Boycotting Diablo III: A Threat to Gaming

I have been a Blizzard fan since 1992. I say this because, in order for some readers to grasp the seriousness of what I have to say, you will need to know where I am coming from in regards to Blizzard. With such information about my background you will, hopefully, realize the severity of the situation.

In 1992 I became a fan when a little game called Battle Chess, the Windows port, was released. When I was younger I happened to be a huge fan of Chess and I always enjoyed playing it against my younger brothers. But when I purchased Battle Chess, I started to play a lot more. That same year, however, I also enjoyed another game called Lord of the Rings vol. 1 for the SNES (sadly there were no sequels).

But it wouldn’t be until 1994, while browsing around in Comp USA staring at the shelves of PC games, looking for the newest releases, that I would begin to purchase every Blizzard game from then on. For you see Warcraft was displayed there, on the shelf, and immediately stood out to me. So after reading the back of the box I immediately decided to purchase it.

It is one of those decisions I have never regretted.

Since that purchase, I have bought every single game and installment for Warcraft, Diablo, and Starcraft. When World of Warcraft came out I immediately picked it up and, for three years, I played the game. On top of that, I have purchased every collector’s edition made for each game and, with the intention of embarrassing myself, I have even written some Warcraft-related fanfiction, as well as a poem, and one short story based in the Starcraft universe. I say all this, as briefly as possible, because what I have to say is very painful for me.

After waiting over 11 years for Diablo III, I will be boycotting this latest offering from Blizzard.

Like every other Blizzard fan out there I became excited as information and screenshots for Diablo III were released to us so that we could drool all over them. But as the game was getting closer to having some kind of release date, we were hit with the news that there would be no offline mode for the game.

In other words: Blizzard has given in to the “always-on” DRM which a company like Ubisoft has been pushing onto players for a couple of years now. However, Ubisoft has been met with enough resistance and outrage over it which has caused them to backtrack on such a decision on a couple of occasions. However, Diablo III is a whole different ball game with the dangerously high potential to convince other developers and publishers that it is time to fully embrace this draconic DRM.

DRM, for those unaware, stands for Digital Rights Management which is the term for access control technologies. PC gamers have had to deal with all kinds of restrictive DRM for a long time. From being limited to how many times we can install a game, to online activation, these are just some of the DRM methods that we have had to deal with.

Yet the worst one involves a game requiring a permanent internet connection in order to play the multi-player AND single-player campaigns. Online activation and limited number of installations are no longer good enough for companies to try and ‘combat piracy.’ Now you will no longer be able to play the single-player campaign without an internet connection.

Let me make myself clear. I have no problem with a game requiring a one-time online activation process so long as I can play offline anytime I desire to do so. I understand the need for developers and publishers to protect their IPs from pirates even though such measures are ineffective.

But when it interferes with my enjoyment of the game, then we have a problem.

Such interference can come from both the client side and the server side. Should your internet go down for any reason, you will be unable to play your game. In regards to Ubisoft’s DRM, once you lose your internet connection the game immediately kicks you out without saving your progress. So if you have an unstable connection then you are out of luck.

But then there is the server side, which could go down, that results in no one being able to play the game. Ubisoft has, on several occasions, had their servers go down due to outside attacks and even for maintenance which disrupted gameplay. BioWare also has, on a couple of occasions, had their servers go down which meant that gamers couldn’t play the Dragon Age games (they required an internet connection to verify authenticity).

So it is with Diablo III that all this can happen to prevent you from enjoying your game. You will never be able to play the single-player campaign unless you are connected to the internet with the added stipulation that you need to be on Battlenet 2.0 as well.

In other words you will have, from my perspective, no perceived ownership over the game.

Yet, because of Blizzard’s popularity, the threat that Diablo III poses will be at the highest it has ever been. Ubisoft’s shoddy console ports and draconic DRM have caused them to experience increased piracy and declining sales. But who knows? Perhaps Blizzard could pull off the unthinkable: acceptance of the “always-on” DRM. Should such a thing occur then nothing will prevent developers and publishers from adopting it.

However this will not just affect PC gamers. Sooner or later such DRM will find its way over to console gaming. Already the console has to deal with $10 online passes as a way to deter people from purchasing used games while recent rumors have circulated saying that the next Xbox console will prevent people from playing used games. But with the rise of piracy on consoles, companies are looking for other ways to combat both the used game market and piracy. The “always-on” DRM would be the perfect way in a company’s eyes. One-time activation, for one account, that requires a permanent internet connection.

It’s a scary thought, made even scarier by Diablo III Game Director Jay Wilson who justified Blizzard’s “online-only” decision by saying: “There’s two basic problems with us doing that. One is players default immediately to that. So, they basically unintentionally opt out of all the cooperative experience, all the trading experience, and the core of Diablo is a circle-trading game. So for us we’ve always viewed it as an online game – the game’s not really being played right if it’s not online, so when we have that specific question of why are we allowing it? Because that’s the best experience, why would you want it any other way?”

Rather amazing that someone can tell us exactly how we should play a game while circumventing the real reason for such DRM. Let’s face facts; Blizzard has invested a lot into Diablo III which has an in-game auction house system where players can sell items for real money with Blizzard taking a small cut of the sale (which will cause a number of problems). So of course they want full and complete control of the game, which means that we have no ownership and no say in regards to it, because there is too much money involved.

Developers and publishers no longer want us to own games which we purchase. Online activation, cd-keys, and digital distribution are the ways in which they make this happen. Just look at the steps, such as online passes, being taken to ensure developers see some profit from used sales or to outright prevent gamers from selling their games.

If Diablo III becomes a huge success then we can look forward to a future where games will require a permanent internet connection in order to play the single-player campaign.

Thankfully, however, there is another game to look forward to aside from Diablo III. Torchlight II is being developed by the co-founders of Blizzard North which was the division of Blizzard Entertainment that developed Diablo and Diablo II.

Author’s Note: Editorial was originally published in March 2012 for Press2Reset. Many of the links are no longer valid due to websites purging older content or making changes to their sites.

I also hope you enjoyed the article. If you would like to support this site, you can donate via Paypal or even check out our merchandise on RedBubble. Here are some of the items available.