And then I reserve the right to ignore whatever they spew out.


Anyway, as far as this particular 'Jimquisition' went, it wasn't even all that terrible though he did obviously go overboard at times.

Let's take the launch night issue. Now, I'm not sure how many people were unable to play at launch night but if the forums fiasco is anything to judge from then potentially thousands... From millions who bought the game. I don't know what the statistics are, but in any case it's irrelevant. Ok, Blizzard dropped the ball, boo fucking hoo. It's not the first game in the history of mankind to have had problems at launch. Remember Dead Island and the xbox build fiasco?
I'm willing to listen when people say that they want to play the game whenever they feel like it, but gnawing your teeth over a launch that went slightly wrong is stupid. Put that paper bag down and go to sleep. Get up in a few hours and voila you can log on. The world isn't such a terrible place after all.

As for always online. Yes, I do not agree that there should be always-online for people who want to play single player exclusively. On the other hand, Diablo III is a multiplayer game to me and I'm sure that many people who have played it will agree with me. It is that different from D2.
Now Jim keeps banging on about Blizzard making 'their problem' 'our problem.' Ok, fair enough. Once again, I agree on principle. But how much of an issue is it really? I have played D3 from four different locations over the past two weeks. Have not had any connection issues.
Apparently some people are having technical issues with relative good connections. Ok, that's for the tech support to solve. Since when has a game been technically perfect at release.
But if you live in an area with poor infrastructure, the game quite clearly says that an internet connection is required to play. You don't have the right to an internet connection and you have much less right to play a game. Poor infrastructure is your problem Jim, not Blizzard's. What's next? Are we going to demand LAN servers for WoW so that people in Somalia can play?

No one said you had to listen.....go right ahead and ignore whatever you want.

But it's kind of silly to watch you complain about people complaining about stuff then say you can and will ignore what you want to.

I didn't complain about people complaining about stuff.
I complained about people going off-topic.

Wasn't this thread about cookies?

Stop that, it's silly. Now let's see something decent and military.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2ecasPqhgk

Not then...I was talking about your current replies.

And as I said, a person voicing their opinion is fine. It's more than fine, it's great.

When some people are trying to discuss the game, and others are constantly shunting discussion over to DRM talk with the same posts ad nauseam, that isn't great. That's obnoxious. Hence the reason for the other thread.

People who are okay with the DRM on a game have to understand that not everyone will be accepting of that DRM. People who aren't okay with the DRM on a game have to understand that not everyone agrees with them, either. Both sides are entitled to their opinion, and to discuss it. The former are also entitled to ignore the DRM chat and talk about the game. Anyone who feels differently about any of that is, frankly, a self important moron.

But on the other side, and speaking of "not too smart", the "the majority of gamers doesn't care about that so nobody should" or the always popular "the game sold like hotcakes so just accept it and sfu!" attitudes, that some peoples have, are not exactly high mark of intelligence either.

But what's "obnoxious" and not great to you is mere return of the favor to them.

To them, it's "obnoxious" and not great that you ignored their desire to live in a world where always on DRM doesn't exist when you took an action to make that world more likely.

You say they could ignore the threads about the game, well, you can ignore the posts in the threads about DRM. Or, if you're saying they could at least show some respect by not posting DRM issues in threads about the game only then yes they could, but the return is also true, in that those that purchased the game, knowing that action negatively affects others, could refrain from publicly talking about it out of respect too. It works both ways, but you seem to only want to consider one side.

When people take a direct action that may potentially affect others in a negative way, then they simply CAN NOT reasonably expect that those others will then be very respectful of whatever wish they have. Including having a thread about Diablo 3 without DRM issues.

Everyone is perfectly free to live for them and them only, and not give one rat's ass about anyone else. I seem to do it all the time myself. But when someone does, they aren't perfectly free from the consequences. And the consequences can manifest themselves in many ways.

Think about this. If one started a thread about Betrayal at Krondor and say they JUST wanted to talk about the role of Pug in the game, I'd bet dollars to donut one could do that, and have the thread mostly stay on that topic, as most people will respect those wishes.

Now why would one be successful and the other one not, and I can promise you almost ALWAYS not??? It's because with the Krondor example, NOTHING done with or about that affected anyone else in any way whatsoever. So they don't care. But in Diablo 3, by purchasing the game that's an action that will likely negatively affect others, and THAT'S WHY it's always going to get the negative feedback even when you ask nicely that it doesn't.

That's just the way the world works. No matter how badly we want to believe our acts affect us and us alone, the fact is no man (or woman) is an island.

I guess the bottom, for me, is, if it were me, and I had purchased Diablo 3, I would choose not to talk about it publicly anywhere except perhaps Diablo 3 forums because I know how my purchasing it might upset others.

And another wall of text because I don't know how to be brief. My apologies to all and I will make this my last post in this thread. Sorry.

That means we're justified in doing the same against people who buy second hand games, am I correct?

Because that's an action that makes it more likely for DRM to be used. We should all get in their faces for doing so?

I realize it's annoying to see so many people who don't really give as much about DRM as you might, still buy games because for them the entertainment factor probably outweighs the frustrations the DRM might bring with them. But in the end, that *is* for each person on their own to decide. You can't expect people to rebel against something if they are fine with how it is.

