Blizzard Cleans Up GAME's Mess

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

tony2077:

Andy of Comix Inc:

tony2077:
you want them to fix your crappy connection?

He wants them to fix their totalitarian DRM. Blizzard does understand that LANs exist, right? I mean Starcraft II basically single-handedly killed the LAN party, not to mention the ramifications it had on the tournament scene. Diablo 3 is doing the same. Why does Ubisoft get grated for this but Blizzard gets away with it?

how is being online to play this game so evil

Because here 35 minutes after the servers went live and 2 hours and 35 minutes after I should've really been playing the game, I still cannot play the game because those servers I need to connect to are busy. That's the goddamn problem.

Amnestic:

Keslen:

Funkamander:
I think I've found your problem. You're confusing a single-player game with an online game that can be played on your own.

Do you get mad when Guild Wars 1 boots you off the servers when your connection dies? No? Because it's an online game that you can play on your own if you want?

So what exactly qualifies a single player game? Is it one where I'm playing all by myself and not including any other people nor intending to ever do so? 'Cause that's what I'm working off of. If you're using something else, let me know so we can work towards some common ground on the terminology.

I've not played Diablo 3 at all, but as I understand it you're constantly connected to the auction house - an online feature. You're never playing all by yourself. Doesn't really matter what you 'intend', you're still technically playing with others by design.

Pretty simple fix there, then. If someone wants to play offline or on LAN, let them, then just disable the auction house during that session. They're very deliberately not having this feature in the game for DRM reasons, it has nothing to do with design decisions.

They do know people have already worked out how to pirate the game and crack it, yeah? Nice DRM, Blizz. Forcing your customers to be online, even those who do not ever wish to play multiplayer, sure did stop them pirates.

I love when the excuse is given, that they don't want offline people cheating and then entering online, thus unbalancing the game, ruining multiplayer and, most importantly in their minds, making their little money grabbing auction house obsolete. Because making it so offline characters can't enter online play is so hard, right?

This is why I will never spend a single cent on a Blizzard game -- they are assholes.

Well, it's better than nothing, I guess. Course, if it was me, the ONLY reason I'd buy retail in Australia is:
a) Game is available in retail ONLY, or
b) I want the CE/LE version with the artbook or whatever, otherwise I would've bought digital anyway.

It's a shame that instead, if using this process, I'd just be getting the digital version without the extras.

I didn't preorder Diablo III (my internet is unreliable on a good day, inaccessible on a bad one), but I live in Australia, so I know what it's like to be fucked over when buying a game. Just a shame for those people who wanted the CE, but are ending up with just digital instead.

I know that Blizz is just doing this to help their product and get more money from a direct sale, but I still think it's good on their part to offer the refund, when GAME's demise is clearly not their problem at all.

I wonder if Rockstar will be doing something similar for those who preordered Max Payne?

Frostbite3789:

tony2077:

Andy of Comix Inc:

He wants them to fix their totalitarian DRM. Blizzard does understand that LANs exist, right? I mean Starcraft II basically single-handedly killed the LAN party, not to mention the ramifications it had on the tournament scene. Diablo 3 is doing the same. Why does Ubisoft get grated for this but Blizzard gets away with it?

how is being online to play this game so evil

Because here 35 minutes after the servers went live and 2 hours and 35 minutes after I should've really been playing the game, I still cannot play the game because those servers I need to connect to are busy. That's the goddamn problem.

wow relax a bit will you damn

Why was anyone preordering stuff from Game anyway? This move into administration has been coming for ages and anyone who was even slightly paying attention should have cancelled their preorder and gotten their money back before now

Blizzard: The little angel sitting on Activision's shoulder.

a very good move on Blizz's part. it gets them good PR, and it makes them not look like dicks

The Blizz hate is rather out of control, when it comes down to it, Blizzard have always made quality games, most of the ire on here comes from when they merged with Activision, and I think most of the blame can be laid at Mr Kotick's door, preferably in a paper bag, with some poop in it, on fire.

You lot realise that if Blizzard had done fuck all, there'd not be two pages of complaints about them? I actually was cynical myself, when I read the post about GAME cancelling preorders, no refunds, I thought 'Blizzard could step in here and get some PR, but I bet they won't.'

In the end, I imagine many of the people who want D3, really want it, and they feel screwed by GAME, not Blizzard, and probably would have purchased it again eventually.

