Realm Downs.

[zirilion]

how about temp bans

 

[sardoniclysane]

R/d's on east are getting really bad now. I think it's time to get a static ip...

 

[BananaPancakes]

i think you cna get a realm down up to a week..dont they increase the time each time u try to get back on battlenet? well thats what i heard
@sirdoofus: now thats a good way of lookin at things lol i wish i was like u

 

[Orphan]

i think you cna get a realm down up to a week..dont they increase the time each time u try to get back on battlenet? well thats what i heard
@sirdoofus: now thats a good way of lookin at things lol i wish i was like u

I believe the longest time you can experience a single realm down is about 3 days. Any longer, and you should probably contact Blizzard, as something is probably amiss.

 

[Ax2Grind]

Lots to say, little time to say it

I believe the longest time you can experience a single realm down is about 3 days. Any longer, and you should probably contact Blizzard, as something is probably amiss.

You should contact Blizzard when it reaches three hours, as there's no logical explanation why a Realm Down occurs this often, period. OTOH, contacting Blizzard doesn't do a damn bit of good. They know the network is sucking, and they care very little, otherwise it would've stopped by now.

It is possible, and has happened, that people have experienced Realms Down for longer than three days. In fact, how do you contact Blizzard when you're Realmed Down and your realm is USWest, [email protected]? HAHAHAHAHA!:lol:

 

[Orphan]

You probably shouldn't send an email to [email protected]. Rather, you should try the webform (there's a link at the bottom of the realm down page, at http://www.blizzard.com/support/?id=adt0689p). I've sent requests through there several times (though, not realm down related), and have had no trouble getting responses. Also, a friend of mine had a realm down longer than a 3 days, and after contacting Blizz, he was able to get back on with no difficulties.

As for Blizzard not caring, I would probably argue that the main reason they did implement realm down was because they do care. Bnet was a mess before, when you had to wait 3 minutes in queue just to make a game. People really need to stop blaming Blizzard for this, as they didn't create the botter's. We don't blame security every time we walk through a metal detector at an airport. The fact of the matter is, there's always going to be idiots in the world that ruin any experience for the rest of us. Blame them, not the people who are trying to stop them.

 

[sardoniclysane]

You probably shouldn't send an email to [email protected]. Rather, you should try the webform (there's a link at the bottom of the realm down page, at http://www.blizzard.com/support/?id=adt0689p). I've sent requests through there several times (though, not realm down related), and have had no trouble getting responses. Also, a friend of mine had a realm down longer than a 3 days, and after contacting Blizz, he was able to get back on with no difficulties.

As for Blizzard not caring, I would probably argue that the main reason they did implement realm down was because they do care. Bnet was a mess before, when you had to wait 3 minutes in queue just to make a game. People really need to stop blaming Blizzard for this, as they didn't create the botter's. We don't blame security every time we walk through a metal detector at an airport. The fact of the matter is, there's always going to be idiots in the world that ruin any experience for the rest of us. Blame them, not the people who are trying to stop them.

The difference there is metal detectors actually do what they are intended to do. The r/d's really don't do anything except (it seems) to those playing legit. (Or at least legit at the time of the r/d).

It's a bad fix, and r/d's are a good deal more random than needed if they are actually intended to stop what blizzard views as "illicit" activities.

 

[Mikhailus]

Well said Orphan, Blizzard have done all they can to make battlenet as efficient as possible for everyone, and they implemented r/d as a feature to stop people from flooding - the fact is if there wasnt that security feature, then EVERYONE would have alot more r/d's due to every server being full of spam games, and lag crashing the servers.
If you make more than 3 games in any 1 minute period then you get a r/d for 15 minutes. Every time you try to login, your sentence doubles up to 48 hours, so my advice is that if you are botting, set the minimum game length to 30 seconds and if you are dc hunting, dont use a bot. Instead, go throught games doing a countess run every game then you dont flood anything. Not only that, but you'll undoubtedly find some nice runes with a bit of patience. complex problem, easy solution :thumbsup: I do this and have only ever had 1 realm down

 

[Orphan]

The difference there is metal detectors actually do what they are intended to do. The r/d's really don't do anything except (it seems) to those playing legit. (Or at least legit at the time of the r/d).

It's a bad fix, and r/d's are a good deal more random than needed if they are actually intended to stop what blizzard views as "illicit" activities.

