Blizzard to offer compensation, refunds for poor service of Diablo 3

[Grooveriding]

http://blogs.wsj.com/korearealtime/2012/06/19/diablo-gamers-1-blizzard-0/

South Korean online gamers scored a victory on Monday as Blizzard Entertainment said it would offer a full refund to some Korean customers of the latest version of its blockbuster online game Diablo following persistent problems with the game’s online connectivity.

The move comes about three weeks after South Korea’s Fair Trade Commission launched an investigation into the company’s Seoul office after receiving a flurry of user complaints about problems with the game’s internet servers caused by overloading.

Blizzard had said it wouldn’t provide any compensation to gamers but Korea’s consumer protection law guarantees a refund if there is a problem with a product that is not caused by the consumer.

The problem stemmed from a misjudgment about user volume in Asia, which led to frequent server crashing and slow connectivity, causing a particularly strong backlash among Korea’s large online gaming community. About two-thirds of online traffic in Asia from the game originates in Korea.
In a message posted on its website, the company said Diablo III players who are less than Level 40, about two-thirds of the way through the program can apply for a refund from June 25 to July 3.

Blizzard will also accept returns from any players less than Level 20, around a third of the way through the program within 14 days of purchase from now on.
In early June, the company set up more servers in Korea to cope with connectivity issues. To compensate users further, Blizzard said it would offer Diablo III users a 30 day free trial of another hot online game, Star Craft: Wings of Liberty.

Just keeps getting worse for this game. Blizzard is also facing lawsuits and investigations in France & Germany as well for their business practices related to Diablo 3. In Europe the investigations are also looking into not just poor service, but legality concerns related to the real money auction house system.

http://www.geek.com/articles/games/...iablo-iii-drm-in-france-and-germany-20120618/

They also lost their attempt at suing Valve to get the rights to the DOTA trademark and had to rename Blizzard DOTA to Blizzard all-stars.

http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=336991

This company is going down the toilet.

 

[Ns1]

Why does blizzard have to rename dota if it was originally an SC mod?

 

[sigurros81]

This company is going down the toilet.

Sensationalize much? You should write for FOX news.

 

[Anubis]

its really just becuse SK has some messed up laws, i havent seen a AAA game release that has a major online component go smoothly EVER.

never thought about sueing over it.

as for the RMAH, yes they are playing with fire on this one in some places. as for the DOTA thing i thought they came to an agreement rather then lost

 

[Aikouka]

as for the DOTA thing i thought they came to an agreement rather then lost

They did.

I've seen the OP make numerous threads/posts in opposition it Blizzard over Diablo III. It seems like some sort of odd vigilante campaign against Blizzard simply because some of us don't make a big deal out of a few days of downtime that occurred over a month ago and really haven't been a problem since. I shall be waiting for the person to say, "but the game is down right now!"

 

[ImpulsE69]

Personally, I think this is good news and too bad it doesn't hold elsewhere. Game companies SHOULD be held accountable if they are going to require always online. I DGAF if it should be expected to be buggy at launch, because it shouldn't. Someone needs to be made an example of. Once again, games for some reason are given this length of rope that other consumables do not have, but they want both ways. It needs to be stopped.

 

[Barfo]

Personally, I think this is good news and too bad it doesn't hold elsewhere. Game companies SHOULD be held accountable if they are going to require always online. I DGAF if it should be expected to be buggy at launch, because it shouldn't. Someone needs to be made an example of. Once again, games for some reason are given this length of rope that other consumables do not have, but they want both ways. It needs to be stopped.

1000 times this. I had been avoiding games that require always online, even though I only play single player, decided to take a chance with D3 and got burned.

You want me to play single player while connected to your server all the time? fine, but it better run without a hitch or you compensate me for your bullshit.

 

[diesbudt]

Personally, I think this is good news and too bad it doesn't hold elsewhere. Game companies SHOULD be held accountable if they are going to require always online. I DGAF if it should be expected to be buggy at launch, because it shouldn't. Someone needs to be made an example of. Once again, games for some reason are given this length of rope that other consumables do not have, but they want both ways. It needs to be stopped.

