DiabloFans

Quote from NullerGnuen

No offence, but since D3 is now an ONLINE only game, they maybe you shouldn't get .. There's TONS and tons of other ARPG games out there with offline mode ..

That..was one of the most selfish and rude posts I've seen on Diablofans.com...

And I've been here for about 4 years...

Damn man...

Quote from TagDerEnte3

Ok how long did it take you to figure out how to do that??? And what ever tatics you used to do it would of gotten you how many bans if you were testing it online?? Now that you have an idea of what you need to do to make the hack work offline, means you have less work to do to make it work online.

So what you are saying is that it makes it easier to make a hack work online, even though you still have zero access to the online characters?

Ever wonder why the charms you would see on Battle.net Open with the +99 to Fireball were never on Battle.net closed? Yup, because you didn't have access.

It's that whole thing where offline characters are client side and online characters are server side thing.

Quote from ecutruin

As for those people complaining about a lack of offline mode, honestly, are you in this century? Seriously, most everything is online now days. Even my console systems have online only games. Complaining that you cannot play Diablo 3 on your flight while you travel is kind of ridiculous. Its a minor inconvenience that you're using to complain. If that seriously is the only time you can play the game, then don't buy it.

Or complaining that you cannot play Diablo 3 at home in, say, the Philippines like the previous poster said is ridiculous, right? A minor inconvenience that you simply cannot play, right?

Quote from ecutruin

Now, I understand that it will remove the ability for someone without an internet connection to play the game. However, from a business standpoint the amount of people that alienates is almost negligible. Most of the people that would purchase the game in the first place have access to the internet either at home or a nearby cafe. Heck, our mall has open wireless.

How do you look somebody in the eye and tell them they are negligible? I'm just curious...

Quote from sithsylar

Quote from ecutruin

@Irrational: I actually disagree. What kept D2 alive was that there was not a viable alternative to the game really. I personally am glad that Blizzard will be able to monitor activity easily and ban those that bot. It won't catch everyone, but it'll catch many of them.

I kind of agree, there is really no game like d2 except for wow and i really don't want to have to group to get good items.

Quick check with Alternateto.com:

• Titan Quest
• Dungeon Siege
• Silk Road Online
• Torch Light
• Metin 2

Quote from Kiserai

I will trade a thousand people calling me a selfish asshole for my complete lack of caring about no offline in order to have hundreds of thousands of players on Bnet playing D3 with few if any bots / dupes / hacks / spammers.

Pity that alienating a large portion of the Diablo fanbase doesn't get rid of bots/dupes/hacks/spammers, right?

Quote from Kiserai

I have sympathy for them but whether you agree it's Blizzard being greedy or you agree that this is simply how more and more games are working these days and that this will give us the best D3 experience as intended, this is the reality of D3. Just like WoW, some games are simply made now to be played online.

Games like WoW, Rift, DCUO, EQ, etc, are persistent worlds. You close a game in Diablo/Diablo 2/Torchlight/etc, and that world is gone. So, yea, at least Blizzard North understood that non-persistant worlds do not have the requirement of being online.

Quote from Kiserai

This client/server structure is what will give not just the majority of players the best experience but the overwhelming majority of them the best experience; not everyone can be pleased--does anyone really think Blizzard is going to risk having D3 fall into the same hacked/duped/spammed wasteland that D2 has become simply to satisfy a very small (if vocal) sliver of the player base? It wouldn't make any sense. Sure it makes them more money, but just look at it logically--the extra money is just gravy, a very happy byproduct that comes with giving the majority of D3 players what they want -- an online experience with a bedrock of genuine items and spam-less channels / games.

Actually, best I can tell, the money (as well as the drm) is the main issue, happy customers like you are a byproduct.

Standard & Poor - AA+
Moody - AAA
Fitch - Under Review


Now, while I am happy we still have our triple A rating for Moody, the Standard & Poor double A rating is bound to hurt.


Everybody just remember, when elections come along, John Boehner caused this.