I guess another difference is that the security people are getting paid to install and monitor metal detectors, whereas Bnet is this nice little free service that is provided to us. Maybe if we started paying for it, we could expect results on an equal standard.


Alot of people seem to be angry at Blizzard's focus on the new games (this is a more broad statement, not aimed at sardoniclysane), but we gotta be honest with the situation here. Let's face it. Diablo 2 is dirt cheap now-a-days, in alot of stores. Blizzard isn't going to (and can't) sit back on their laurels and let D2 support them financially. It's an unreasonable, unrealistic (and just plain selfish) expectation. Blizzard is one of the few developers out there that have made consistantly good games, and in order to maintain that, they need to keep moving forward.

Put simply, Blizzard doesn't owe us anything because we've stayed with the game for so long. The reason we have stayed with this 5 year old game is because it's an incrediably fun and addictive game. We've gotten much more than what we've paid for, and, if given an opportunity to turn back time, I doubt anyone here would change anything (apart from avoiding some scams, maybe).

It's unfortunate that D2 has ended up this way (on the battle.net front, at least), but it's in Blizzards best interest to look towards WoW. As nice as it would be to go to work each day, without pay, and doing good work only for the satisfaction, it doesn't put food on the table. Let's just not forget the amount of hours, days, weeks, months and years that we've had fun playing this game.

We aren't kids anymore We can't just keep asking for that toy in the window, and ignore the price tag.

 

[sardoniclysane]

I guess another difference is that the security people are getting paid to install and monitor metal detectors, whereas Bnet is this nice little free service that is provided to us. Maybe if we started paying for it, we could expect results on an equal standard.


Alot of people seem to be angry at Blizzard's focus on the new games (this is a more broad statement, not aimed at sardoniclysane), but we gotta be honest with the situation here. Let's face it. Diablo 2 is dirt cheap now-a-days, in alot of stores. Blizzard isn't going to (and can't) sit back on their laurels and let D2 support them financially. It's an unreasonable, unrealistic (and just plain selfish) expectation. Blizzard is one of the few developers out there that have made consistantly good games, and in order to maintain that, they need to keep moving forward.

Put simply, Blizzard doesn't owe us anything because we've stayed with the game for so long. The reason we have stayed with this 5 year old game is because it's an incrediably fun and addictive game. We've gotten much more than what we've paid for, and, if given an opportunity to turn back time, I doubt anyone here would change anything (apart from avoiding some scams, maybe).

It's unfortunate that D2 has ended up this way (on the battle.net front, at least), but it's in Blizzards best interest to look towards WoW. As nice as it would be to go to work each day, without pay, and doing good work only for the satisfaction, it doesn't put food on the table. Let's just not forget the amount of hours, days, weeks, months and years that we've had fun playing this game.

We aren't kids anymore We can't just keep asking for that toy in the window, and ignore the price tag.

I just feel bad for all those people getting realm downs without doing anything to cause them.

And yes, we are not p2p, so any support we get should be well appriciated.

 

[leumas]

I guess another difference is that the security people are getting paid to install and monitor metal detectors, whereas Bnet is this nice little free service that is provided to us. Maybe if we started paying for it, we could expect results on an equal standard.

I don't have any problem with the real down issue. The most RD I had go away within half away. However, I am sick and tired of hearing people said bnet can offer bad service because it's free of charge. Would you be mad if your pizza is throw at your door step because the delivery guy think that he can do what he want because the delivery is free of charge?

Somemore, the whole free bnet services is part of d2 sales point. Can you imagine d2 was launch without bnet? Can you imagine d2 offer only tcp/ip network play? Blizzard would had sale 50% less copies of D2 then they could today.

Most people bought diablo because of bnet. Would it be fair to them, to know afterward they could be suspend from bnet for few hours to the extend of days just because they leave their game too fast? I mean these type of limitation should be printed all over diablo box cover for the sake of fair warning.

 

[Orphan]

I don't have any problem with the real down issue. The most RD I had go away within half away. However, I am sick and tired of hearing people said bnet can offer bad service because it's free of charge. Would you be mad if your pizza is throw at your door step because the delivery guy think that he can do what he want because the delivery is free of charge?

Your a little bit incorrect. The delivery person is paid to deliver the pizza, by the pizza company. So, someone's paying their salary. They do have some incentive not to throw the pizza at our door step. They're not delivering pizza for free. They're paid to deliver it to our door step. Not a very good analogy.

