Legal Opinion: How Cloud Gaming Turned Piracy Into Espionage

[exe3]

GW2 is relying on it, by giving group content to those who don't want to group. So you can be online and single player only, and GW2 is actually promoting that as a major selling point.

But you're still forced to be online...

[Marius]

That's kindof the point of online games.

Next we'll be saying Wikipedia needs printed versions.

[Otto-matic]

Basically they're saying "You are allowed to play your game at home, on your broadband connection. If any circumstance changes, you can't play the game you bought" And thus why I'm buying Torchlight2 instead of Diablo3.

I see that as a good thing...

Word twisting indeed.

Diablo 3 and Torchlight 2 are different games, online components aside. If I purchase Diablo for single player and my situation changes such that I lose my Internet connection, can you provide a good reason why I should not be annoyed at Blizzard?

Realistically, single player Diablo doesn't need to be online, but they are making it that way. Same thing with Ubisoft always online with no benefit (that I can think of). From a consumer point of view, do you support Ubisoft's DRM too?

Side note: Have you represented or worked for any game companies? You seem unusually vociferous in your support of always online DRM. If so, you really should put that in your article.

[xanarax]

1. the game is too expensive for me (I literally don't have the money to buy it);

Just because you can't afford doesn't mean you're entitled to steal it.

[Marius]

Well, read those sentences in order.

"And thus I am buying Torchlight 2."

"I see that as a good thing."

Hence I'm saying that buying Torchlight 2 is a good thing if it fits the person's needs, the situation promotes a greater variety of games. This situation does mean more money for Torchlight 2, btw.

And no, I've never worked for a game company. I'm discussing with people who I'm grateful took the time to read and comment on my article. I just have different views to you about online games.

[exe3]

That's kindof the point of online games.

Next we'll be saying Wikipedia needs printed versions.

But i'm trying to play a singleplayer offline game...

[Otto-matic]

That's fine, you just seem to support it very enthusiastically.

What about the other bits of what I wrote?

Hidden: show

Wikipedia offers free copies of all available content to interested users. These databases can be used for mirroring, personal use, informal backups, offline use or database queries (such as for Wikipedia:Maintenance). All text content is multi-licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License (CC-BY-SA) and the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL). Images and other files are available under different terms, as detailed on their description pages. For our advice about complying with these licenses, see Wikipedia:Copyrights. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia: ... e_download

[Marius]

But i'm trying to play a singleplayer offline game...

Which isn't D3. In a recent video interview, Jay Wilson said their 'prime directive' is that no harm comes to the co-op game. Providing an offline client would harm the co-op game in several ways: less secure, less players, less people contributing to the economy.

About the other things Otto?

No, get annoyed at Telstra. Big difference in who is guilty there.

Ubisoft's DRM is different because their games are actually designed as single player games. I don't think it's as horrible as some people make it out to be, but I do see it as more slapped on.

In contrast, D3 is not designed as a single player game: it's a co-op game. Just because D3 can be played single player, does not make it so: fundamental design and balance decisions were taken with co-op in mind. Effectively, every single skill and item is balanced with group play in mind.

[TheBard]

The King is dead long live the King!

Bring it on.

[Marius]

Why are you quoting The Lion King?

[Ralph Wiggum]

Basically they're saying "You are allowed to play your game at home, on your broadband connection. If any circumstance changes, you can't play the game you bought" And thus why I'm buying Torchlight2 instead of Diablo3.

Good for you. No, I'm not being sarcastic. I actually admire the fact that there's something about Diablo 3 you don't like, and so you make the conscious decision not to purchase it. You've voted with your wallet. You're supporting in what your opinion is the superior product. Rather than saying, "OMG I HATE DIABLO 3's DRM, AND I CAN'T LIVE WITHOUT IT SO I'M NOT GONNA PAY FOR IT"

Since when did gamers feel this entitlement where if there is something about a game they didn't like, whether it be the price, DRM, online connectivity, mouse support, consolve port etc. etc. they subsequently feel the need to pirate it? I mean honestly, do you apply the same concept to any other goods/service? I don't like pickles in my cheezburger, should I not pay for it?

Hello! I'm going to be the "a**hole" here and pirate this game if and when I will feel like playing it. Why? Well. Allow me explain. I usually pay for 9/10 games that I play. I pay for these games because I want to support the developers. I don't pay for the other 1/10 because of many reasons. These reasons may be:
1. the game is too expensive for me (I literally don't have the money to buy it);
2. the game has a too high price tag at any point in time (Alice Madness Returns is 50 euros at the moment. FIFTY EUROS! COME ON!!);
3. the price differs between regions (if a customer in the US will be asked to pay 50 dollars why am I asked to pay 50 euros? Why am I asked to pay 30%+ more for the same product?);
4. the price on the PC is too high (while the graphics are the same as on the console.. see Mass Effect 3) (PC games SHOULD NOT cost 60 dollars but 50);
5. some developers will simply not allow me to play the game that I payed for because I don't have an internet connection.
I will pirate Diablo 3 will be because of reasons 1, 3, 4 and 5. And if you're asking yourselves why I don't have an internet conenction, it's because I travel a lot and there's no internet where I go.

You know what? Price gauging and high prices affect other goods and services in Australia. Do you apply the same concept of not paying to use those goods/services?

[Bluefire]

Would you please stop refering to D3 as a multiplayer game.
It is a single player game with the OPTION to multiplayer IF YOU CHOOSE TO.
It is not wow.
It is not LIKE wow.
It is not LIKE GW2.
D3 is like D2, D1, Torchlight1, Torchlight2 etc etc etc.
It does not matter that some of you are personally only going to play it online with friends/random people.

Until they add ANY content at all that REQUIRES multiplayer then it is a single player game with a multiplayer OPTION.
A single player game does NOT require an internet connection to play. EVER.

[DarkMellie]

I AM A UNICORN.




I AM A UNICORN.










Wait, I thought capitilisation made things come true?

[Marius]

Would you please stop refering to D3 as a multiplayer game.

Did you watch the video interviews with Jay Wilson? Because that's where my statements that D3 was designed with co-op in mind come from.

[pinkwithhappiness]

Games officially have lifetimes now and when the developer/publisher decides it's time, you're never playing that game ever again.

This is basically the only issue i have with online gaming, and one i don't see addressed very often.

And Marius - it seems as though you are saying that for now (using the Torchlight vs D3 example) it's a good thing that the video game industry has such diversity, so offline games are still being made to cater for those who don't want always-online games.
But what about if/when in the future there are no offline games? I know it's all well and good to say a lot of gamers feel entitled and devs/pubs don't owe them anything, but it's still effectively changing a much enjoyed pastime so much to the point where the people who loved it, can't enjoy it anymore.
I honestly think the internet will become accepted as a 'basic necessity' (like water, electricity etc) in the future for many reasons, but i still think it's a bit sad that those who have played offline games for years might be forced to always be online.

Though on the other hand....if piracy is seriously hurting the industry, i suppose you could argue that those people wouldn't actually have any games to play without always-online in the future