That is because games today have so much coding, it is impossible to make it bug free. Also all online games will have issues at the start. It has been true for pretty much any game. This is because the millions of lines of coding, maybe 1 single line of coding wasn't prepared for mass amounts of people online at once, and caused this line to break. And was not seen until release because they didn't have that many people on at once before.

Because of this, software has to be held accountable differently, as it can be patched overtime when 95%+ of all other consumables cannot be edited/fixed after release. So all issues have to be fixed before it leaves the factory, or it gets recalled (which happens more often then people realize)

Every MMO / online non-MMO game I or a few friends have played (At launch), had issues the first few weeks.

For those interested - This includes: Everquest, Everquest 2, Asheron's Call, Asheron's Call 2, Guild Wars, World of Warcraft, Diablo 3.

 

[Lonyo]

That is because games today have so much coding, it is impossible to make it bug free. Also all online games will have issues at the start. It has been true for pretty much any game. This is because the millions of lines of coding, maybe 1 single line of coding wasn't prepared for mass amounts of people online at once, and caused this line to break. And was not seen until release because they didn't have that many people on at once before.

Because of this, software has to be held accountable differently, as it can be patched overtime when 95%+ of all other consumables cannot be edited/fixed after release. So all issues have to be fixed before it leaves the factory, or it gets recalled (which happens more often then people realize)

Every MMO / online non-MMO game I or a few friends have played (At launch), had issues the first few weeks.

For those interested - This includes: Everquest, Everquest 2, Asheron's Call, Asheron's Call 2, Guild Wars, World of Warcraft, Diablo 3.

Most of those games are MMOs and don't have a single player mode.
Diablo 3 is almost supposed to have a single player mode.

 

[QuantumPion]

Disagree. Blizzard thinks their reputation is so good they can get away with not buying the servers required for peak load and save money, riding out the waves of criticism until the load stabilizes to normal levels.

 

[lupi]

Didn't we already have this thread(s)

 

[diesbudt]

Most of those games are MMOs and don't have a single player mode.
Diablo 3 is almost supposed to have a single player mode.

That is correct, except that blizzard decided to make it all online through use of servers, which constitutes an MMO like usage.

Whether or not you agree with it always online, the minute it was known to be so, the "regular" online gamers should have realized it ment issues for a week or 2.

 

[gorcorps]

They did.

I've seen the OP make numerous threads/posts in opposition it Blizzard over Diablo III. It seems like some sort of odd vigilante campaign against Blizzard simply because some of us don't make a big deal out of a few days of downtime that occurred over a month ago and really haven't been a problem since. I shall be waiting for the person to say, "but the game is down right now!"

The article is very focused on the Korean issue. Do you live in Korea?

 

[Anteaus]

I think the issue is less about Diablo 3 specifically and more about an increasing number of games being released that require internet access and the failure of the publishers/developers to properly load test their systems prior to release. While I agree there is a pro/con argument that can be made about the ethics of DRM, people would have far less to complain about if it worked as advertised on the day they are advertising it (i.e. release day).

The same people that seem to be ok with a few turbulent days of non-connectivity would likely have a much different feeling about it if it was their ISP that was causing the connectivity issues and not Blizzard. We pay our ISP to provide us with reliable internet service, and that same sentiment is passed to game developers/providers when we pay them for the same level of service. We might not pay monthly fees in every case, but when internet connectivity is mandated there is an implied service contract with the provider that they will hold up their end of the bargain.

When I start up a game that requires internet connectivity, I demand the same of the game provider as I do my ISP to provide me with a stable connection to let me use the product as advertised. I don't believe anyone is out of line for standing up for that simple concept.

Again, while Blizzard is in the crosshairs at the moment, this is an industry wide issue that is only becoming more important with every new release. In my opinion, connectivity issues due to inadequate testing or preparation is no different than any game killing bug. It just sucks that Blizzard gets a free pass for the most part.