Quote from Spawkuring

If there's an offline mode, then characters and items won't be server-side, because an offline mode wouldn't work without putting all that information on the client.

Unless you have offline characters stored client side and online characters stored on the server.

Quote from sithsylar

Has everyone forgot if you are not located near the server your ping will be shit no matter what internet connection you have??? I can see Australians getting pings of 300+ making diablo 3 hardcore unplayable just like the ping i get in wow.... I really would love to get some info on this and be proven wrong....

QFT

Quote from Daemaro

Don't think it'll happen Link since it isn't designed to be played offline at ALL.

I doubt it will happen fast, but I don't see the gaming community permitting Diablo 3 to be online only. Either Activision-Blizzard will make an offline mode or the gamers will. I just hope that Activision-Blizzard does because it will be faster for them to do it then the gamers to do so.

He is one of my heroes.

Between him, Neil DeGrasse Tyson, and Richard Dawkins, Science fucking rules!

Quote from Concepticon

Yes through a 3rd party such as paypal

Quote from Ghost_Sanguis

Yes, you can have it transferred to whatever is tied to your account, such as paypal. Remember though that the items you sell for real cash will be taxed by blizzard to avoid legal issues.

So I can find a Shako (Or D3 equivilant), sell it, put it on Paypal, and pay rent with it?

Hahaha! You work for McDonalds for a living? Cool. What do I do for a living? I play Diablo 3.

Epic.

I just remember TotalBiscuit saying the Swede's made the game. I was just curious. *Shrug*

Warning: These video and the posting following the video has course language. These videos and the post after them should not be viewed by minors, depending upon the laws of the nation in which said viewer resides. This poster takes no responsibility or liability on anyone choosing to view this post or these videos.

You have been warned.

I know that on more then one occasion I would have to skip 5 or 6 pages simply because I wasn't able to read fast enough to catch up to the conversation. Lol.

I'm not exactly upset about having to skip pages of pages of conversation.

This guy, Zubin, was the first person to welcome me to the forums those many moons ago.

/bows down to Zubin

No, they didn't play wc3 so they are confused. If it's not wow, it doesn't make sense.

Pandamonium is here. Time to pick up your samurai swords!

Those who paid 3x the going rate were those would could afford it, not those in the middle class who currently shoulder a greater burden compared to growth and wealth. I think you should educate yourself about how our tax system works:

Wikipedia is your friend.

Taxes are the price we pay for a civilized society.
-Oliver Wendell Holmes

Also, I should congratulate you for completely avoiding the rest of my points. Well done.

Quote from Sabvre

Thats the thing though proletaria... you are all hard over big government. I'm not :D.

This is where you're mistaken and woefully so. It doesn't take a "big," government to do what they should be doing. There are plenty of useless tripe programs and departments to be trimmed and eliminated. What the government should do (ie. provide adequate infrastructure, defense, educaiton, and healthcare for citizens to get a chance at their own success story) is something they've never had a chance to do because of right-wingers demonizing the entire concept of federal government. Meanwhile, the ever-helpful lefties have sought to pass anything that might be psudo-progressive in nature and have concocted us a nightmare of addons we never needed.

It's as though the country always needed glasses, but the right said it was too expensive. So we've augmented EVERY other sensory organ except the eyes to try and make up for it. History has shown us, that simply won't do.

Some people in this country believe that they would need to pony up all but the shirt on their backs to have these things. Overwhelming numbers of examples in Europe have proved this isn't so. Economists know that this isn't so. Politicians who aren't bought out by plutocrats know this isn't so. And yet, the same tired crap the right has been parroting since the 1800's is still with us today.

I got my PhD in US History and began teaching long before any of this Reganomical junk ever made it into the system. I remember the days when wealthy CONSERVATIVES were perfectly content to pay 3x and more the present rate in federal income tax and capital gains, admired the government for building the roads, bridges, funding police, fire fighters, the postal service, military, etc. They felt that their politicians compromising for pragmatic goals was noble and even the most die-hard repubs I met in the 70s couldn't deny the greatness of Apollo 11 for all of humanity.