To me, they've done a good thing, of course it's good business sense too, but that doesn't detract from them not leaving a bunch of potential customers screwed over by someone else.

Even if you only put down ten or twenty bucks, it's probably made it cheaper to buy from them than anyone else. If you paid up front in full, however, then I imagine Blizzard just made your day and you can't believe a massive corporation is bothering to care.

Oh and I played D3 for a while last night, one disconnect, but immediately got back in and carried on. Got a Barbarian to 9 and Witch Doctor to 8, firstly with a REAL ID friend from WOW, and then by just opening my game to the public.

Everything is much smoother and simpler than D2 in terms of connecting to a game and to people. Also, they seem to have really sorted out any loot issues, in that when enemies are killed, it generates loot for each player in your group, so you can loot everything, knowing you're not ninjaing, yet at the same time, if you're feeling nice, and a bow drops, you can trade with the Demon Hunter and offer it to them :)

SenseOfTumour:
The Blizz hate is rather out of control, when it comes down to it, Blizzard have always made quality games, most of the ire on here comes from when they merged with Activision, and I think most of the blame can be laid at Mr Kotick's door, preferably in a paper bag, with some poop in it, on fire.

This is very true. And this story shows it. Note that the headline reads "Blizzard Cleans Up GAME's Mess", not Activision Blizzard. Activision couldn't be involved in a classy PR move, now could they? :P

So if you paid for the game with a bank card, they put £40 directly back into your account? Or do you get a sort of store credit thing?

If it's the former then wow, just wow, that is pretty decent of them.

If if's the latter then well, I am not surprised much at all, 'here you can now give us more money, enjoy'.

Its a small part of people overall. And lets not forget they are sitting in offices build from money. So yes its a great way to make a good PR stunt and make even more good with fans.
But lets be honnest Blizzard already stand at Exalted with pretty much all gamers around the world.

CardinalPiggles:
So if you paid for the game with a bank card, they put £40 directly back into your account? Or do you get a sort of store credit thing?

If it's the former then wow, just wow, that is pretty decent of them.

If if's the latter then well, I am not surprised much at all, 'here you can now give us more money, enjoy'.

"This credit will be applied to the payment method used for the digital purchase."

Not the Battle.Net account. Payment method.

Good move from Blizzard. Save for a few very vocal haters, just about anyone with a computer is playing D3 or waiting for their copy to ship. Mine should arrive today in the afternoon.

Ahaha, I love the "hottest night of the year"-line they put in there. Modest much?
Well, good on the costumers and on Blizzard, I guess. Positive press like that will likely more than make up for giving away a few copies' money worth.
Personally, I don't care too much. I'm not a "hater" of Blizzard by any stretch, but I dislike their online-heavy methods these days. I haven't bought a Blizzard game since Frozen Throne and I don't feel poorer for the lack of playing them.
WoW as well as "Battlenet 2.0"-DRMs really turned me off their products. You know what I like? gog.com, Humble Bundle and the "used games"-section on amazon and similar sites.

EDIT: And gog just released Silver, tweaked to work with W7. Well damn, I guess they were right after all, this is going to be the hottest night of the year.

tony2077:

Andy of Comix Inc:

tony2077:
you want them to fix your crappy connection?

He wants them to fix their totalitarian DRM. Blizzard does understand that LANs exist, right? I mean Starcraft II basically single-handedly killed the LAN party, not to mention the ramifications it had on the tournament scene. Diablo 3 is doing the same. Why does Ubisoft get grated for this but Blizzard gets away with it?

how is being online to play this game so evil

Because having to be online to play a game by myself that I paid $100 essentially makes my investment worthless. They're not providing me with a product anymore, they're giving me permission to use their product. It shows a blatant disregard for their fanbase without internet connections, it's cocky assuming that their system will definitely work for everybody, and it means when those servers get switched off, my disc I paid for becomes as worthless as a coaster. I don't want to support a company that think that's good design.

Funkamander:

Keslen:
Now if only they'd fix that issue where your single player game crashes if your internet connection dies.

I think I've found your problem. You're confusing a single-player game with an online game that can be played on your own.

Do you get mad when Guild Wars 1 boots you off the servers when your connection dies? No? Because it's an online game that you can play on your own if you want?

