@Diabeto It's becoming increasingly obvious that you are intellectually incapable of grasping the issue at hand. Therefore, continuing this conversation is futile. Have a wonderful day.
@Diabeto Amazing how you refer to those who are going against the grain as the sheep. It is the people who blindly follow the trend that are sheep. Turn that finger right around and point it at yourself.
You are comparing apples to oranges and, hence, your post is invalid. WoW is a subscription-based MMO. Of course you have to be connected to play it. It is, by nature, always multiplayer. There is no single player option. Diablo is and was an RPG that you can play single player or multiplayer. When you elect to play it single player for whatever reason (servers are down, or you just want to play that way) there is no need to have a connection to battle.net.
The connection was put in place for DRM purposes only. So, if you're someplace where there is no internet connection or the servers are down, you can't play at all. They have your $60, but you can't play. That's wrong. When they decide it's no longer financially viable to keep the Diablo 3 servers online, guess what? You can never play the game ever again. When you're feeling nostalgic for Diablo 3 in 25 years, too bad. You can't play it. That's wrong.
@Thathanka I think they they just aren't giving any weight to the bad things about the game, like the requirement to constantly be connected to battle.net even for single player and the fact that most people couldn't even play the game the first day because of that requirement. They are pretty much ignoring that and looking only at the gameplay when everything is running perfectly.
@ghandi16 Although I did purchase the game, I have to disagree with you here. DRM is bad for gamers and I generally don't have anything to do with it. Taking a stand against DRM by not purchasing DRM titles, such as Diablo 3, is noble. Besides that, there are many DRM-free gaming choices one can make. One could decide to wait a little while for Torchlight 2, for example, and get almost the same gaming experience for $40 less and without the intrusive and restrictive DRM.
There is no "single player mode" per se. There is only one game mode, and that is online mode. You can either allow other people to join your game or not. So they can't just take down the "single player server," because there isn't one. Having said that, even if there was, I have to go to bat for Blizzard a little here. They still have battle.net servers up for the original Diablo, which released 16 years ago. Now, having said that, they WILL eventually stop maintaining servers for Diablo, Diablo 2 and Diablo 3. When that happens you'll still be able to play Diablo and Diablo 2 in non-battle.net modes. Diablo 3, on the other hand, will be unplayable.
@CreMax90 It was put in place to prevent people from pirating the game. I think the result will be the opposite. Some people who would normally buy the game will wait for a pirated version so they don't have to deal with the DRM nonsense.
@Vodoo If they base the score on how the game was when it became available to the public, the game game would get a zero. The servers crashed immediately due to the poor preparation for their ill-conceived idea of having absolutely everyone who wants to play be connected to those servers. I personally was unable to play at all the first day. There was a window in the morning when the servers were up and running, but I was at work. When I got home they were down again.
RoadStar1602's comments