Recommended Posts

Battle.net servers went live at 12:01 PDT, which is 3:01AM my time. I have been in touch with a multitude of users who from the very first moment have encountered the dreaded "Error 37" explaining that the servers were busy. While I understand that there are probably hundreds of thousands of users trying to log on, this only shows a complete failure on Blizzard's behalf on several fronts:

1. Being one of the most anticipated game launches in years, Blizzard knew what to expect in load and should have planned accordingly, even if it required leasing additional servers for launch.

2. Blizzard insists on requiring all users to authenticate with their servers each time a user wants to play. Single Player anyone? Not if Blizzard has anything to do with it.

3. Blizzard caused massive unnecessary network traffic by not staggering launch times based on locale

4. Blizzard also caused massive unnecessary network traffic by forcing all game data to go through their servers.

5. Blizzard removed LAN play option that was present in Diablo 2 forcing users who want to play with friends to use Battle.net servers, yet again, causing massive unnecessary network traffic.

This is not the first time Blizzard has caused something to be totally fubar. Starcraft II launch was also plagued with these problems.

Message to Blizzard: Stop screwing your customer base!!! Listen to what they want and give it to them. You are in the entertainment industry and as such the customer truly is always right.

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1077335-diablo-iii-launch-epic-fail/
Share on other sites

Message to Blizzard: Stop screwing your customer base!!!

I could be wrong here, but the last time I checked Blizzard were quite good with their customers. The actual message you want Blizzard to hear is, "Guys, how about some better preparation when launching future products?"

Considering that's the message you want to send, it would be worth pointing out that Blizzard isn't the only group to have launch issues. All games have launch issues, especially looking at the multiplayer aspects.

I could be wrong here, but the last time I checked Blizzard were quite good with their customers. The actual message you want Blizzard to hear is, "Guys, how about some better preparation when launching future products?"

Considering that's the message you want to send, it would be worth pointing out that Blizzard isn't the only group to have launch issues. All games have launch issues, especially looking at the multiplayer aspects.

The only games that I am aware of that have these sorts of launch issues are those who use an online authentication system such as what Blizzard employs. I understand fully a companies desire to protect there profits and prevent piracy but their is a tipping point when they begin to alienate their user base. This is an example of just such a case.

I could be wrong here, but the last time I checked Blizzard were quite good with their customers. The actual message you want Blizzard to hear is, "Guys, how about some better preparation when launching future products?"

Considering that's the message you want to send, it would be worth pointing out that Blizzard isn't the only group to have launch issues. All games have launch issues, especially looking at the multiplayer aspects.

If Blizzard had listened to that, they would have on what the previous 5 WoW expansions.... and would have allowed offline SP for those that just want to do just that in WoW...

If Blizzard had listened to that, they would have on what the previous 5 WoW expansions.... and would have allowed offline SP for those that just want to do just that in WoW...

I don't have a problem with how Blizzard handled WoW because of the genre of the game. It is assumed that you must authenticate with a server in a MMORPG. Diablo III is not an MMORPG and thus should not be handled as one.

If Blizzard had listened to that, they would have on what the previous 5 WoW expansions.... and would have allowed offline SP for those that just want to do just that in WoW...
I might have misunderstood you, but if you mean what I think you mean ("If Blizzard listened to the advice 'be prepared' then we wouldn't have had the launch issues with the previous 5 WoW expansion packs") then I'll point out again that Blizzard aren't the only company that have launch issues, especially when the game is multiplayer/internet based. It's just the way things are.

I admit, I have no idea as to the relevance of the suggestion to have a singleplayer aspect put in to WoW, other than Blizzard being responsible for both the Diablo series and the WoW series.

Well since a large group of players only have an interest in playign the game in single player, they could have prevented this by allowing offline single player mode.

and not being the only one is not an excuse, not for a game like this anyway, for am MMO it's somewhat excusable, this is not an MMO.

I don't have a problem with how Blizzard handled WoW because of the genre of the game. It is assumed that you must authenticate with a server in a MMORPG. Diablo III is not an MMORPG and thus should not be handled as one.

Actually I meant Diablo 3 at the end ;)

I have been watching all of the FB posts from my friends expressing the same frustration... But lucky for me (in a way) my copy doesn't arrive until next week. Hopefully the dust settles by then and I can have an enjoyable experience :)

Battle.net servers went live at 12:01 PDT, which is 3:01AM my time. I have been in touch with a multitude of users who from the very first moment have encountered the dreaded "Error 37" explaining that the servers were busy. While I understand that there are probably hundreds of thousands of users trying to log on, this only shows a complete failure on Blizzard's behalf on several fronts:

1. Being one of the most anticipated game launches in years, Blizzard knew what to expect in load and should have planned accordingly, even if it required leasing additional servers for launch.

