PixlBit

Really looking forward to this one. It's the Buffy-meets-Clueless thing that does it for me.

And chainsaws.

We're in agreement about people overreacting. Even I didn't use the right wording in my comment. I'm not angry about the Diablo 3 thing. I'm concerned, for the reasons I listed. But I also think it's a problem within the game itself, or more accurately, with the way it's set up. I'm playing this game single player, as I said. My internet connection isn't the best, and I'm experiencing lag. In a single player game. There's no fix for that; it's not Blizzard's fault, and I can only imagine what people with worse connections are dealing with.

I try to look at these things from a business perspective as opposed to a fan's perspective.  I understand the need to put some DRM into the game (and that's what this is, let's be real). I understand wanting to monetize something that gold farmers have done for years. That's smart business. And at some point, it will be smart business to pull the plug on Diablo 3's servers. And that's the part that bothers me the most.

On Elder Scrolls Online and God of War multiplayer, my objection doesn't stem from the normal arguments. I just wonder at the expectation of the people involved. MMOs are on the way down, and I really don't think Elder Scrolls has the pull to be a success in the long haul. If Star Wars of all things is already fading, I don't see Elder Scrolls doing much better. God of War will surely be a great game, but will the multiplayer really keep people from trading the game in after a month or two? Probably not. So that's time and money that could either be used to make a better game, or reserved for lean times. How many times do we hear about studios having financial woes after releasing a hit game? It's because of moves like this--staffing up and spending money on things that ultimately don't see real gains.

Great episode, guys. Probably your best so far!

It's a 3DS title? DAMMIT! 

The problem with the Diablo III server situation is that it sets a bad precedent for the future. When I can't play the game because of high capacity on the servers I'm not angry because "OMG I CAN'T PLAY MY GAME AND I'M PISSED BECAUSE I HAVE NOTHING BETTER TO DO!". I have a life, I have other hobbies, and hell, I have a stack of about 30 games I need to play. No, I'm angry because there's really no reason to not be able to access the single player mode when the servers are jammed.

Now, they'll say that the always on thing is because of the real money auction house and ease of use for the player and most PCs are always online anyway. All of that may be true, but the fact is that there's one real reason for this--piracy. Now, I'm extremely anti-piracy and I'm all for ways to curtail that. But this is a prime example of punishing everyone for the actions of a few douchebags. I think having online authentication is fine, but when you're offline (say your network goes down) or just want to play solo you should be able to do just that, and not be at the mercy of Blizzard's servers being filled to capacity.

Mike kept bringing up MMOs as an example, but the comparison is flawed. With an MMO, the consumer has purchased the game with the knowledge that the game is always running and they will need to be connected to play. Diablo III has a single player mode. I disagree with the statement that this game is a co-op game first--I'm playing single player to enjoy the story and explore, and I'll dive into multiplayer later. I'm not the only one who does this.

But again, me not being able to play Diablo III right at launch easily isn't a problem besides me being on the review for PixlBit. The problem happens later. Imagine if you will, that Diablo III doesn't have the same long tail that the previous game had. Maybe in 2 years only a few thousand people are playing, and the game isn't selling anymore. It's not cost effective to keep those servers going, so the logical answer is to pull the plug. So those thousands of players can no longer play, even solo. If I tell a younger gamer how awesome Diablo III was, he or she can't hunt down a copy of the game and try it, because it's essentially vanished.

That's an extreme example, but let's move forward to the next generation. With the industry pushing for an end to the used games market, it's easy to see a world where every game, even the ones that only have a single player mode, need to be online to work. Well, game companies go out of business all the time. What happens to their games when they aren't there to maintain them? They become lost to time, and the people who enjoy playing them simply can't anymore. This is how the video game industry loses its history, bit by bit. Imagine if you couldn't watch Gone With the Wind all of a sudden. Or Star Wars. Or Rocky. Video games have touched people in the same way that those classic films did, and if you suddenly can't experience them, that's a profound loss.

Michael117esque rant complete.

Which is the reason it's the only game in the series I haven't finished. I've tried from scratch at least 8 times since the release of Anthology. I'm 17 hours in this time, which is way better than I've done before. I'm stuck, but I'm gonna gamefaqs it before my vacation and play it on the plane.

I went back to FF V on GBA after this. That probably has more to do with the retrospective I'm writing, but my comment about dreaming about a new old FF is a real thing. 

Yeah, I wanted to love it. I was excited when I saw that it was a throwback since I missed out on those types of games. Maybe the upcoming Baldur's Gate remake will be just what I want.

I'm super excited for this one, but I want them to get it right. I thought Underworld was great, but critics didn't seem to love it as much as I did. I want CD to hit this one out of the park, so I can wait.

I loved the first Way of the Samurai. I always wanted the series to evolve, but this looks like it's stuck in the past. Still, it's a game I'd like to pick up on the cheap.

Great post as always, sir.

I think the last game that made me get into "flow" was Deus Ex: Human Revolution. I lost hours trying to squeeze every last bit of data and information out of the computer terminals and lockers. I did every quest in that game, which I rarely do. The only recent games I can say I've done that with are Mass Effect and Dragon Age.

You and I are the same when it comes to viewing games cinematically. People talk about hating passive cutscenes, but I would prefer that to a real time conversation where I'm never sure if I'm in the right spot to see what I need to see. Since I get totally engrossed in a storyline I tend to stand still when someone's talking to me anyway, because that's what I do in real life, so it's like I'm in a cutscene anyway.