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

    • Epic Games says Unreal Engine 6 will help developers "build content faster" using AI models by Pulasthi Ariyasinghe Epic Games is rolling out the latest major update to Unreal Engine 5 today, and at the same time, the company also dropped some information on the next-generation version of the product, Unreal Engine 6. This was already revealed a few weeks ago alongside the new Rocket League upgrade reveal. The company says it is combining the features of Unreal Engine and Unreal Editor for Fortnite to create this new version of its popular media creation tool. On top of creating entire games, the new engine will also focus on letting developers operate large-scale live service titles more easily, whether by shipping content into their own ecosystems or into Fortnite. The use of large language models is also mentioned here, with Epic saying it will be a core part of the engine. "We see LLMs, generative AI models, and tools like Claude and Codex playing a central role in helping you build content faster while maintaining the creative control you need," adds the company. Here is the rundown of what's new about version 6 of Unreal Engine: With all these changes to the programming model, portability upgrades, and generative AI integration, Epic says the new version of the engine will "change a lot about how games are made." The company aims to ship Unreal Engine 6 into early access in late 2027, with a full release planned for 12-18 months later. Epic Games also dropped a lengthy blog post about the new Unreal Engine 5.8 update for game developers over here. The release is focused on delivering better performance, customization, and streamlined workflows for development teams. This will be the final major update for this version of the engine before Epic switches to focus fully on Unreal Engine 6's early access launch.
    • Watch Louis Rossmann's recent experience on YouTube about trying to get a warranty replacement from Samsung. It's crazy.
    • That is the thing, how many of these people don't realise they are using AI? If they use Google Search they have no choice but to use AI. So yes, maybe half of American adults do use and I expect a lot of Uk adults do to, but I bet most of them don't realise it. Myself, i avoid the rubbish.
    • They use FREE AI. They aren't paying for this meme-generating slopware...
    • Gotta' buy that there Rufus guy a beer if I ever meet him. He makes good stuff.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      Vincian earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • First Post
      Jocimo earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      suprememobiles48 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Windows Guy earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      Prasann earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      499
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      165
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      89
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      69
    5. 5
      neufuse
      65
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!