2. Blizzard insists on requiring all users to authenticate with their servers each time a user wants to play. Single Player anyone? Not if Blizzard has anything to do with it.

3. Blizzard caused massive unnecessary network traffic by not staggering launch times based on locale

4. Blizzard also caused massive unnecessary network traffic by forcing all game data to go through their servers.

5. Blizzard removed LAN play option that was present in Diablo 2 forcing users who want to play with friends to use Battle.net servers, yet again, causing massive unnecessary network traffic.

This is not the first time Blizzard has caused something to be totally fubar. Starcraft II launch was also plagued with these problems.

Message to Blizzard: Stop screwing your customer base!!! Listen to what they want and give it to them. You are in the entertainment industry and as such the customer truly is always right.

uh the game had a staggered launch, i was playing for hours before my american mates got on, and while i was ****ed off at the lauch - after 45 minutes i could freely login and out without issue - i have logged in this morning without issue and the game is running and working fine.

as to the always online thing, they do the same thing with starcraft, and I'm always connected so i don't particularly care

This is what happened in the stress test a month or so ago. Apparently, they still didn't prepare enough.

And because the game has MANDATORY always-online mode, they could have easily assumed that everyone who bought the game would HAVE to connect as soon as they could just to play it. It wasn't rocket science to scale up from the beta test to that sales number...

Like many people, I have no interest in locking my game to their servers 24/7 (because of this very problem and ones like it) and chose not to buy it yet after playing the beta test. It was boring and exactly the same as Diablo2 except with better graphics.

But without a proper 3d mode (with rotation), adjustable zoom (what decade is this anyway?), and offline single player, I'll be buying Torchlight 2 for 1/2 the price but without all of the BS, thank you very much.

I can't remember exactly, but I think I read somewhere that they had 10 million pre-orders or something like that. I don't see how you can prepare for such a massive amount of people wanting to log in at the same time and, at least in Europe, I was able to log in fine after a while which is more than acceptable to me.

Also, it is a very multiplayer and community-based game, much like Diablo II. I guess they learnt that most people do play it for the multiplayer and went all out for it. As previously mentioned, it's also an excellent way to protect yourself from piracy. There were already sandboxes for the beta though, so just keep an eye out if you can't stand the idea of logging into Battle.net. :)

Why? Since when is it normal for such substandard service to be considered BAU?
It's business. I'm assuming Blizzard couldn't justify the costs of having the ability to deal with the initial surge of users when a few weeks from now things will be more balanced and bearable. That said, I'm only speculating on that. Maybe they honestly thought that they had the ability to deal with the mass of players and were just caught off guard, but that would surprise me given people's admiration of the Diablo series.

Mandatory online connection is to prevent piracy...Blizzard works on Diablo 3 game for many years and they do not want to see their hard works will be pirated in day 1 by the likes of Skidrow, Reloaded , Razor1911 etc

Yes I understand this as I have already posted. I have also mentioned my disdain for how companies push their anti-piracy measures so far that it alienates their paying customers. I don't have a problem with anti-piracy measures, they just need to be implemented in a way as to not **** off paying customers.

*sigh* yay for more: "Zomg online only" trolling. Online only in my eyes is awesome and the way to go. The launch was Staggered, the rest of your comments are just "Boo hoo it's online only".

And you keep with your argument that "I don't mind, so it doesn't affect anyone else and it's just fine"

It's business. I'm assuming Blizzard couldn't justify the costs of having the ability to deal with the initial surge of users when a few weeks from now things will be more balanced and bearable. That said, I'm only speculating on that. Maybe they honestly thought that they had the ability to deal with the mass of players and were just caught off guard, but that would surprise me given people's admiration of the Diablo series.