Today the "center," has shifted hard-right. The economic crash is, in no uncertain terms, a construct of Reganomic policy and the capitulation of the left (the Clinton admin killed glass steagall). I can't say how long the trend will continue, but it's quite apparent that nobody on the left is satisfied with this status quo. What remains to be seen is just how satisfied (or complacent) the independent middle-ground is. Given the projections of healthcare costs, the projections for economic (and thus job) growth, and the prospect of a new generation of vets coming home: I doubt we can continue to hear about this big-gub'mint bogeyman much longer without seeing past the farce.

The case can be made for the government getting OUT of a lot of things, but that kind of argument should start from the basis of what can be realistically privatized, not a bog-standard "the government is too big," statment that lends absolutely no credential what-so-ever to what might be justly cut and cropped. Blanket statements like that simply allow the corrupt and the corrupting influences that be to take a wild stab ay everything that doesn't make them a profit.

Hum... FF7...


I always hated, despised even, the gameplay of FF games. Beyond boring and tedious. Make it action based and still so interesting story wise, and I would have played them more.

Tried to get in a few. Thought FF8 was very interesting but again, gameplay got in the way. Random encounters with appearing enemies and turn based system... all day long... yaaaawn...

FF7, story wise... looked very interesting, and everybody loves it. So I thought lets give it a shot, right? I'm sorry but I can't. I play ugly games alright. But FF7 is beyond ugly. It was done in that one era of absolutely disgusting 3D that looks worse than Pong, Doom, and any half-3D games I've seen. It truly is the ugliest game I have ever seen, and one of the only game I can actually say: I can't play it, because its too damn ugly!


I'm saying that because people find that FF7 "aged well", but no 3D game looks as bad as it does. I never thought I'd push a game away purely because of its graphic before I played it again.

Quote from LinkX

I'm personally not voting for somebody who will cause me to wake up in the middle of the night for the next four years in a cold sweat checking to see if America is gone, or if we are in World War 3, or some other crazy shit, just so we can get out of the middle east and stop harassing civilians for smoking pot.

Considering how rabid both parties are, I don't know there is any such candidate who DOESN'T fit those criteria. Bad qualities in a short list:

1. Libertarians:


-No safty net of any kind
-No regulation to keep corporations from becoming the plutocratic dictators we already accuse them of being
-No foreign policy outside of non-intervention
-LOLGOLDSTANDARD
-Many, many, lunatics support this party.
-Did I mention the lolgoldstandard?

2. Democrats:


-Can't tell granny that medicare and social security are going to make the young broke, but don't have the balls to nationalize healthcare.
-Clearly bent on forging ahead with green energy even though North American fossil fuel reserves are an easy ticket out of the poor house.
-Can't seem to end wars that republicans start.
-Won't tell Sharpton and Pelosi to shut up.
-Obvious Corruption
-DRONES

3. Republicans:


-Haven't had an original idea since Regan was in office and still have a fetish for his drug war
-Want to hand over healthcare to private companies (retail price for a kidney, inc)
-Actively seek to denegrate the rights of Gays, Women, non-christians, and people of lower socio-economic status.
-Are not willing to compromise on taxes and have insane tax reform ideas (see: 999).
-Fillibuster everything just because they can.
-Obvious Corruption
-WAR

Lesser of evils? I'm having a hard time seeing one. You know shits hitting the fan when the gay liberal progressive can't decide who is worse.

This one always pisses off the reps.

While I have plenty of things to say on this topic, I (a.) have no time to read through it all, and (b.) don't really want to express my opinion directly.

I will say, however, this is oddly the most radioactive thread on this forum and for that I give you a thumbs up, Proletaria!

I really don't get the hype behind Ron Paul. I don't get how people can say, "well, all politicians are bought," and then turn around and say, "THIS GUY IS SUPER SERIOUS and definitely NOT A PUPPET OF THE TOP 1%!"

