Some people could give a crap about all of that. Even MS managed to make achievements work offline and they did that 6 years ago. Maybe Blizzard could ask them how they possibly managed such a technical feat.

And do you know the penalty for having offline achievements? Saved games that you can't properly move across computers.

Umm, again, solved by GfWL years ago. Game saves are encrypted, there's nothing magical about them other than that. XBox saves move across machines fine too.

We apparently just need one thread in which we can yell at each other. Right now I'm just shifting between the two of them. But the answer is: if you don't care about the features, well, that sucks, because they're a part of the game. If the features decrease the quality of the game for you, well, don't buy it.

How does that justify it? Those features are optional (they must be since they're disabled in 'offline' mode). Perhaps DRM does scare some people away but that still doesn't make it acceptable to require an internet connection for single player.
See above, the features are obviously optional given that they're disabled in offline mode. Your argument is massively flawed there.

I'm fine with having to connect to the Internet once every 30 days to play games. I'm always connected. If the servers go down, I will crack my game or, more likely if the servers are permanently going down, the DRM will be removed.

Lol, you're defending forcing people to accept what amounts to Facebook because they want to play a single player campaign to see how the story they played over a decade ago unfolds!

Look, I get you like SC2, that's fine, but you're apologizing for complete BS on Blizzard's part, no amount of hand wringing is going to make it sound like anything but what it is.

Also, I'd like to reiterate from an earlier post, "Do you really think Sony's PSN servers would be down for a month? That would cost Sony billions!"

You implied Blizzard would never let their servers go down. Yeah right. Aside from big companies turning them off by choice, at times it's been way out of their control.
Name one, single time when remote activation was removed from a DRMed product before the servers went down. Because in my examples above, it wasn't.

Want to count the cases where it was? I can help: Zero.

I'm actually not a huge fan of the Activision portion (actually, I really don't like them) but I'd defend them on this as well, because it's not a big fucking deal. PSN is not equivalent to auth/shard servers. It's a whole infrastructure whereas Blizzard's setup is much more modular. They're entirely different beasts.
I honestly am not aware of any cases in which the auth servers have been removed, so I'm not surprised by your zero number.

Walmart's music servers and MS' music servers were taken offline, oops, no unlock issued for all the DRMed music people had bought.

No cases reported of what you're claiming is likely to happen: that Valve or Blizzard will release a patch to disable auth requirements on your software.

So why do you stubbornly believe this is a likely scenario?
Yeah man, PSN is BIGGER, and INCLUDES auth servers. Or did you miss all those stories about people not being able to play their Capcom games while PSN was down?

I'm talking about games which have to contact the auth servers, not music. Why do you stubbornly believe that Valve and Blizzard employees hate their customers so much that wouldn't release a patch. Furthermore, do you really believe that Blizzard would want to forfeit the money they get from SC2 tourneys?

I subbornly believe that when those servers go down they'll be looking out for their own self interest, not yours. There could also be legal requirements that they not release said things in the case of big lawsuits or bankruptcy.

Why do you believe MS or Walmart hates their customers especially when they planned on launching new music services after they screwed their old digital music customers?

Do you really believe that Sony would to want forfeit all the money they get from PSN purchases for 6 weeks?

I thoroughly am convinced Valve and Blizzard are more concerned about the experiences of their customers than MS and WalMart are. If you listened to interviews with them, you'd understand that.

Once again, this is a moot point, because you can crack it in two seconds anyway.

Anyway, this is like smashing my head against a brick wall. I suspect you feel the same, so I see no point in continuing the conversation further. I seriously doubt that this conversation is changing anyone's mind.

Interviews are mostly PR speak. Half of what any developer from any company says in an interview is bull.

This is also why I love Stardock: no DRM.

...


This is an 'ilarious joke, yes?