Somemore, the whole free bnet services is part of d2 sales point. Can you imagine d2 was launch without bnet? Can you imagine d2 offer only tcp/ip network play? Blizzard would had sale 50% less copies of D2 then they could today.

No-one's denying that a fair amount of people purchased the game with the intention of going on bnet. But you must understand that owning a copy of D2, does not equal the right to log onto bnet. This has to be true, otherwise botters, scammers and hackers would have unrestricted access, based soley on the fact that they "purchased a copy of D2".

Sales pitch? Yes, there's a very good chance it was. But ultimately, it's not required to play D2. Battle.net was around before D2 was. It makes sense that they would allow D2 players to use this facility. But this is no different to a drag strip letting you race your new car, a tennis court letting you try your new racquet, or a cricket field letting you try your new bat out. We don't own those places anymore than we own bnet.

Most people bought diablo because of bnet. Would it be fair to them, to know afterward they could be suspend from bnet for few hours to the extend of days just because they leave their game too fast? I mean these type of limitation should be printed all over diablo box cover for the sake of fair warning.

*Sigh*, I seem to be mentioning this quite abit these days.... I'll direct you to the Battle.net terms of use , that you must agree before creating any account on bnet. It states:

9. Acknowledgments. You hereby acknowledge that...

(v) Blizzard does not warrant that Battle.net will be uninterrupted or error-free, that defects will be corrected, or that this site and/or service or the server are free of viruses or other harmful components;

(vi) you may not be able to access Battle.net whenever you want, and there may be extended periods of time where you cannot access Battle.net;

They don't need to be on the box, because they're given to you when you log onto bnet. It's not their fault that you didn't read them.


Edit: I feel we should get things in perspective here. The people who did buy D2 back when it first came out have had an incrediable run for their money. The realm down issues have just started recently, and now-a-days the game is dirt cheap in most countries. Right now Blizzard is focusing on WoW, because (as every successful company does) they are moving forward.

As a traditional D2 player, who has been playing since pretty much December 2000/January 2001 (if I remember correctly), I've had alot of fun playing the game over these last ~5 years, and I think alot of people would agree with me. Things don't last forever, it may be hard to accept, but it true.

 

[leumas]

Your a little bit incorrect. The delivery person is paid to deliver the pizza, by the pizza company. So, someone's paying their salary. They do have some incentive not to throw the pizza at our door step. They're not delivering pizza for free. They're paid to deliver it to our door step. Not a very good analogy.

Is that mean blizzard employee isn't paid by his company to work on diablo? Frankly, I don't see much different. I paid for the pizza so I got a free delivery. Same thing as I paid for D2 so I get to play on bnet without extra charge. You just prove that both parties aren't paid directly by the consumer.

No-one's denying that a fair amount of people purchased the game with the intention of going on bnet. But you must understand that owning a copy of D2, does not equal the right to log onto bnet.

Is that so? Then I guess blizzard is lying when they put "Full Multiplayer support, including Internet play over Battle.net" under game features.

BTW, stop pulling up the term and condition. Most company setup the term solely based on their company benefit, because they know most consumer didn't bother to read them. Had you read the term & condition before ordering your pizza? You realize they could drop the pizza on the floor, and still sell it to you. Because in their term, it's clearly said the pizza deliver may not in best condition.

 

[Orphan]

Is that mean blizzard employee isn't paid by his company to work on diablo? Frankly, I don't see much different. I paid for the pizza so I got a free delivery. Same thing as I paid for D2 so I get to play on bnet without extra charge. You just prove that both parties aren't paid directly by the consumer.

We need to separate D2 from Battle.net. These are two different entities. D2 is the game, and Bnet is the facility or service (though, free). What we paid for, was for D2. The money we spent to buy the game went towards making up the money that was paid to the programmers who created it (amongst alot of other things, including publishing, marketing, retail stores fees). The game is bought as is, with the intent that you can take it home, load it to your computer and play it.

If you choose to play online, you need to agree to some more terms of use, as this is an extra service, and is not what you physically purchased.

I could understand someone trying to bring this argument up 3 years or so ago, when the game was $80, but now your able to find it for $10-$20, from most stores.