As Link said, some of his policies just make me cringe. I would not want this guy in office pushing his agenda, no matter how "pure" he was as a person. The thing we have to realize, as citizens of the United States of America, is that our political participation (or lack thereof) is a major contributor to our current situation. If we had a public that was more in tune with the issues of today, we would have more effective government. Sometimes it's not just the leaders; we can't just sit back and expect that things get better just because there is that one person who we think will make it all better. Our system of government is complicated and it will be hard as hell to get it back on track. It's not as simple as voting out all the incumbents; it requires years of investigation and correction.

Benjamin Franklin said that we have a Republic "if we choose to keep it." We should be able to show this through our participation, but since we have very little participation, it almost seems like we don't even know what to do with it.

Do some research. Don't just assume things about people. Find the politician who you agree with the most and don't just judge a book by its cover. If you want to seriously fix this country, you need to seriously get involved. Sitting at home and posting videos will do little to stop this unless the people who are behind this forum take the incentive to actually get involved. You can bring a horse to water, but you can't make them drink.

Both the people and the politicians are to blame for the situation we're in. Take that into account before you go screaming Ron Paul's name from the rooftops. One man isn't going to magically fix every problem in our government and I doubt that one man can effectively get started. There are thousands of people in our government.

And before you go around saying that Ron Paul will spawn rainbow unicorns in the sky that shit skittles if he's elected, take into account the idea that some, if not many, of his ideas will probably die upon arrival in our House and Senate.

/AP Government student rant

Quote from BlackSheperd

I’m not saying those books are useless actually they are quite useful to understand how stupid a civilization can be.
The only true value this books hand out are matters of ethic and moral, like: don’t still, don’t lie, don’t harm the other, help the one in need, etc. You don’t need a religion to teach to a child these things.
Everything else is bullsh*t. Who ever come from the dead to say if there is a heaven or hell?
Live your life while you can because is the only one you have. After you’re dead you will just be dead and you won’t have a second chance.

WOW this is by far the biggest insults i've seen in this thread. Congrats. btw the bible is not about teaching not to steal, or dont lie, or helping the one in need. that all comes from our individual choices based on what we believe to be true. The bible goes a lot deeper than that, dont hurt ur silly head over it tho
but u definately said something quite interesting but ill reiterate. guys in reading this right now, there is NO HOPE, after ur dead ull be just that DEAD! like food for worms, so get cremated pple cause its ugly. oh and there is no SECOND CHANCE. if u make a mistake ur done for. HAR HAR HAR! So anwser me this why should i help anybody besides myself? to be nice and a good person? thats very debateable cause maybe im just a proud bastard in the inside, which i am. If i help someone in need, sure its good to help them, but the essence of the act is to help myself. this is a wisdom u may not understand. but its ok, thank you for sharing ur ignorance with regards to the bible. Feel free to live in ur past or u future just dont forget about the present or u might break ur nose on a wall.
as far as the link u provided. its from wiki so i wonder its acurracy but yea ill take it for wat it is, in my experience however there is much history that is left out that many times shows a much different reality.

Surprising you know that by helping the other you are helping yourself.
Then why do you need me to specifically say it. Why are you questioning it?

But I will have to ask you, where is the connection between my afterlife and helping someone now?

Maybe you don’t know what it really means to help someone because your teaching just tells you to help the other, or else you will burn in hell.

I will try to explain you in more human terms and lease godly words.

We as human are a society based leaving beings. We can’t leave outside a society.
If you throw me on a deserted land with no other humans around I will die.
Even if there is a lot of food and videogames and amusement parks or anything that you like, without other humans around, if I won’t die I will get mad.

So, why do we help each other?
We help each other because by doing so we help the society we leave in, and buy doing so we help ourselves.
If you live in a garbage bin you will get sick. I don’t want the society I leave in to be like a garbage bin else I will get sick.
We help our society for the present and the feature, not for our afterlife.

When you are dead you ARE DEAD that’s FINAL. You are food for the worms as you sad.
Those ugly worms btw are part of the food chain and they need to eat too.