[D3] Blizzard do something nice
- Thread starter Xylak
- Start date
Xylak
New Member
Well, yes, but the point here is that Blizzard are under no obligation to provide product to customers of GAME. It means that they will, effectively, be giving the game away as they have not been paid for it by either the distributor (GAME) nor the customer.
It'll cost them quite a bit BUT this type of goodwill gesture is generally well received, especially by those people getting their product. And seeing as EA have recently been voted "worst company" in the USA, they need to do something to make [strike]people forget that "accolade"[/strike] sure they don't get it!.
(Edited to amend stupidity)
Panda with issues...
Well-Known Member
Oh wait!
http://venturebeat.com/2012/05/15/world-exclusive-diablo-iii-review/?fb_ref=.T7JORjNnjAA.like&fb_source=home_multiline#s:diablo-iii-2012-05-15-00-49-30-42
There's a lie right there!
But seriously. Well played Blizzard.
Xylak
New Member
I had a brain fart!
Panda with issues...
Well-Known Member
Kind of hilarious seeing all of Blizzards fans trying to defend them over what, by all reports has been a very (predictably) rough launch.
This exchange at RPS seems to summarise it nicely:
Uthred
Lasikbear
Uthred
This exchange at RPS seems to summarise it nicely:
Uthred
Lasikbear
Uthred
Xarlaxas
Active Member
There's really no excuse for it, and it could have been so easily avoided by letting people play Single player offline, it is a massive amount of hubris they have to say that their system is correct and then launch like this, especially as, apparently, they do a really good job of keeping WoW up and running when expansions come out.
In other news, my collector's edition just arrived, and I will point out that they still are very good at packaging their products. . . .
Though I'm a bit disappointed in the soul-stone USB stick.
In other news, my collector's edition just arrived, and I will point out that they still are very good at packaging their products. . . .
Though I'm a bit disappointed in the soul-stone USB stick.
Xylak
New Member
Just to point out I wouldn't say I am "fan" of any particular developer/publisher per-se. I just thought I'd post this as it was a nice gesture which they really didn't have to do - they could have sat back and said "not our problem".
It certainly doesn't let them off the login issues a lot of people have been complaining about.
It seems to be a recurring theme (and not just with Blizzard) that high profile titles have launch day issues.
I do wonder if that's because there's an increasing tendency towards simultaneous global releases and a higher number of gamers in general. WoW will have cultivated a Blizzard fanbase (even more than any of its other releases) and it's not as if the WoW team will have been retasked to D3.
Panda with issues...
Well-Known Member
There's no way I was implicating you of defending them. This just seems to be the de facto thread for discussing the launch. It was indeed a nice gesture, as I acknowledged in one of my previous posts. To be fair those aussies can get the same experience as most other users without even paying for the game by clicking on this link:
http://error37.com/
Zing! (Again, via RPS)
They could have saved themselves an awful lot of trouble by just allowing people to play their single player characters offline, as Xar pointed out. THey could then have monetised transferring offline characters to online ones and created themselves another revenue stream.
thatbloke
Junior Administrator
Blizzard would need a server farm the size of Google's or Facebook's to be able to cope with a couple of million people all trying to connect at the same time. I know there are still ongoing issues but there are companies out there that will sell server processing capacity to people who pay for it, and they should be able to use such a service for a couple of weeks after launch.
Name me a single MMO that's not had login server trouble the instant that said game has gone live?
Every WoW expansion has had issues, due to sheer weight of numbers. People sometimes are waiting for hours to login to the game when an expansion goes live (though with the last one I was lucky and was in within 2 minutes, meaning I got to see the hilariousness on our server).
Much as I hate to say it - people should be prepared for this. However, that doesn't mean that we as the users should accept it as "the norm".
Diablo 3 is basically an MMO, regardless of what you think, so having such login issues is not unheard of.
Name me a single MMO that's not had login server trouble the instant that said game has gone live?
Every WoW expansion has had issues, due to sheer weight of numbers. People sometimes are waiting for hours to login to the game when an expansion goes live (though with the last one I was lucky and was in within 2 minutes, meaning I got to see the hilariousness on our server).
Much as I hate to say it - people should be prepared for this. However, that doesn't mean that we as the users should accept it as "the norm".
Diablo 3 is basically an MMO, regardless of what you think, so having such login issues is not unheard of.
Panda with issues...
Well-Known Member
The point is, it DIDN'T HAVE TO BE. They shot themselves in the foot.
Honestly, I just opted for the "can't play my single player game offline...? not interested, thanks" approach. Also, D3 stress test weekend didn't leave me feeling like I wanted to play any more.
thatbloke
Junior Administrator
yea the problem is that you're in a minority - there are plenty of people who dislike that fact, but then realise that if they don't buy it they won't be able to play the game at all, so then buy the game anyway, despite it's supposedly "major" faults.
Panda with issues...
Well-Known Member
Oh of course.
More and more, the only option in life to avoid these idiotic policies is to 'step outside' as it is put in Rising Stars. Non participation is the only option. When I was younger, I'd feel left out, or like I was missing out. These days I just feel like a smug, self-satisfied arsehole.
But as we already established, most of this stuff isn't targeted at me. The point to remember though, is that although it is a game that wasn't targeted at me, I enjoyed the first two, and there's a high likelihood I would have bought this one, if they hadn't resorted to a bunch of awful policy choices. According to the vocal portion of the internet, I'm far from alone in this particular case.
Exercising your right NOT to buy something is about the only right a consumer has. Unfortunately, I believe corporations only tend to see lost sales/low sales as a reflection on the quality of the product, whereas they are actually a function of the quality of the product, and a whole bunch of other factors, such as the delivery mechanism, and everything else which comes with the product itself. A subtle distinction, but one none the less.
Very few surveys come round asking people why they bought what they did, and why they didn't buy what they didn't. It would seem to be a pretty easy thing to do using steam:
'Hey, your games list contains all these games by us, but you chose not to buy this one. Why was that?'
Juba
In Cryo Sleep
Unfortunately a lot of companies don't assume low sales are down to quality even they just assume low sales is down to piracy and therefore next title is even more DRM'ed
Personally whenever I might have bought a game but then didn't because of something like this I try and email the company and let them know why I did not buy their product even though I doubt it has any effect