I think I've found YOUR problem. You're confusing a single player game with a very robust and well implemented multi-player mode (Diablo) with a semi-MMO (Guild Wars). Diablo has never been a multi-player game primarily, the focus was always the single player game. And there are some of us who don't feel like our single player game should be dependent on an internet connection to a remote server.

That said, this is still a pretty cool move on Blizzard/Activision's part. This wasn't their mess to clean up, but stepping up to it was a good move for them.

Lol at the people saying "blizzard single handedly killed lan parties!", which is ironic seeing as lan parties usually doesn't have any internet connection..(*sarcasm*) Sitting in the same room with the guys you're playing with is always better, and it really doesn't matter if you're connected to the internet or not in the process. And now that blizz is adding "resume from replay" feature in hots, we really don't have any reason to whine about it anymore, even if the internet should cut for a second in a large tournament.

Blizzard is the only one of two companies who get their costumers (the other being valve). Yes, they are owned by activision who..doesn't.. But that hasn't stopped them from churning out the best games and costumer service in the industry. And stories like in this article only adds to strengthen that image.

tony2077:

Keslen:
Now if only they'd fix that issue where your single player game crashes if your internet connection dies.

you want them to fix your crappy connection?

It doesn't matter how good your connection is. If their connection is flaky, everyone's crap out of luck.

Not being able to play single-player because servers are down is just... stupid.

Damn that money grabbing greedy Blizzard with their auction house and their pet store this is outr-

oohh...

Free games you say.
huh, you'd think Blizzard actually might not be such a evil corporation after all.

eventhorizon525:

Guess I just find effectively pay-to-win options disappointing to say the least, since it basically cuts out the feeling of achievement you get from finding/unlocking everything on your own. And while yes people like me don't have to use the money shop, it will effect us none the less, and make the trading scene more frustrating. If you can tie real money value to an item (legitimately), people are going to more often compare items based on those prices, and there is going to be less wiggle room than the more barter or alternative currency method originally employed.

However I can't argue that this isn't the best choice to do from Blizzard's perspective, it does reenforce some (imo) unfortunate trends in gaming.

captcha: easy as cake; well yes, I do think people being able to buy the best items ruins the fun of the game.

It's not pay to win though...buying from an in-game NPC is more pay to win then this. They just changed the currency. For it to be pay to win, the items have to be spawned into the game with money: These items are still crafted/found/w'e by players, but rather then sell them for virtual promissory notes, they are selling them for paper promissory notes.

how does that make any sense at all.

Bat Vader:

tony2077:

Andy of Comix Inc:

He wants them to fix their totalitarian DRM. Blizzard does understand that LANs exist, right? I mean Starcraft II basically single-handedly killed the LAN party, not to mention the ramifications it had on the tournament scene. Diablo 3 is doing the same. Why does Ubisoft get grated for this but Blizzard gets away with it?

how is being online to play this game so evil

Not everyone has a great internet connection and people should not be punished because of it. The same exact thing happened when Assassins Creed 2 was released. People had to be connected to the internet to play the game. I believe AC2 was patched later on though so people could play it without having to always be connected to the internet.

If someone wants to play the campaign by themselves by making their session private why should they still have to be connected to the internet? Hopefully Blizzard patches in an offline mode in the future.

Don't forget that Ubisoft's servers went down for a few days locking everyone who had supported the game out from playing it. The same could easily happen for Diablo 3 if Anon wants to DDOS them.

I have the sudden urge to purchase a Blizzard product.....

Captcha: round robin

John Funk:

eventhorizon525:

Amnestic:

I've not played Diablo 3 at all, but as I understand it you're constantly connected to the auction house - an online feature. You're never playing all by yourself. Doesn't really matter what you 'intend', you're still technically playing with others by design.

Which is actually what most people complaining about D3 have an issue with; the whole RMAH. Given that the previous installments were very friendly toward the single player option offline, and were quite harsh in blocking any sort of virtual goods/real money exchange, this sudden reversal is unwelcome.

The RMAH from the beginning has been the thing I have the *least* problems with. D2 had RMT out the yin-yang on shady third party sites, and Blizzard couldn't really do much to stop it.

So, they did the sensible thing and cut out the third party black market directly. It was going to happen anyway, why not make it legitimate?

