An honest thread about the option for *Offline only, LAN client* and acceptable price for it.

"

Onionspam wrote:

Okay, I get that, like I said it's hard to talk ownership about a f2p game. BUT I still don't see why you are so opposed to a retail or downloadable offline client. Why not offer the option of ownership? It seems like you want this discussion to end quickly, for some reason, like it's just a silly idea.

The point of a business is to make money. You sell a copy of the game, you make money. Constant updates to the online version of the game will help with the hacking. I really don't think it's too damn complicated to be perfectly honest.

I'd easily pay 30 bucks for a copy of this game with no online-only DRM. With online only DRM then I'd pay exactly zero.

I get a feeling that the majority of this forum doesnt want an offline client based on loose beliefs on how it could end the game and make GGG go bankrupt, and thus just tries to silence people that speak up about it.

Which is also why i made this thread.
I had a theory about how some of the forum posters were stuck in their own opinions/fears/beliefs and woudnt even argue that an offline client would be something to consider for some of the community that had need of such a client that is separete from the online one.

I get a feeling this kind of positive/constructive opinion about "Offline LAN client"
seems to be *persona no grata* in these forums :(

"

Planetsurvival wrote:

I get a feeling that the majority of this forum doesnt want an offline client based on loose beliefs on how it could end the game and make GGG go bankrupt, and thus just tries to silence people that speak up about it.

Which is also why i made this thread.
I had a theory about how some of most the forum posters were stuck in their own opinions/fears/beliefs and woudnt even argue that an offline client would be something to consider for some of the community that had need of such an client that is separete from the online one.

I get a feeling this kind of opinion about "Offline LAN client" is *persona no grata* in these forums :(

Ah good, thought I was getting paranoid there. I'm definitely getting that same vibe. It seems I have more faith in GGGs ability to handle their own game than some posters here.

Look, it's as simple as this, if PoE remains online only, with a nearly 4 gig download, then chances are it will hover right at the border of obscurity and semi-success. The best chances for a game to break out into full-fledged success is retail. When I first saw a DVD of Torchlight several years ago I had NO IDEA what it was. But it was pretty cheap, and offline, so I bought it. It really can be that simple. Some of us do still go to stores and buy physical copies of games.

I want this game to succeed for several reasons, HOWEVER, I feel really shady about supporting online only DRM in any way. Many of us aren't willing to just accept it as the way things are going. And if this game does succeed, the argument for online only DRM can only get stronger.

It's not personal; it's about the security and longevity of the game and GGG's financial success.

An offline version would have to be done in one of two ways:

1) Take all of the server code (that handles most of the game mechanics to prevent client-side cheating) and package it into an offline client that hosts its own game. This gives hackers exactly what they need to hack the online version, so it's a very bad idea.

2) To mitigate the damage that option 1 would cause, create a new client that functions differently in order to prevent hackers from using it against the online version. Since this version would be different from the online version, separate updates would have to be produced and hosted. This whole idea would obviously cost a lot of money due to the man-hours needed to develop a new client.

Another thought:
Would they host the offline version as digital distribution, or package it for store sale? Both of these cost money that would need to be recuperated.

PoE has always been intended to be an online ARPG. From the About page:

"

Path of Exile has been designed from the ground up as a secure online game. Characters and items are stored on our persistent servers, and great effort is being taken to make sure that the game economy is not destroyed by exploits or hacks.

The devs have made it clear in other similar topics that they have no intention of making an offline version. So, no, it's not just forum-goers disliking the idea.

"

Onionspam wrote:

Ah good, thought I was getting paranoid there. I'm definitely getting that same vibe. It seems I have more faith in GGGs ability to handle their own game than some posters here.

Look, it's as simple as this, if PoE remains online only, with a nearly 4 gig download, then chances are it will hover right at the border of obscurity and semi-success. The best chances for a game to break out into full-fledged success is retail. When I first saw a DVD of Torchlight several years ago I had NO IDEA what it was. But it was pretty cheap, and offline, so I bought it. It really can be that simple. Some of us do still go to stores and buy physical copies of games.

I want this game to succeed for several reasons, HOWEVER, I feel really shady about supporting online only DRM in any way. Many of us aren't willing to just accept it as the way things are going. And if this game does succeed, the argument for online only DRM can only get stronger.

Well i started reading old threads about his offline LAN client 1 week ago or so, i found they all stopped rather quickly for some reason, and the very same arguments were reused in every thread.
And what i found also is that they are based on pure fear that GGG will go bankrupt if they go through with a Offline client that people can buy.
Hence the very harsh attempts to silence any opinion or constructive post about the good sides of an offline client.
My social experiment part of this thread, unfortunately, was proven true.

To be perfectly honest i dont expect this thread to produce any results at all or anything new since most opinion against an offline client is based on emotions or to be more specific: fear/suspicion being the most prominent ones.

I agree with you, this game should be sold and have an offline LAN mode to reach a wider audience.

-----------------------------------

"

WhiteBoy88 wrote:

It's not personal; it's about the security and longevity of the game and GGG's financial success.

An offline version would have to be done in one of two ways:

1) Take all of the server code (that handles most of the game mechanics to prevent client-side cheating) and package it into an offline client that hosts its own game. This gives hackers exactly what they need to hack the online version, so it's a very bad idea.