As a note, most pizza companies charge a delivery fee, including Pizza Hut and Dominos. Although, I do know it differs between individual companies. In most cases, it costs more to get a pizza delivered to your place, then if were to pick it up yourself.

Is that so? Then I guess blizzard is lying when they put "Full Multiplayer support, including Internet play over Battle.net" under game features.

Nope, not lying. You are able to play multiplayer, and also play over BNet. Yes, recently it has become abit unstable for some people (and by now, the game is dirt cheap), but it's still there. I know alot of people that have no trouble (myself included), and recently IN_FLAMES has posted on how he managed to fix his problem, which just re-inforces my belief that the problem lies not with bnet, but with the user (or in IN_FLAMES's case, the user's setup).

Additionally, by your logic, every hacker/botter on bnet should get their CD-Key's unbanned? Merely because they've purchased the game, and it reads "Full Multiplayer support, including Internet play over Battle.net"? We need to understand that even though we've purchased the game, we're essentially guests on battle.net, bound by the terms of use.

BTW, stop pulling up the term and condition. Most company setup the term solely based on their company benefit, because they know most consumer didn't bother to read them. Had you read the term & condition before ordering your pizza? You realize they could drop the pizza on the floor, and still sell it to you. Because in their term, it's clearly said the pizza deliver may not in best condition.

Regardless if whether people read them or not, it doesn't make it any less a contract or any less real. For example, when you sign up for an Internet connection, there's a good chance the terms of use specify a that you must remain with them for a minimum number of months. If you switch out before you've met those months, you'll need to pay an additional "opt-out" fee. You won't be able to "not pay the fee" simply because you "haven't read the terms and conditions". As they say, ignorance of the law is no defence.

In your example of the pizza. Assuming it's true (I don't know, as I pick up), it means you can't legally complain to them about a pizza that was dropped on the floor.

 

[Ax2Grind]

I've quashed this argument before...

Free != lousy. Free != inability to complain. Free != no need for money.

I used Netzero, a .wav file and a court ruling to justify these three things, respectively. Do a search but I'm sure it's in another forum section.

BTW, about the blurb in the TOU, almost every business uses language like that to cover their ass in case they some day want to do something that winds up screwing their customers. That doesn't justify the actual screwing, it just gives them the ability to say we were warned we could (read: would) be screwed. You have to see it from a business standpoint, really, it's a hilarious inside joke.

 

[Orphan]

Free != lousy. Free != inability to complain. Free != no need for money.

I used Netzero, a .wav file and a court ruling to justify these three things, respectively. Do a search but I'm sure it's in another forum section.

BTW, about the blurb in the TOU, almost every business uses language like that to cover their ass in case they some day want to do something that winds up screwing their customers. That doesn't justify the actual screwing, it just gives them the ability to say we were warned we could (read: would) be screwed. You have to see it from a business standpoint, really, it's a hilarious inside joke.

No-ones denying the right to complain. You could have quoted the first amendment in order to support that (Freedom of Expression).

I think the statement Free != lousing is slightly off. Firstly, Nothing = lousing should be an ideal situation, but let's just say that Free < Paid. At the very least, we've got to accept that Free != Paid, anything otherwise would be an exception, not part of the rule.

Yes, alot of the Terms of Use are just created to cover Blizzard. But only an ignorant idiot would say they could offer an uninterrupted Internet service. It just doesn't happen. Additionally, it would be the same type of person who would expect an uninterrupted Internet service. Ideally, they wouldn't need to mention that in the TOU, but we all know that if they didn't, someone's going to try and screw them over because of it.

On that note, who's getting screwed? Blizzard? by the amount of people complaining to them? I mean, alot of people are able to enjoy battle.net with miminal difficulties, and several people who originally had trouble with realm downs have since corrected their problem (which turned out to be their computer settings). Must be the thrill of the Witch-hunt, I guess.

 

[leumas]

Free != lousy. Free != inability to complain. Free != no need for money.

I used Netzero, a .wav file and a court ruling to justify these three things, respectively. Do a search but I'm sure it's in another forum section.

BTW, about the blurb in the TOU, almost every business uses language like that to cover their ass in case they some day want to do something that winds up screwing their customers. That doesn't justify the actual screwing, it just gives them the ability to say we were warned we could (read: would) be screwed. You have to see it from a business standpoint, really, it's a hilarious inside joke.