Okay, first off stop apologizing for speaking at length. Totally unnecessary. And certainly unnecessary for you to pull yourself out of a conversation due to it. :)

So, people who bought and are playing the game should self censor out of respect for those who don't like it? That seems incredibly simplistic and one sided. Really, I could flip that argument around and say that people who don't like the DRM should have respect for those who bought the game and not discuss their dislike of it. There is exactly no difference between either suggestion and it's just as wrong from that side of it. Because nobody is absolutely right or wrong. This is based entirely on personal opinions, and you seem to be saying both that both sides are entitled to their opinion (which I agree with and have from the start) but that one side should really expect to make their feelings subservient. Sorry, but that makes absolutely no sense. If both sides have equally valid opinions, then both sides are 100% free to express those opinions.

Like I said, I have absolutely no issue with people on the other side of the fence from me expressing how they feel. When I begin to have a problem with it is when those people apparently feel they are 'righter' and therefore entitled to completely take over any and all conversation about it. And yes, I would be equally bothered if the script was flipped and the opposite was happening as well, because that would be just as silly.

Agreed...opinions are great to have and share. It's when people try to shove them down other people's throats at every turn in uncivil ways that it becomes annoying(Not that I think it's right to stop such people unless they're outright trolling/etc. I still think it's annoying in some cases though.)

Frater made a thread to discuss the game without talking about the DRM at every turn, and I respect that. If anyone decides to go against it and rant in it about such(Especially when they have other threads to discuss the D3 DRM in and other threads to rant about life in general in.) things....well then(imo) that would be a shite move for them to pull.

(Of course if they make one small comment about how they feel the OP isn't right before moving in[And stay civil/don't spam that feeling over and over again.) then that I can live with.)

Also(imo) I don't think people dominating a conversation(as long as it's ontopic and civil) is necessarily obnoxious/wrong. This will often happen in many topics/threads, normally. It can be annoying if that's all there is and/or it doesn't appeal to you, but one can always try to shift the conversation away from the sole direction it may be going in if they so choose(While ignoring the ones posting about the currently dominant sub-topic in that thread to try to avoid keeping the dominant thread discussion sub-topic from staying dominant or becoming more dominant.).
--------------------------------------------------
I agree that people should understand not everyone shares their opinion and should be more tolerant of those with differing opinions. They don't have to accept other people's opinions, but if they want to/"need" to complain about such people & opinions they should at least try to remain civil while doing so.

(Before starting I must say that i'm sorry about dividing the posts up like this, but it helps me think better about what to write in reply with larger posts.)

If they seriously think that way(And have that whole "With or against us" mentality, with no room for a middle ground or grey area.) then that's fine, as long as they express or handle it in a mature & civil way. It's when such people also feel the need to be uncivil about it that it becomes childish and obnoxious(Note that I am talking in general here as I haven't seen much of the other D3 threads yet, and as such I am not trying to pinpoint any one example or examples.).
------------------------------------
I agree that people should ignore posts they don't want to read in a thread(On both sides of a discussion or debate.....as long as such posts are ontopic and civil.)....but please prove to us that people buying the game/saying they bought the game will lead to such negative outcomes(D3 DRM/etc becoming more widespread/etc.) as some seem to think they will. There are more factors to consider than just that when trying to predict if a DRM scheme/other event will become the norm/go a certain way/etc, and to use just that one possible factor to make a future prediction about the gaming industry(or something else) is silly at best, insane at worst. Also, using such loosely formulated "predictions" to blast those(As in trolling/rude banter/etc...not civil discussion of how they feel.) who aren't "with you" seems very childish to me.
---------------------------------------------
Why shouldn't they expect such? I think people shouldn't just behave civilly when people do things or say things they agree with(otherwise all civility is out the window). If someone does something you dislike, and then posts about it(Barring some things like saying they murdered someone or stole from old people.), I don't think this should give anyone license to treat them like shit for it....maybe rebut or disagree with them calmly, but not troll them over it.

Also the same thing goes for people making threads whom you disagree with personally......civility shouldn't go out the window just because they did something you don't like or hold an opposing viewpoint.
--------------------------------------------
Hey, it's human nature, but you seem(Note I didn't say you ARE, here.) to be making one action(people buying D3 and saying they did in a civil way.) out to be something totally different(People saying they bought D3 while trolling/swearing at/etc those that didn't.) while making excuses for those that also possibly think in the same way & use such thinking to justify being dicks to those that don't.
-----------------------------------
You have proof that no one(or near no one) had issues with the creation/sales of the Krondor games? Or that the sales of D3 will affect people in such a manner as you claim? It seems you're making theoreticals(And flimsy ones at best if they hinge on only one or a few factors like people buying games with the D3 DRM in them.) out to be as absolutes/near absolutes.
------------------------------------
Yes, but some acts/actions affect people/the world more than others......and saying that one KNOWS certain actions will affect the world in a certain(negative or positive) way without ample proof (No, ample proof isn't just thinking one action will automatically cause said outcome without any other proof......barring some exceptions like action/reaction events like lighting a match will cause a certain chemical reaction.) is just crap reasoning at best. If one honestly uses such reasoning(if it can even be called that) to justify childish or rude behavior to others then I don't feel sorry for them if people respond in kind, as imo they kind of deserve it.
-----------------------------------
And if someone wants to state they bought a game/did something they should be able to if it's ontopic to the discussion at hand and done in a civil manner, regardless if someone might not like to see or read such.
----------------------
Post as much as you want. I don't mind. :\