mentioned above but I feel that I needed to sit down and bring my thoughts to some form of a visual medium, and in doing so attract and develop an amount of intelligent, incisive and hopefully a lack of enmity form of feedback as I intend to somehow make Blizzard aware of this document’s existence. If this comes about through notability brought on by your user base and/or when I find appropriate means to get in contact with Blizzard. Any assistance on the latter would be very much appreciated.
In finishing, I wish to stress that this isn’t a be-all end-all document. If need be I intend to cultivate feedback to further enrich and consolidate the contents, but not to the point it becomes a multipage document. I have other ideas for that if required ha-ha!
Kind Regards,
Anonymous.
Click the image to read his proposal infographic. You can also see it in our Diablo 3 Misc gallery, if you prefer.
I don’t understand the purpose of this at all. It looks exactly like Diablo II’s Battle.net / not Battle.net options, and therefore does not contribute anything new. Or am I missing something?
You’re not. The dude goes a long way to say nothing at all with a lot of fancy words and graphics.
It will NEVER happen for the simple fact that Blizzard DOES NOT WANT TO RELEASE SERVER CODE TO THE PUBLIC.
No other reason is nearly as important.
Yep, that was my first thought: This idea does nothing to address the concern about providing data to the public (which makes it easier to bot/maphack/etc. – not that online-only necessarily makes that impossible, but I think you’d be hard-pressed to suggest that it doesn’t make it more difficult).
So…..grats on making a .jpg of the same tired old complaints that everyone who wants this has been making, showing 0 understanding of what’s handled server-side and what’s handled locally, and what it would take to change that?
That’s the real issue, isn’t it? Always-online isn’t just about requiring game keys, it’s about server-side control of game assets to prevent the creation of games on servers outside Blizzard’s control.
Meh, multiplayer game is multiplayer. As much as some people want to scream that it’s not, it is.
As much as people want to scream about past games, this isn’t them.
And as much as people want to keep rewording the same crap over and over that it should change, it’s not going to. So, either deal with it or go play a game that doesn’t have this kind of setup, because only by speaking with your wallet, will you make a difference.
“Meh, multiplayer game is multiplayer. As much as some people want to scream that it’s not, it is.”
If D3 is a Multiplayer game to you… then you probably haven’t played a multiplayer game in your life. Here’s how you’ll see that i’m right. Host a server with no bots in Quake 3 and see what makes a Multiplayer-exclusive game.
And to inhibit the creation of maphacks and botting programs.
That horse (bots) bolted with hellbuddy and immortal bot.
Though bots may now exist (though, frankly, I don’t keep up with botting news so I don’t know specifically what you’re talking about), that doesn’t retroactively change Blizzard’s motivations for the online-only requirement.
^Exactly what Sentarius said. It looks just like Open/closed battle.net but renamed to sound fancy.
And confusing…
They just made an infographic of Battle.net for Diablo 2 – as we all have undoubtedly spotted.
Pretty much open/closed battlenet for diablo 2, we all know what a hackfest open were.
As opposed to taking all of 3 weeks to get the first bots onto d3 closed battlenet?
Hacks != bots.
Bots are simply a way of automating legitimate user input. It’s difficult to detect that sort of thing (warden etc is required).
Hacks and cheats are ways of exploiting the code, to make it do things it wouldn’t ordinarily do or allow you to do. I don’t believe we’ve had any hacks on D3 yet?
My mistake I should have used the correct term. The automated bots that are farming gold and whatever the correct term is for what people are using to create the dupes, that’s what I meant. What is the last one called?
What dupes?
If you’re referring to seeing many of the same blue items on the auction house, eg rings or amulets, generally that’ll happen from a vendor rolling to sell that item. You can buy more than one copy. I did this myself when I saw a vendor roll a nice amulet: bought 8 of them and sold them on the auction house.
but but doesn’t a pretty slide show make blizzard want to change their mind??
if only it was that easy
-Floydman
There’s pretty much no way that Blizzard is going to allow the server code (used to generate and track the levels, monsters, items etc.) to reside on the player’s computer, which is what would be required for offline play.
Mind blown!
This wouldn’t work for the pure purpose that if Blizzard included the code for an offline mode, they would include basically everything an emulator would need to properly operate. It just isn’t going to happen. All those little formulas and bits of information the game needs to run? It doesn’t run on your machine.
(I posted this to the image page on accident)
Does the author of this graphic even know what he wants? At first i thought i was looking at a jpeg demonstrating a proposal for a single player mode, then i come to find out he’s wanting a \local lan mode?\ firstly, nothing about any of the message or graphic is laconic (as he so demonstrably desires) and secondly as others have posted he doesnt grasp the concept of what server side and client-side are for. Blizzard needs to come up with a single player client for the game, yes, but it would never come out retarded and aborted after the 3rd trimester like the graphic looks. -Oh so anonymous.
edit: i spy with my little eye someone who doesnt want to pay for d3 and has found an emulator on the net that doesnt work 100% and thinks that blizzard should just give the game away.
lets see if this anonymous poster will stand behind this “news” and update us with a comment regarding his true intention