Diablo III launch epic FAIL!

By rafter109
in PC Gaming

 Share

Recommended Posts

Rising Star

rafter109

Posted
Posted

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
Grand Master

Nick H. Supervisor

Posted
  • Supervisor
Posted
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.

Rising Star

rafter109

Posted
  • Author
Posted

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.
Grand Master

HawkMan

Posted
Posted

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...

Rising Star

rafter109

Posted
  • Author
Posted

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.

Grand Master

Nick H. Supervisor

Posted
  • Supervisor
Posted
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.

Grand Master

HawkMan

Posted
Posted

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.

Grand Master

HawkMan

Posted
Posted

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 ;)

Mentor

Ently

Posted
Posted

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 :)

Collaborator

Midge

Posted
Posted

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

Grand Master

excalpius

Posted
Posted

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.

Mentor

Jub

Posted
Posted

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. :)

Grand Master

Nick H. Supervisor

Posted
  • Supervisor
Posted
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.
Rising Star

rafter109

Posted
  • Author
Posted

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.
Grand Master

HawkMan

Posted
Posted

*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"

Veteran

vanx

Posted
Posted

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.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Posts

    • Epic Games says Unreal Engine 6 will help developers "build content faster" using AI models

      By +pmrd · Posted

      Which game runs at 20fps with framegen?
    • Epic Games says Unreal Engine 6 will help developers "build content faster" using AI models

      By +pmrd · Posted

      The problem isn't with Epic, it's with the platform holders like Steam and Nintendo, they should be a lot more strict in their review process.
    • Nvidia 610.62 driver lands with big bug fixes and Empulse support

      By goretsky · Posted

      Hello, Installed here without issue. Regards, Aryeh Goretsky
    • Microsoft updates Visual Studio Code with easier language model discovery and in-app search

      By zikalify · Posted

      Microsoft updates Visual Studio Code with easier language model discovery and in-app search by Paul Hill Microsoft has released Visual Studio Code 1.125, its latest weekly release. This week, the company has focused on discovering and installing extra language models via the Marketplace; searching the web and securely browsing over remote connections without leaving VS Code; choosing how long VS Code waits before installing extension updates; and delivering managed Copilot settings through existing device management tooling. In older versions of VS Code, extensions could contribute their own model providers, but to find these extensions, you needed the right tags to search for in the Extension view. Now, the Language Models editor gives you an Install Model Providers button that opens the Extensions view, which is filtered to extensions that contribute model providers, making it easier to find and install them. Once you install a provider, its model will appear in the model picker. If you use the integrated browser much, you can now look up information without leaving VS Code by typing a query into the integrated browser’s address bar. It will use your configured search engine, the same way a standalone browser does. You can use workbench.browser.searchEngine to pick a search engine. When the browser is opened in a remote workspace, it's now possible to proxy HTTP(S) traffic via the remote connection. This allows you to connect to any ports or services that can only be accessed from the remote machine. If you read our coverage from two weeks ago about VS Code 1.123, you might have seen that extension updates have a two-hour delay as a safety measure. In this update, Microsoft is giving you the ability to configure the time of the delay. You can find it under extensions.autoUpdateDelay. Finally, with this update, admins can deliver managed GitHub Copilot settings through native device management (MDM) channels on Windows and macOS, in addition to account-based enterprise settings files. Settings delivered via MDM appear as policy-enforced in VS Code and can’t be overridden locally. Future updates will extend the supported policy keys across Copilot surfaces. You can download the update from the Visual Studio Code website now.
    • Microsoft will finally let you sign in to Edge with a Google account

      By monterxz · Posted

      "it opens up new doors for people who prefer using Edge, but cannot be bothered to configure a Microsoft account" You already have a Microsoft account if you are using Windows 11, because you can't set it up without one.

  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      With What earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Harris Gilbert earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Vincian earned a badge
      One Month Later

  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      543
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      171
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      84
    4. 4
      ATLien_0
      64
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
    Show More

  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!