I’m currently playing Diablo IV (and having a blast with it) but finding one small gripe which I only think is going to get worse and probably stop me playing it completely in the long run.

My girlfriend is currently pregnant. This means in 6 months time we’ll have a newborn. With this in mind I’m expecting to only be able to grab a few minutes at a time to game and even when I think I’ll have longer I may end up jumping off at short notice. This means I’ll almost certainly come to rely on games which I can pause. Unfortunately this isn’t possible with Diablo IV since it requires an always online connection even though I’m essentially playing it as a single player game.

What are other people’s thoughts?

  • minimar@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    If it’s a strictly multiplayer game, fine.

    If not, that’s just DRM, and it should die in a fire.

  • Saauan@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think it might be a good anti-piracy measure. But it’s really sad for the accessibility of these games as a whole, especially when it is possible to play the game without any online features.

    I’m a big fan of the Steam Deck and Nintendo Switch ability to simply turn into sleep mode, which allows me to pause very easily games. But I guess that’s not possible with online games :/

  • catcarlson@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Definite no from me. Applies to all apps, really: there should always be an offline mode unless always-on is absolutely required (i.e., accessing a website/API is the app’s sole purpose).

    This is a big problem for me with mobile games, since developers seem to have forgotten that cell service is not universal, capable of failure, and often metered.

    Of course, there are still annoying edge cases. A bunch of apps I have don’t strictly require always-on connection, but they have a check-in at startup. They skip the check if you have no service at all, but if you have service without data, they just sit there without timing out.

  • amanneedsamaid@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    If a game has a single player mode without features that require internet, and isn’t accessible without wifi, thats just lazy design imo.

  • EnigmaNL@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    In my opinion all games that can be played solo should have an offline mode. Personally I have an excellent internet connection but I hate having to depend on servers to be able to play the game that I bought.

    The thing about always online is that the servers often crap out, especially during launch or during major patches. That just annoys the hell out of me.

    • Gert@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      These were my thoughts as well. Ever since I’ve had a good internet connection, online only games haven’t really bothered me, but that’s a privilege many don’t have.

      When I had crap internet it, I’d have to download a patch overnight and it was awful getting a surprise patch, meaning I couldn’t play til the next day.

      I don’t see any reason for single player games not to have an offline mode. Especially for people who don’t have good access to internet.

  • ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I have avoided the Hitman series because of their always online requirement. One day I loaded it up only to be told I couldn’t play their single player game because their servers were down for maintenance.

    I’m not paying $60 for a single player game that I won’t be able to play when the company has server issues.

  • DrLongTRL@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    If the game actually does something useful with that connection, I don´t have a problem with it. Examples:

    • MSFS does the processing of the terrain and it´s details off site. Also things like live weather and traffic obviously need a connection.
    • Souls games allow you to leave messages and read messages from other players. Also you can help or attack other players in their game, which is super useful and fun.

    However, sometimes the always on is just a way for the devs to battle piracy. In which case its hurting the actual gaming experience.

    I´m not familiar with Diablo 4 to be honest. So, in my understanding, the fact that it need an internet connection alone can´t be the reason for not being able to pause the game, right? There must be some real time interaction going on between your “world” and the worlds of others.

    EDIT: Hm, I read up on it for a second and it seems like there is a portal that you can use to teleport to a safe place? A town? Supposedly you can even do that from within a dungeon AND even teleport back to the same place?

  • mek@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    It sucks, plain and simple. Single-player games should never require internet access, and if the game has a multiplayer component, it should be a separate mode that leaves the single-player mode working even when there is no internet connectivity.

    It’s just basic fucking common sense… except that it conflicts with financial interests and greed.

    • aTempUser@lemmy.film
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It makes sense in that having a local single player and a multiplayer mode requires writing much of the game twice. Having a remote single player mode only requires making the game once, with a special instance spun up for each single player game.

      I live a life where I often don’t have a persistent connection. That means for me, I can’t play new games. While I have been a fan and player of Diablo since the first one I’ll have to sit this one out.

  • IcySyndicate@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    If it’s single player games, there should be ZERO reasons to have it requiring online connectivity 24/7. No buy for me. There will be times where your internet goes offline for ISP related issues or Xbox Live or PSN experiencing server issues. How am I going to play those games?

  • Grizzzlay@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Well, games that are inherently built for an online social presence, like an MMORPG, makes perfect sense to require being always online. World of Warcraft, Star Wars: The Old Republic come to mind.

    Even though you can quest solo on those games, it doesn’t make sense from a core-concept standpoint that you just walk around an empty world where there’d otherwise be players doing their own thing.

    If it’s a game that has little to nothing to do with online as a core part of its concept (like a single-player campaign where you can’t have any sort of online co-op), then yeah that seems rather silly.

  • Rhabuko@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Last month, construction workers did something in our street. I didn’t have Landline Internet for a whole week. Always Online is pretty horrible for single player games.

  • Malta Soron@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Concerning gaming with a newborn, you should also look for games that you can play with one hand, so you can hold the baby with the other. Europa Universalis 4 is a great game if you’ve got a kid who will only fall sleep while being held.