If they cannot scale their server infrastructure up and down flexibly, they have a problem. In a way, they brought it on themselves by having so many components tied to online back-end. Yes, it is their right to design and engineer the game to work they way they want to. However, it is unjust to the customers to expect them to suck it up and bite the bullet.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • Stop asking people that. It's a "No True Scotsman" argument in that you are attempting to discredit the opinions of a person by Attacking the Messenger. The reason that these are logical fallacies is the TRUTH is based on facts as supported by evidence. Nothing else. So, always debate the facts with evidence to reach the truth. Once you learn to do this, you'll be able to recognize when people are fearmongering and lying to you for their own selfish ends.
    • It doesn't matter if you didn't directly hear it from person X or Y. Every one of your statements comes straight from the racist, skinhead, anti-immigrant, be afraid of everything, "they are all taking our jobs", etc. etc. mouthpieces. That's where Farag and Putin heard it from too...and used it against the UK. So, while you keep disavowing the people who publicly peddled that position, you keep proving over and over again that those lies influenced you into being tricked when the Brexit vote came around too. In fact, your final sentence makes it crystal clear that it was the racist/anti-immigrant lies you fell and voted for, since you stated that you didn't have an issue with the economic trade issues with the EU. Ahem. To be clear, all of these LIES are EONS old, mate. They are the same fearmongering lies peddled to the same ignorant, gullible cowards by the same charlatans, snake-oil salesmen, and would be demagogues who've been doing this since caveman Ugh lied about his slightly different neighbor in order to steal his land. And, finally, you answered your own previous question. The reason that the EU isn't clamoring to bring the UK back is that they have had enough of people who would rather shoot themselves in the foot than get over their "insecurity issues". It's the same reason the entire world is moving away from the USA as fast as it can...
    • Onkyo Dolby Atmos AV receivers are really solid deals by Sayan Sen Recently we covered great deals on several soundbar models from the likes of Sony, JBL, Samsung and others for really good prices (the lowest in several months). Aside from that we also reported on the Edifier S3000MKII, a hi-fi two-way bookshelf monitor that's available for only $800. Today we bring a list of AV receivers from Onkyo that are available at great prices including the Onkyo NR7100, RZ30, and 8470 (purchase links under the specs table down below). The Onkyo TX-NR7100 and Onkyo TX-RZ30 are both 9.2-channel AV receivers designed for immersive home theater setups but they occupy slightly different tiers within Onkyo’s lineup with the RZ30 positioned as the more advanced model. The TX-NR7100 is a THX Certified 9.2-channel receiver offering up to 100 W per channel (8 ohms, 2 channels driven). It supports Dolby Atmos, DTS:X, and IMAX Enhanced formats, with flexible configurations such as 5.1.4 or 7.1.2 speaker layouts. A key highlight is its built-in Dirac Live Room Correction which should help optimize sound based on your room and its acoustics. In comparison, both models share several core capabilities though the RZ30 is geared toward enthusiasts seeking more precise calibration and system flexibility, while the NR7100 is positioned as a slightly more accessible, value-focused option with strong all-round performance. The technical specs of the RZ30 and NR7100 9.2 AVRs are given in the table below: Specification Onkyo TX-RZ30 Onkyo TX-NR7100 Power Output (FTC, 2ch driven) ~100 W/ch (8Ω, 20Hz–20kHz, 0.08% THD) 100 W/ch (8Ω, 20Hz–20kHz, 0.08% THD) Dynamic / Peak Power 9 × 170 W (6Ω, 1kHz, 1% THD, 1ch driven) 220 W/ch (6Ω, 1kHz, 10% THD, 1ch driven) Frequency Response 5 Hz – 100 kHz (+1/-3 dB) 10 Hz – 100 kHz (+1/-3 dB) THD 0.08% 0.08% Room Correction Dirac Live (full bandwidth) Dirac Live (with AccuReflex support) Immersive Audio Dolby Atmos, DTS:X, IMAX Enhanced Dolby Atmos, DTS:X, IMAX Enhanced Speaker Layout Support Up to 7.2.2 / 5.2.4 / 9.2 processing Up to 7.2.4 / 5.2.4 / 9.2 processing HDMI Inputs / Outputs 6 inputs / 2 outputs (eARC) 6 inputs / 2 outputs (Main + Sub/Zone 2) HDMI 2.1 Support 8K/60, 4K/120, VRR, ALLM, QFT, DSC, eARC 8K/60, 4K/120, VRR, ALLM, QFT, DSC, eARC Video Formats HDR10+, Dolby Vision, HDCP 2.3 HDR10+, Dolby Vision, HDCP 2.3 Streaming / Network Wi-Fi, AirPlay 2, Chromecast, Bluetooth, DTS Play-Fi Wi-Fi, AirPlay 2, Chromecast, Bluetooth, DTS Play-Fi Get them at the links below: Onkyo TX-RZ30 9.2-Channel AV Receiver: $797.00 (Sold and shipped by Electronic Expo) Onkyo TX-NR7100 9.2-Channel AV Receiver: $699.00 (Sold and shipped by Adorma) Onkyo TX-8470 2 Ch Stereo Receiver: $449.00 (Sold and Shipped by Adorma) Good to know This Amazon deal is U.S. specific, and not available in other regions unless specified. We only use first-party seller links or authorized dealer links (at the time of article publishing); ensure that you purchase from such links only. Check out Today's Deals on Amazon | or our recent tech deals. Become a Prime member (for Students or SNAP) via Neowin Get Prime Access - Prime for half price (for qualifying Medicaid, EBT, SNAP) Subscribe to Prime Video, Audible Plus, Music Unlimited or Kindle Unlimited via Neowin As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Woland13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Woland13 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Year In
      bernmeister earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      498
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      224
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      148
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      74
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      69
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!