Blizzard Apologizes for Diablo III Launch Troubles

[The.Bard]

Saying DNS problems are Battle.Net fault is about the same level of inaccuracy as calling Diablo 3 servers online DRM while ignoring they actually run the game.

So then the DNS problems ARE Battle.Net's fault? XD

You crack me up. You can argue semantics until you're blue in the face. DRM comes in 500 shapes and flavors. The fact that Diablo 3's online servers run the game is a completely superfluous bit of information. It's. Still. DRM.

Forbes thinks it's DRM in this EXCELLENT write up called "Diablo III Fans Should Stay Angry About Always Online DRM":

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2012/05/17/diablo-iii-fans-should-stay-angry-about-always-online-drm/ [http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2012/05/17/diablo-iii-fans-should-stay-angry-about-always-online-drm/]

And here's an article from Time, which also calls Diablo III "Online DRM":
http://techland.time.com/2012/05/18/diablo-iii-and-always-on-drm-bad-for-us-and-here-to-stay/ [http://techland.time.com/2012/05/18/diablo-iii-and-always-on-drm-bad-for-us-and-here-to-stay/]


So you can stop apologizing for Blizzard. They're using DRM. It's ok. If you still like the game, there's nothing wrong with that. Well, nothing other than your implicit support of the impending gaming apocalypse.



.
..
...
....
And as if I haven't hammered this argument out of the ballpark already, let's top it off with fun applicable DRM definitions! WHeeee!!!

Digital rights management (DRM) is a class of access control technologies that are used by hardware manufacturers, publishers, copyright holders and individuals with the intent to limit the use of digital content and devices after sale. DRM is any technology that inhibits uses of digital content that are not desired or intended by the content provider.

Those opposed to DRM contend there is no evidence that DRM helps prevent copyright infringement, arguing instead that it serves only to inconvenience legitimate customers, and that DRM helps big business stifle innovation and competition.

Works can become permanently inaccessible if the DRM scheme changes or if the service is discontinued.

 

[PingoBlack]

You crack me up. You can argue semantics until you're blue in the face. DRM comes in 500 shapes and flavors. The fact that Diablo 3's online servers run the game is a completely superfluous bit of information. It's. Still. DRM.

I was only arguing more precise and clear communication.

All you posted is true, but on the other hand, Diablo 3 always online is not only taking care of DRM it does much more game vital functions. And as such is not quite as easy to separate DRM from other functions servers do, or even sensible. If game cannot run without servers, it doesn't matter much if it has DRM or not.

We could also debate whether Blizzard communicated clearly enough the always online requirement to buyers. I think this is more important from perspective of making a purchase decision.

 

[The.Bard]

You crack me up. You can argue semantics until you're blue in the face. DRM comes in 500 shapes and flavors. The fact that Diablo 3's online servers run the game is a completely superfluous bit of information. It's. Still. DRM.

I was only arguing more precise and clear communication.

All you posted is true, but on the other hand, Diablo 3 always online is not only taking care of DRM it does much more game vital functions. And as such is not quite as easy to separate DRM from other functions servers do, or even sensible. If game cannot run without servers, it doesn't matter much if it has DRM or not.

We could also debate whether Blizzard communicated clearly enough the always online requirement to buyers. I think this is more important from perspective of making a purchase decision.

Now there's something we can agree on!


I agree; Diablo 3 is far more complex system than your run-of-the-mill DRM. And I do believe Blizzard will (eventually) do right by the customers (though I still won't buy it without an offline mode).

It's the EA/Ubisofts of the world that follow in their footsteps that have me legitimately worried about the future of offline, single player gaming.

 

[PingoBlack]

I agree; Diablo 3 is far more complex system than your run-of-the-mill DRM. And I do believe Blizzard will (eventually) do right by the customers (though I still won't buy it without an offline mode).

It's the EA/Ubisofts of the world that follow in their footsteps that have me legitimately worried about the future of offline, single player gaming.

I always join a beer and buy round two.

Yeah, Diablo 3 is best described as SC2 isometric rendering engine connected to WoW server system that provides all game logic, character database and item and mob generation. So offline mode is pretty much impossible sadly.

The key is the game is advertised clearly as what it is and people get value for money. That's why I am passionate about gamers being informed so they can vote with their wallets. That's what will get our argument noticed.

 

[Leadfinger]

No. Can't. Log. on.

Try contacting Tech Support then. You are now very definitely a minority, unlike first two days when issues were very real.

As a paying customer you have access to support, correct?

Hey Pingo-
Try playing D3 right now. Or SC2. Or WoW. Or going to Blizzard's website. Or Battlenet. Or their store. It's all down, and has been for at least the last few hours.

Is working for me. [http://eu.battle.net/wow/en/?-]

And I just logged into WoW to check if that was working. It is. A guildy received an epic 8 minutes ago as of this post, which is the time when you made your post.

Clearly, it's "not all down".

I tried logging on later and it worked! I rather like the game-it gives me the warm, fuzzy feeling Diablo I used to-but having to log into Blizzard's servers to play it is giving me the blues.

 

[darkknight9]

Damn you Escapist,
When you have a hyperlink titled "wildebeest careering over a cliff." I expect, nay, demand a funny video to that effect.

Yours Sincerely,

Happy_turtle

 

[darkknight9]

So, as expected, Diablo III launched with all the beauty and grace of a wildebeest careering over a cliff. [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/117262-Server-Issues-Mar-Diablo-IIIs-Launch]

Dude, not cool. With words like that, I expect to the link to go to a video of an actual wildebeest careening over a cliff. Color me disappointed.

 

[Shamanic Rhythm]

I find it mildly amusing that you're accusing Grey of shitty journalistic practices while basically admitting that you didn't do any research on the subject. All you need to do is google 'Error 37' - which, incidentally, was a trending topic on Twitter on launch night - to get an idea of the scope of people who have been affected.

Of course there are no 'hard statistics' on the launch, but you can't really overlook the huge glut of anecdotal evidence without looking like you just want to stick your fingers in your ears and go 'lalalala'. Not to mention that filling out your post with condescending ad hominem makes you look even more in denial.

You completely misread.
First of all, editorial policy is not personal. I do not say Mr. Grey, but Escapist, as in the magazine.

Second of all, I did as much research as I personally could. On the other hand you point out anecdotal evidence, while listing Error 37. The only error that was announced by Blizzard to be expected as part of log in throttling.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/117151-Diablo-III-Launch-May-Get-Messy

What you proved is that people on tweeter do not read their emails.

Now, about last part ... I did not discuss you as poster, so do me a favor and do the same.

1) You referred to someone in your post as 'Johnny', which is kind of obvious.

2) You obviously didn't do enough research, and if you're going to cling to the belief that if Blizzard didn't acknowledge it, it didn't happen, then neither I nor anyone else will persuade you otherwise.

3) You called Grey a hipster and accused him of exaggerating news as a kind of petty revenge for not being given an advance copy of Diablo III. You're free to discuss me as a poster all you like, because I personally don't care. But if you're going to launch desperate ad hominem attacks on people because for some reason you don't want to hear the news they've got, expect to be called out on it.