2) To mitigate the damage that option 1 would cause, create a new client that functions differently in order to prevent hackers from using it against the online version. Since this version would be different from the online version, separate updates would have to be produced and hosted. This whole idea would obviously cost a lot of money due to the man-hours needed to develop a new client.

Another thought:
Would they host the offline version as digital distribution, or package it for store sale? Both of these cost money that would need to be recuperated.

PoE has always been intended to be an online ARPG. From the About page:

"

Path of Exile has been designed from the ground up as a secure online game. Characters and items are stored on our persistent servers, and great effort is being taken to make sure that the game economy is not destroyed by exploits or hacks.

The devs have made it clear in other similar topics that they have no intention of making an offline version. So, no, it's not just forum-goers disliking the idea.

So your saying that GGG walks the very same narrow path as ActiBlizzard?
Wasnt this the very thing they wanted to avoid.
Didnt they want to make a good game?
And now their using the same DRM as the very game people migrate from due to said DRM among other things?
I think ill stop recomending this game to my friends for now, they also hate Online only DRM and i cant with a good conscience say "Hey PoE is awsome!" anymore.
GGG, i am disapointed by this lack of recognition of DRM that hurts potential customers.

Ill refer my friends to Torchlight 2 instead as they played Diablo 2 mostly on LAN/singleplayer and only occasionally online.

I still think GGG makes a huge mistake in this way of marketing an excellent game, its like having a nice big cake attached to a 500 pound lead weight with the current Online only DRM.

if this is so why not have like an offside donation after PoE has been released and who ever is willing to donate to a offline version can donate then

"

Planetsurvival wrote:

"

Onionspam wrote:

Okay, I get that, like I said it's hard to talk ownership about a f2p game. BUT I still don't see why you are so opposed to a retail or downloadable offline client. Why not offer the option of ownership? It seems like you want this discussion to end quickly, for some reason, like it's just a silly idea.

The point of a business is to make money. You sell a copy of the game, you make money. Constant updates to the online version of the game will help with the hacking. I really don't think it's too damn complicated to be perfectly honest.

I'd easily pay 30 bucks for a copy of this game with no online-only DRM. With online only DRM then I'd pay exactly zero.

I get a feeling that the majority of this forum doesnt want an offline client based on loose beliefs on how it could end the game and make GGG go bankrupt, and thus just tries to silence people that speak up about it.

Which is also why i made this thread.
I had a theory about how some of the forum posters were stuck in their own opinions/fears/beliefs and woudnt even argue that an offline client would be something to consider for some of the community that had need of such a client that is separete from the online one.

I get a feeling this kind of positive/constructive opinion about "Offline LAN client"
seems to be *persona no grata* in these forums :(

"

WhiteBoy88 wrote:

Another thought:
Would they host the offline version as digital distribution, or package it for store sale? Both of these cost money that would need to be recuperated.

You do this by charging for the game. That's the point of this thread. I realize that the original idea for this game is online only f2p. However, I would like to think that the developers are open-minded. They seem to be, so maybe sometime down the road they may change their mind if they see a demand for an offline version, even if they have to start from a way earlier version of the game. Let's be honest, if they see the potential to make large amounts of money, they will most likely do it. I doubt that GGG will just say "Bah, it's too much work".

As I said before, I would pay 30 bucks for an offline version of this game. That's my vote.

Now I'm done with thread before I piss you guys off enough to pull my name from the random timer. lol

"

Onionspam wrote:

You do this by charging for the game. That's the point of this thread.

Yeah, I understand that concept. The point is that the sales would likely not provide enough income to cover the expenses, much less to actually make a profit. From the comments on threads dealing with this topic, the demand isn't there (from the posting forum community, at least).

"

WhiteBoy88 wrote:

The point is that the sales would likely not provide enough income to cover the expenses, much less to actually make a profit.

like I said:

"

Onionspam wrote:

it seems I have more faith in GGGs ability to handle their own game than some posters here.

"

Planetsurvival wrote:

So your saying that GGG walks the very same narrow path as ActiBlizzard?
Wasnt this the very thing they wanted to avoid. Didnt they want to make a good game?
And now their using the same DRM as the very game people migrate from due to said DRM among other things?

I said nothing of the sort. PoE was in development as an online-only game years before D3 was even announced, so it's not like they're copying anything from D3/Blizzard. This is how PoE was always meant to be played.

"

planetsurvival wrote:

GGG, i am disapointed by this lack of recognition of DRM that hurts potential customers.

I (and the devs, I'm sure) see the argument against online-only DRM in games that actually cost money and/or actually have an intended single-player version. This game has neither. It is intended for people to play online. It's not online-only just for the sake of DRM. It's online-only because it's meant to be an online game.

"

WhiteBoy88 wrote:

I said nothing of the sort. PoE was in development as an online-only game years before D3 was even announced, so it's not like they're copying anything from D3/Blizzard. This is how PoE was always meant to be played.

I (and the devs, I'm sure) see the argument against online-only DRM in games that actually cost money and/or actually have an intended single-player version. This game has neither. It is intended for people to play online. It's not online-only just for the sake of DRM. It's online-only because it's meant to be an online game.

So your basically are saying this (and do correct me if im wrong):

GGG developed PoE and when people say that they dont like Online only DRM
, especially so with the recent D3 fails regarding it, the responce is to "Just accept it, we are not going to change"?

And even *IF*, there is a market for an Offline LAN client.
Then GGG woudnt make one because people just "Has to accept online only DRM if they want to play PoE"?

This is what your post sounds like to me.