We need an actual digital consumers bill of rights that deals with these kinds of things. We don't get the same protections that someone gets if they buy something off the shelf, and it's ridiculous.

 

[KaOTiK]

It really is piss poor to release a game nowadays and your servers can't handle it. Rift which came out a little over a year ago (I think) had a large launch and it was literally flawless. Servers were not crashing, lag was not a problem, you could log in just fine (expect if you joined a high population server and had a queue for that). I've played many MMO's and pretty much each one I played I played at launch and Rift's launch is by far what the standard should be for any game that requires a constant online connection.

To make matters even worse, Rift was Trions (the dev) first game, so they didn't have the massive resources these other companies do and yet these massive companies still fail.

 

[drebo]

I don't care about the RMAH, or even the fact that I had connectivity issues in the first couple weeks.

For me, I want a refund because D3 is just genuinely a bad game.

I should have trusted my instincts after playing the beta and not bought it. Too bad I've always been a Blizzard fan .

 

[diesbudt]

The same people that seem to be ok with a few turbulent days of non-connectivity would likely have a much different feeling about it if it was their ISP that was causing the connectivity issues and not Blizzard.

This metaphor doesn't work.

What you are missing is that withan ISP, my internet has been working fine (except for a few hiccups here and there for 2-3 years now). So if it was to cause an issue all the sudden that made my connection be lost for a few days, yes I would be upset.

Same as if Diablo 3 was running perfectly for a year or 2, and all the sudden the servers are on meltdown for a week or 2 when nothing changed (aka patch/expansion). I will be upset. Because it WAS working just fine before.

Whenever any service/software launch happens, and there are hiccups, I understand. As theory and realism are 2 very different relms.

Sure maybe the game was flawless to them by release (which I will admit I doubt as stress test 2-3 weeks prior couldnt even been done correctly as so many issues) in theory and towhat tests they gave it. But minute the servers open and they open up and enter the relm of "realism" it wasn't good enough, and they wouldn't have known this unless doing said opening of servers. (Game runs fine now doesn't it?)

Again: Shorthand - Metaphor is wrong. Diablo was launched, ISP has had me connected for a long while. Losing something that has proven to work for years is not the same as something working the minute it is released when it wasn't fully tested to that capacity.

 

[Robert Munch]

Anyone know if this applies to US gamers as well?

 

[diesbudt]

I don't care about the RMAH, or even the fact that I had connectivity issues in the first couple weeks.

For me, I want a refund because D3 is just genuinely a bad game.

I should have trusted my instincts after playing the beta and not bought it. Too bad I've always been a Blizzard fan .

Bold = your opinion. So the word "genuinely" does not apply.

I think it is a good game. I enjoyed it, and still do. Sure it isn't my favorite game. Or the best. And some things I do miss from the previous diablo games. But I still think it is a good game.

 

[diesbudt]

Anyone know if this applies to US gamers as well?

No, Korean virtual/commision law is much different then Americas.

If you clicked accept on the TOS, it states that there will be downtime and no promise to have servers always working. In this country, reguardless whether we have laws on it or not, clicking an accept button is a "virtual contract"

Also, it states in the TOS if you decline the TOS (Which means you cant play) you have the right to get a full refund within 30 days of purchase.

Stuff like this is exactly why people should read the TOS, but we never do...

 

[darkewaffle]

It really is piss poor to release a game nowadays and your servers can't handle it. Rift which came out a little over a year ago (I think) had a large launch and it was literally flawless. Servers were not crashing, lag was not a problem, you could log in just fine (expect if you joined a high population server and had a queue for that). I've played many MMO's and pretty much each one I played I played at launch and Rift's launch is by far what the standard should be for any game that requires a constant online connection.

To make matters even worse, Rift was Trions (the dev) first game, so they didn't have the massive resources these other companies do and yet these massive companies still fail.

Rift also had, optimistically, one player for every ten D3 has and was coming from an unknown developer so they needed to make a good impression to be taken seriously.

