The Infernal Madness of Diablo III’s Always Online Requirement
Right, I’m not normally one to indulge in a spot of nerdrage, even when it comes to games and DRM, but after being subjected to four or five days of developer Blizzard‘s draconian DRM solution for Diablo III, I’ve just about had enough. Don’t get me wrong; I absolutely love Diablo III, it’s easily one of my favourite games of the year so far – and that from someone who arrived a bit late to the party to really get much out of Diablo II. However, all the fun I’ve had so far has been set against a backdrop of sheer teeth-grinding frustration caused by Blizzard’s requirement that players remain connected to its servers at all times, even when playing solo.
Feature Not Bug
Why do players need to be online at all times to play Diablo III? Ostensibly, because Blizzard have added new features to the game – such as an in-game currency and real-money auction house – that would be rife for abuse if Diablo III was plagued by the cheats and hacks that afflicted earlier titles in the series.
In Diablo I, and to a lesser extent the second game, it was possible to create and level a character offline and then use various techniques to modify stats and duplicate powerful items before taking them online, giving these characters a massively unfair advantage in internet play. With the arrival of the auction houses, abuse of an offline item duplication bug could see the game’s economy debased and eventually completely ruined. Worse still, with the ability to cash out money earned via the real-currency auction house, vast sums of cash could potentially be obtained by wannabe fraudsters.
I say ostensibly, because of course, there’s more to it than that. As well as introducing the auction houses and various social features, Blizzard have also moved almost all of Diablo III’s game logic – player movement and commands, scripting, hit-detection, the nuts and bolts of the game, really – server-side. For the uninitiated, the vast majority of single-player games do all this kind of processing locally on the player’s machine. It’s only really multiplayer-only titles, particularly MMORPGs, that have everything handled server-side, partly because of the scale of the games but also to maintain control over the world and stop local hosts altering the game’s code to allow the game to be played in a way it wasn’t intended to.
ERROR ERROR
This dependency on Blizzard’s servers means that Diablo III suffers from incredibly annoying issues that normally only afflict multiplayer games, even when playing locally. In the last few days I have experienced:
- Ongoing difficulty in logging in to servers – and thus play – the game I spent £30 on (and that only because I pre-order ages ago before Blizzard set RRP at £45)
- Unplayable lag. While playing single-player.
- Losing an hour of game progress and a not insignificant amount of gold to an unexplained error.
The biggest problem here isn’t so much the need to always be online – my internet connection is absolutely rock-solid – it’s the fact that your playing experience is completely governed by Blizzard’s servers. If the login or authentication servers are down, you can’t play. If the servers keel over and die mid-fight, you are unceremoniously dumped back to the login screen until such time as they come back up, losing anything from the last ten minutes to the last hour of progress you’ve made. If they start to creak under the weight of the sheer number of players logged on, like when the US and EU communities are playing in force at the same time, you experience crippling, unplayable lag. You are entirely at the mercy of the developer’s online infrastructure at all times, EVEN IN SINGLE PLAYER.
Obviously this isn’t acceptable in any way, shape or form, as many of the army of gamers who have been beset by Errors 37, 75, 3003 and the rest know all too well. When the servers are up and running smoothly, Diablo III is simply unrivalled fun, a triumphant masterclass in how to ensure players have a good time. But the launch period has, unsurprisingly, seen millions of people trying to play the game all at once, resulting in instability and extreme difficulty in connecting at times. Blizzard, of all companies, should know better. Having run World of Warcraft, the world’s most successful MMO, for the best part of a decade, they should know a thing or two about server loads during the launch window and be able to adapt accordingly.
On DRM
The why of all of this, which I’ve been circling around for the last 400 words, is patently Digital Rights Management – though Blizzard have yet to come out and say so explicitly. Moving game logic to the game servers is the real giveaway – this prevents pirates from cracking the game and allowing it to be played in single player mode gratis. With all of the maths happening at a server farm in California or France, there’s not enough of the game code in the local client files to actually play without some serious reverse engineering that, even if successful, will only allow for a shallow facsimile of the full Diablo III experience. By taking so much of what makes the game a game onto its servers, Blizzard have effectively created a game that’s almost impossible to pirate.
Now, I appreciate that piracy is a very, very serious issue for PC developers and support their right to take reasonable measures to prevent pirates from ripping them off. Clearly there’s a wide spectrum of opinion on this, from a vocal minority of gamers who view all DRM as intrinsically evil to publishers like Ubisoft who have been extremely forthright in their efforts to protect their products against the pirates. Both of these polar-opposite views are wrong; pragmatism shows that even developers like CD Projekt Red who haave shipped major titles without DRM as a gesture of faith and goodwill to the PC gaming community still suffer from astronomically high piracy rates, while Ubi et all have seen sales plunge as gamers steer clear of titles with punitive DRM measures.
Steamworks is the best compromise solution I’ve seen so far. Implemented through Valve’s superb Steam service, it centralises DRM for multiple titles and though it insists on players being logged in to access most online features, it allows them to play games in single player while in Offline Mode. Steamworks is far from perfect but it’s definitely the least worst solution around at the moment; gamers get to play without too much inconvenience and hassle and publishers are able to protect their investment without completely alienating potential customers.
Infernal Madness
Returning to Diablo III, I have no problem with Blizzard taking steps to protect both their revenue stream and the integrity of the game’s virtual economy – up to a point. The inconvenience caused by Diablo III’s infernal always-online DRM simply goes far past that point and away towards that mountain of skulls in the distance. There’s an argument doing the rounds that players foolhardy enough to buy the game before seeing how the launch week panned out should have known what to expect and learn to put up and shut up instead of getting vocal about it. I certainly don’t accept that – the game didn’t ship with a warning that it would be sporadically unplayable during the first few weeks after going live and, in any case, it’s not unreasonable to expect a company with Blizzard’s pedigree and experience of online-only titles to get the launch of a new entry in one of its core franchises right.
There’s a relatively straightforward solution to all of this; Blizzard could simply release a (probably monstrous) patch that enables Diablo III to be run locally when playing solo. In order to make this work and protect the integrity of the online economy, the single and multiplayer aspects of the game would probably need to be separated entirely – no offline characters could be taken online – but I can’t see too many gamers being bothered by this (though of course, some will happily complain about anything). Many would even welcome this approach as a fallback for when servers come down for maintenance - switching to an offline alt while taking an (enforced) time-out from your main character is not without its appeal. This doesn’t entirely protect against piracy but at least ensures that players need a legitimate copy to access online modes, one of Diablo III’s biggest selling points.
Of course, a more likely scenario is that connectivity issues will gradually diminish as the initial rush after launch fades over the next few weeks and the DRM fiasco will be largely forgotten until the first expansion pack rolls around in 18 months time. By then, Blizzard will have hopefully seen the error of its way and opted for a less draconian solution, though I’m not holding my breath. Until then, Diablo III’s incredibly badly-handled DRM solution remains a very black mark against what is otherwise a towering achievement in game design.

