Excatly. If someone would had sue Blizzard over the realm down issue(which is most unlikely), Blizzard would not be the sure win party. In fact, I doubt the whole legalabilities of the term of use. It's always make me grin, when I read someone in forum refer to the term as if it's a legal law statement.

Sorry, orphan, further discuss with you is pointless since you could go as far as to argue blizzard and bnet are two entity. What can I said? LOL!

 

[Orphan]

Excatly. If someone would had sue Blizzard over the realm down issue(which is most unlikely), Blizzard would not be the sure win party. In fact, I doubt the whole legalabilities of the term of use. It's always make me grin, when I read someone in forum refer to the term as if it's a legal law statement.

I must admit, that is one of the most ridiculous things I have ever heard. A terms of use agreement is a legal contract. Alot of companies and websites use them. I suggest you read the definition of Terms of Use (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terms_of_Use), or ask any court official or lawyer about the legal standings on them.

In many cases, terms of service are used as a contractual agreement between a company and users of a service they provide. They generally detail restrictions on what each party is and will be responsible for in relation to the service. They may give rules concerning copyright and other legal details. In a court of law, agreeing to terms of use designates entry into a written contract in most cases.

Secondly, trust me, there's an incrediably high chance that you will not win in a court of law if you sue Blizzard. There have been similar cases, like "Steven K Caspi, et all v The Microsoft Network, L.L.C., et al":

Before an individual can commence use of the Microsoft Network, she must first view a series of computer screens which set forth the terms of this subscriber agreement. These terms appear in a scrollable window next to blocks containing the words "I agree" or "I disagree," and set forth the terms pursuant to which the individual can use the Microsoft Network. The user cannot commence such use unless she clicks the "I agree" button. Each of the plaintiffs clicked the "I agree" button, thereby indicating their assent to be bound by the terms of the subscriber agreement. Both the trial and appellate courts held this created an enforceable contract between the defendants and their subscribers.

See also, Robert Novak, d/b/a Pets Warehouse and Petswarehouse.com v. Overture Services,

Court holds that plaintiff, by agreeing online to be bound by the Terms of Service governing use of an online discussion group set forth in a scrollable window, viewable ten lines at a time, was bound by the forum selection contained therein.

The only scenario that you could sue Blizzard in relation to their terms of use, was if it was not displayed prior to your access to their Battle.net service (see Specht v. Netscape ). Unfortunatly for you, it was displayed when you created an account (which you had to do, in order to first gain access to the service), so this is not the case.

Sorry, orphan, further discuss with you is pointless since you could go as far as to argue blizzard and bnet are two entity. What can I said? LOL!

Actually, I said Diablo 2 and Battle.net were separate entities, which they are. I'd suggest you re-read my post, but I know you won't.


I would also recommend you read this article on the validity of Internet Contacts (http://www.zvulony.com/browse_wrap.html). It states that as long as the user is required to click "I agree", as a legal acceptance. Although the article focuses on Websites, the principles are the same.

 

[stkrause]

I must admit, that is one of the most ridiculous things I have ever heard. A terms of use agreement is a legal contract. Alot of companies and websites use them. I suggest you read the definition of Terms of Use (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terms_of_Use), or ask any court official or lawyer about the legal standings on them.
[...]
I would also recommend you read this article on the validity of Internet Contacts (http://www.zvulony.com/browse_wrap.html). It states that as long as the user is required to click "I agree", as a legal acceptance. Although the article focuses on Websites, the principles are the same.

You should consider that there are many countries in the word, and they have really different laws regarding "terms of use" or especially shrink wrap agreements. In germany shrink wrap agreements are void by default, for example.

I'm not a lawyer, so I can't assess the legal value of blizzards term of use here in germany, but we have strong laws regarding consumer rights in such contracts. I think it would come down to the question whether the battle.net access is a voluntary additional service or a integral part of the game. If it is seen as a voluntary additional (free) service, most of the terms of use would be valid, but if was a integral part of the game (ie I "bought" access to battle.net when buying the game) you can't simply lock people out of battle.net without a perfectly good reason.

*stkrause

 

[sjw7]

I was getting loads of realm downs yesterday morning. Strangely enough i was running emule at the time and once i switched if off i had no more RDs. I hadnt used it for some time and only switched it on yesterday for a short period which coincided with my D2 issues. check your not running anything in the background that keeps a constant connection open on some random port and it might sort it out.