Pretty much that.

My opinion : I hated TL1 but greatly enjoyed TL2 and PoE. PoE still being way more interesting and ...well ... free.

Edit : Diablos are dead to me :(

So version is better for user than the one direct from dev. Hmpf, really strange and bad decision from Runic.

For me....

Versions
Steam: I don't do Steam
Dev: Didn't like any of the payment options I saw
Disc: to hard to find & way to expensive.

If Runic ever does finally let TL2 get the GOG treatment I'd happily get it finally

PoE: A game I would buy. If only they would sell it.

Why did they ruin such a promising game with online only play and microtransactions?

Also of TL2: A game I would buy. If only it were available for purchase (and not rental).

The microtransactions are actually purely cosmetic, soo... Yeah, no ruining there. As for online play... Yeah. Try it out tho, you might be surprised - I got runnig extremely well on crappy connections (no noticeable lag whatsoever)

Nope, not going to waste my time with a game that is beyond my control:
* It could vanish (along with my logged play/characters/whatever) at any time.
* I can't play the game how I want to (including modding), on my own terms (TCP/IP andor LAN play with controlled set of friends only).
* I don't want to encourage publishers to use online-only models.
* I don't want to encourage publishers to adopt micro-transactional models, even if they're purely cosmetic.
* They could change the "monetization" model at any time.

It may be "free", but my time is worth more than that.

I actually just had my time appraised and it turns out to be worth significantly less than that . :D

And I have a coupon for it. :)

Well duh, that's why you should give it a shot before that happens :-p

You can actually play it with a controlled set of friends only, on your own terms. When you play alone, instances get generated for you and for you alone. When you play with friends, they only get generated for your group. You will only ever see other players in towns.

They're not a 'publisher', they're a small indie team. Customer goodwill is the only reason they stay afloat, so changing the monetization model would ruin them. As for micro-transactional and online-only models - the game is built to feature a good amount of experimental features, such as races, tournaments, stuff like that. Basically, it's created around the online component in mind - and while it could work offline, the costs for developing such a mode would ruin a small indie studio not backed by a publisher - it's inexcusable when Blizzard does it, but Grinding Gears Games don't have their resources.

So what you have to understand is that the online-only system in Path of Exile is not used because GGG would like to implement DRM, it's there because GGG wanted to try something different and new with the genre, something that would not work if the game depended too much on offline play. It's like saying that MMORPGs are supposed to have an offline mode. That argument didn't work with Diablo III as it didn't do anything worthwhile with online. It does apply to Path of Exile as it's actually trying.

Basically: You're punishing wrong people, for a wrong set of reasons - especially if there are chances of you enjoying the game, because... Well, it is free. Unless you have limited bandwidth, in which case I can definitely understand not wanting to download 10 gigs, it's definitely worth trying. You are talking about not wanting to support bad trends, so I'll tell you what you'll be supporting in principle:

* Creation of innovative games with unique elements
* Fair treatment of customer base
* Experimentation with an existing distribution model which got transferred into one very beneficial to the customer

So far, GGG were one of the best devs I've seen around. They keep releasing fantastic updates on regular schedule, rebalance their game, and are great at communicating with their community. The least they deserve is benefit of the doubt.

Clearly you don't get it. I don't do DRM in my games. At all. Full Stop. Even for a "free" product.

PoE has been on my radar a long time. I will purchase it when it's available for purchase. I am not going to reward a publisher (if they're a self publishing developer, they're a publisher) for peddling a DRM-ladened product.

I have emailed them a couple times to be very clear with them that I would gladly purchase the product (a few copies, since friends to play with locally) if it were available to buy.

Yawn. Add-ons. Also, can be done without an online-only product. See Diablo 2 which had the option to connect to controlled servers with events.

This fallacy comes up all the time. Mere use of a product is supporting it. My own time is worth more than spending it on a product that is beyond my own control. I would be another +1 to their player numbers, which is the all or nothing for these kind of things. It's just like how the villainous religions always say "we speak for (some huge number) people" even if it's clear that they don't really, simply by various people only being on their rosters.

This would not be an issue if they'd make a, pardon my phrase, real product. "Go down prematurely" especially. Your phrase "prematurely" is redundant. If a game can "go down", something's wrong. Perhaps if it goes down, the devs who move on elsewhere can make a real product next time and have learned from the mistake of an online only choice.

Back when I would allow myself less than kosher acquisition of a product, I played a chunk of so-called MMOs in on private hosted servers (or even hosted my own). The decent ones were still decent ones without the huge population.

Any thought that the choice of making an online only product is anything BUT a DRM or DRM-like decision is very shortsighted.

So, Path of Exile is online only. I might as well uninstall that one. It keeps getting updated in steam and I thought one of these days I may play it, but not online only. Deleting...

If we ever do see Torchlight 2 on GOG, it might be a classic release by then. :)

It's your choice. I still disagree with you on the points you have made, especially from purely execution standpoint - you seem to not be aware of difficulties even Diablo 2 had to face, and how expensive are they to remedy client-side. I don't want to further derail the thread, so there you have it.