Thank you for a more competent post that makes a good point rather than uses any D3 news to bash Blizz for the way they protect their IP.

Excludos:
Lol at the people saying "blizzard single handedly killed lan parties!", which is ironic seeing as lan parties usually doesn't have any internet connection..(*sarcasm*)

Have you tried playing an online game with 15ish people on a home connection? In BF2 we had around 900 pings each. In League of Legends (just a 5v5) we could barely even move. The connection was simply overloaded.

Excludos:
Sitting in the same room with the guys you're playing with is always better, and it really doesn't matter if you're connected to the internet or not in the process.

Well, it does matter with D3 if you're connected to the internet or not. If you were thinking of playing D3 with people in the same room, you need to be connected to the internet.

Frostbite3789:

tony2077:

Andy of Comix Inc:

He wants them to fix their totalitarian DRM. Blizzard does understand that LANs exist, right? I mean Starcraft II basically single-handedly killed the LAN party, not to mention the ramifications it had on the tournament scene. Diablo 3 is doing the same. Why does Ubisoft get grated for this but Blizzard gets away with it?

how is being online to play this game so evil

Because here 35 minutes after the servers went live and 2 hours and 35 minutes after I should've really been playing the game, I still cannot play the game because those servers I need to connect to are busy. That's the goddamn problem.

I'd normally have some sympathy here but you're just highlighting the fucking problem with this form of DRM and compounding the problem by giving Acti-blizz your money, you think they give a fuck?

From their point of view you'll happily suck the smeg off of them and say thank you, just as long as you get your fix.

Huh. I'm not really a fan of Blizzard games, but they certainly seem like a class act. Kudos to them, it's nice to see a big company taking customer service so seriously.

Irridium:

tony2077:

Keslen:
Now if only they'd fix that issue where your single player game crashes if your internet connection dies.

you want them to fix your crappy connection?

It doesn't matter how good your connection is. If their connection is flaky, everyone's crap out of luck.

Not being able to play single-player because servers are down is just... stupid.

its a inconvenience but stupid or evil not a chance

I'm actually surprised that a large company would do something like this,I'm impressed.
And to people complaining about connection issues...what did you expect?Most big releases have issues.I seem to remember when COD4 was released there was so much traffic it caused xbox live all sorts of problems.Everyone stomping their feet & complaining about it will probably forget all about it next week.

Royas:
Diablo has never been a multi-player game primarily

It is now.

Denamic:

Royas:
Diablo has never been a multi-player game primarily

It is now.

It's not. It's an online game, but not a multi-player game over a single player game. Blizzard has repeatedly and explicitly stated that it's a single player game with an optional co-op mode, not the other way around.

Ok someone quick, take a picture, frame it and let us all gaze upon it as the one heartfelt moment we'll see this year.

Don't it make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside!

AC10:

Have you tried playing an online game with 15ish people on a home connection? In BF2 we had around 900 pings each. In League of Legends (just a 5v5) we could barely even move. The connection was simply overloaded.

And in SC2 we all 6 guys had a normal ping like we would be playing from our homes.

Keslen:

tony2077:
Well our house is always online since we have internet TV so I don't get blips and I can't really comment on that part but condemning them for it doesn't make sense.

They made a choice within development. They looked at a component that was completely irrelevant to the core game play and said "We should make it so that when this component fails, the entire game comes to a screeching halt." and they made that choice knowing full well that this component could fail at any time outside of the player's control.

I'd definitely say that "condemning" is a harsh word for my context, but this is a choice I feel comfortable speaking against. It is also one that I do not feel comfortable supporting with my wallet.

Also, you do get blips. You may not get them very often and your TV is likely programmed to accommodate them so you don't notice them when they occur, but the system has not yet been invented that avoids them completely (at least not for a cost structure which is reasonable to pay).

I agree. Even if my connection at home is fail-proof there are other issues. I travel a lot and to play Diablo 3 out of town I would have to pay extra to access the net from hotels (some hotels have free internet, but most of them in Brazil don't).

I also like to go fishing and play with my laptop at night. The places I go do not have internet also. I could buy satellite Internet but that is awfully costly to me right now.

With Diablo 3 I think I didn't buy a game, I bought a service. And although it is not the end of the world it is clearly a step back from the ability to play wherever I want, whenever I want.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Posting on this forum is disabled.