It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Always-on DRM = Never-on My PC
Any account-based DRM = must be destroyed
One word: Boycott!
avatar
Tpiom: One word: Boycott!
I would like to second that one word.
avatar
djdarko: It's terrible for single player. Why would a single player game need to constantly be online?
Yes i would like to know the same.
avatar
Roxolani: Some games use this type of DRM (for example, Diablo III). What do you think about "Always-on DRM"?
I think it is even more annoying than the "Almost always-on DRM" of Steam but those who have a very stable internet connection will practically very rarely feel a difference. So for practical considerations it is almost as good as Steam for example. Only sometimes it's worse.

I feel that DRM advocates, especially the publishers, should avoid "Always-on DRM" like the plaque because it annoys customers too much. "Almost always-on DRM", even if the inbuilt grace period is only a few minutes (15 maybe to save the game) is the much better option because you have nearly the same anti piracy effect while at the same time pissing off customers much less.

Microsoft with their XBox-One didn't know this and they got a shitstorm last year. In the end they went back to "Sometimes-on DRM" and now everything is fine and the console sells like hot cakes. If only they had been wise from the beginning they could have had less trouble and more profit...
Post edited April 25, 2014 by Trilarion
It's my line in the sand. I have accepted activation style DRM like Steam, but I will never buy a game with always online requirements for singleplayer.

This means I still don't own Diablo 3, which sucks, but oh well.
Any kind of "always online DRM" or "you must have X client running just to have the game work" is a no-buy for me!
Only if I really want the game i.e any Valve games,Deus Ex HR,Diablo 3,ME3 etc
Out of drive, out of mind.
Post edited April 25, 2014 by phaolo
It's intrusive, restrictive, and no game thus far is worth it.
And never will be. Always on is just one more step. You know what's next? Stool sample DNA identification. Imagine a day when we can finally breathe a sigh of relief when we can poop into our own computers in order to play games.

Take a dump to play crappy games! Yes, we've finally achieved the ability to make sh*t from sh*t. I call that perfection.
avatar
Roxolani: Some games use this type of DRM (for example, Diablo III). What do you think about "Always-on DRM"?
Every time I load Diablo III on my computer (my profile's here), and the Internet connection doesn't let me play my FUCKING SINGLE PLAYER ADVENTURE for whatever reason, I hope Blizzard Corp. will burn in the Seven Hells asap.
Post edited April 26, 2014 by KingofGnG
avatar
Novotnus: For me it equals never-buy-under-any-circumstances :)
The only time I'd be willing to consider buying is if it's an inherent requirement for the gameplay, ie the game is solely multiplayer in a form which LANs can't provide. MMOs and suchlike. IF that's the case then I'll be willing to consider buying (although I'm not really a fan of that kind of game, so generally won't buy anyway. That and so many games of that kind seem to go down f2p [where I probably won't pay anything] or p2p [where I certainly won't pay anything] models).
avatar
Trilarion: I think it is even more annoying than the "Almost always-on DRM" of Steam
Steam can now be left in offline mode indefinitely. Previously account credentials in offline were "lost" quite regularly. It seemed to happen every 2 weeks for me, whilst other users reported periods of anywhere from 7-30 days.

Re the original question. "always online" for any single player game means I will never buy it and most likely download a pirated version as a "fuck off" even if I never play it.