Blizzard has the experience and vision to understand that in a month or two nobody will even remember launch growing pains. Just like how SWTOR had extraordinarily long queue times for the first week or two after release and nobody's mentioned that in six months.

It's a cost benefit analysis really, do you spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on more servers, bandwidth, and space that will gain you next to nothing in return (conversely to the above, nobody is going to say "Remember how great the D3 launch went?") or accept some mild negative feedback that will never be quieted anyway? Much of the complaining would have been heard regardless because of the folks claiming DRM.

 

[diesbudt]

Blizzard has the experience and vision to understand that in a month or two nobody will even remember launch growing pains. Just like how SWTOR had extraordinarily long queue times for the first week or two after release and nobody's mentioned that in six months.

Kinda hard to find someone that complains about it when so few play it regularly anymore... (joking)

 

[KaOTiK]

Rift also had, optimistically, one player for every ten D3 has and was coming from an unknown developer so they needed to make a good impression to be taken seriously.

Blizzard has the experience and vision to understand that in a month or two nobody will even remember launch growing pains. Just like how SWTOR had extraordinarily long queue times for the first week or two after release and nobody's mentioned that in six months.

It's a cost benefit analysis really, do you spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on more servers, bandwidth, and space that will gain you next to nothing in return (conversely to the above, nobody is going to say "Remember how great the D3 launch went?") or accept some mild negative feedback that will never be quieted anyway? Much of the complaining would have been heard regardless because of the folks claiming DRM.

Don't try and sell Rifts launch short. They had over a million subscribers at launch iirc. For a tiny company's first title, to pull it off like they did, larger companies should be ashamed of themselves. Sure D3 sold like over 6 million in the first week, but for a company the size of Blizzard that has the resources and experience/knowledge....it is down right pathetic the way D3's launch was. Tons of lag, log in queues, tons of errors, lots of maintenance downtime.......to top it off, those who wished to play the game as single player had to deal with all those issues as well.

 

[Nintendesert]

Yes yes we get it diesbudt, you're a huge fanboi and are going to defend your company from any criticism levied against it. Do you work for Blizzard or have a financial stake in the company?

 

[Aikouka]

The article is very focused on the Korean issue. Do you live in Korea?

Read the post again, because your response makes absolutely no sense.

The gist is that I'm not surprised at the OP's overall negative tone in his post. It's like when I saw Batuleur post about the MacBook Pro in the Apple sub-forum. I was pretty damn sure that the tone would be negative before I even looked. Sure enough, I wasn't surprised.

Disagree. Blizzard thinks their reputation is so good they can get away with not buying the servers required for peak load and save money, riding out the waves of criticism until the load stabilizes to normal levels.

So, Blizzard should buy tons of equipment to facilitate what amounts to a few days worth of a usage spike? Pretty sure they don't teach that in Business 101.

Yes, it sucks that the game wasn't that playable. Did it affect me? Yes, it did. I paid for the (collector's edition of the) game, and wasn't really able to play it. I guess it helps that some gamers are used to how server-based games are a bit shaky at launch. Although, I recall someone in the Diablo III thread getting a refund, which means it should be possible here too.

It really is piss poor to release a game nowadays and your servers can't handle it. Rift which came out a little over a year ago (I think) had a large launch and it was literally flawless. Servers were not crashing, lag was not a problem, you could log in just fine (expect if you joined a high population server and had a queue for that). I've played many MMO's and pretty much each one I played I played at launch and Rift's launch is by far what the standard should be for any game that requires a constant online connection.

To make matters even worse, Rift was Trions (the dev) first game, so they didn't have the massive resources these other companies do and yet these massive companies still fail.

I did some Googling to try and find the numbers at Rift's launch. It seems Diablo III sold around 4x as many games. Also, I found some people saying something along the lines of, "Hey, Rift has unprecedented demand... don't blame them for launch server issues." So... are you right in that they didn't have problems or are these random forum posters (on Rift-related forums) correct?