Awesome. I'll buy Torchlight 2 and skip Diablo 3.

Gotta 'love' some of the responses here. :)

From what I've read so far, the game would be multiplayer only, so what's up with the bitching about how it would be 'DRM-ed' so much?

Torchlight had online activation for the digital version, but shipped to retail DRM-free. Does anyone know if the plan for Torchlight 2 is the same? If so, I'll probably wait for the box. I bought Torchlight digitally on the cheap and ended up liking it a lot, so I'll probably want the non-shittified version of TL2.

Of course, Diablo 2 seemed like a sure thing, too, but I ended up not particularly liking it. Torchlight 2 might be just as disappointing.

And they'll likely be getting my money if they make the game significantly less repetitive. OTOH, with modding ability that's significantly less of an issue that it would otherwise be and I'll probably buy it even if it is just as repetitive.

Personally, I'd like to get Diablo III, but I won't be doing so for the same reason that I didn't buy Starcraft II, they added an unconscionable amount of DRM to it and I'm not willing to put up with it. Now, if they were to drop the price to what it's worth, say $5 for the DRMed version, I'd probably change my mind.

Sometimes it sucks being locked out of games on principle, but then other times it saves money on games like Spore that they choose to screw up big time.

When exactly were you buying games?

Game is a piece of software, meaning you buy license for it. If you get it on DVD, as long as the DVD is working, your license is valid. If you buy it digitally, as long as the activation servers are working, your license is valid.

Subscription based games that require a persistant online connection is fine, but bringing that to a single player model is just wrong. I cannot believe that this 'you have to be connected to our servers' model didn't die a very painful death. This just proves the Activision/Blizzard is all about gouging their very loyal fanbase.

I lost interest in Blizzard a long time ago. I mean sure, Warcraft 2 and Diablo 1 were both very good, but the only thing of interest they've done since then is WoW and I'm just not interested in MMOs.

So I'm not exactly gutted by this and nor am I surprised they've forgotten how to make offline games. It's just how the company is now.

What single player are we talking about? The game seems to be multiplayer only, judging by the info that these news sites post.

We'll have more info at BlizzCon, can we just wait a dozen days before making decisions? :)

I would say that this will be a perfect opportunity to see if gamers at large really will put up with any old bullshit.

But, alas, I think we already know the answer to that...

Yup, the game will most likely be the GOTY and will be a massive success.

Ok, true enough. I always considered D1 and D2 to be singleplayer games with an online componant.

Yea, that's the whole point of this. Providing consistent user experience, by allowing people to transfer from solo play to co op immediately.

I was buying games back when the seller couldn't retroactively revoke my purchase. All this "license" stuff is so much semantic bullshit to try and get the best of both worlds (service vs. product) whenever it suits them. We don't give books, film, or movies a pass, I won't give games a pass either.

Because there are also no custom (private) WoW servers!? Great!
Anti-piracy fail!

Even better! If I pay for a game, should I be disallowed to play on any server I want? Would it be for example wrong to play WoW on a private server? I say no!

I don't care if hardware guys complain because I use a gamepad emulator instead of a real gamepad to play through the MTG2009 coop campaign! And I care as much if companies whine because I don't pay 13 Euro a month to play for a few hours.