Diablo II: Resurrected online play was down for several hours after launch

yukka

Posts: 993   +155
Diablo 2 remaster purchased 2 days ago. £34.99. Reasonable. Already played for several hours and it looks and feels smooth. Gameplay is great. I didn’t get into it when it was first released but now (after a lot of d3) I can really appreciate the work that has gone into it and look forward to many hours playing an up to date version of a game that will be supported (in terms of security updates and fixes) for a fair few years.

Online game sucks on launch day is so typical but it’s because no company wants to overestimate demand (costs more money than needed to run those extra servers) so they cut costs and underestimate it. Name an online game with a buttery smooth launch and I’ll show you a llama with wings and a gold dong growing out of its forehead.
 

brucek

Posts: 901   +1,305
Visually, there is no denying it looks leaps and bounds better than the original. But that's all to it.
That is precisely what the intended audience for this game wants and demands. They want the game they remember from 2000, with the 2000-era sensibility for game design and mechanics. The last thing they want is an updated rule set. You only have to go to the forums or other fansites for this game to see how virulently the old guard is against any non-cosmetic changes. It is not a case of trying to cheap out on development - they sent out multiple rounds of surveys about possible new features - but about satisfying a particular niche.

None of this is to suggest you buy it or play it if you're not in that particular niche. Many people prefer current game design sensibilities (like me.) That said I'm glad they are offering D2R as it was, the game has remained relevant and kept a fanbase all these years for a reason. For me, I still enjoy the occasional D3 season (still no charge to keep playing, 9 years after release, just like still no charge for the original D2, 21 years after release.) I bet I'll be very interested in D4 once that's ready unless they screw it up pursuing some artificial business goal that isn't fun first.
 

Adi6293

Posts: 931   +1,307
That is precisely what the intended audience for this game wants and demands. They want the game they remember from 2000, with the 2000-era sensibility for game design and mechanics. The last thing they want is an updated rule set. You only have to go to the forums or other fansites for this game to see how virulently the old guard is against any non-cosmetic changes. It is not a case of trying to cheap out on development - they sent out multiple rounds of surveys about possible new features - but about satisfying a particular niche.

None of this is to suggest you buy it or play it if you're not in that particular niche. Many people prefer current game design sensibilities (like me.) That said I'm glad they are offering D2R as it was, the game has remained relevant and kept a fanbase all these years for a reason. For me, I still enjoy the occasional D3 season (still no charge to keep playing, 9 years after release, just like still no charge for the original D2, 21 years after release.) I bet I'll be very interested in D4 once that's ready unless they screw it up pursuing some artificial business goal that isn't fun first.

Spot on comment, the last thing we want is them changing anything significant in Diablo 2, just modern graphics and tiny life improvements and they can take my money :joy: and no this is not sarcasm, I paid for the game right after the announcement and been playing the original D2 still this year
 

Puiu

Posts: 4,962   +3,833
TechSpot Elite
Diablo 2 remaster purchased 2 days ago. £34.99. Reasonable. Already played for several hours and it looks and feels smooth. Gameplay is great. I didn’t get into it when it was first released but now (after a lot of d3) I can really appreciate the work that has gone into it and look forward to many hours playing an up to date version of a game that will be supported (in terms of security updates and fixes) for a fair few years.

Online game sucks on launch day is so typical but it’s because no company wants to overestimate demand (costs more money than needed to run those extra servers) so they cut costs and underestimate it. Name an online game with a buttery smooth launch and I’ll show you a llama with wings and a gold dong growing out of its forehead.
"no company wants to overestimate demand" - scalable servers means that new servers are added dynamically. for example once you hit 90% another server starts up and you only pay what you use.

I seriously doubt that someone like Blizzard doesn't have such servers ready for a big title.
 

yukka

Posts: 993   +155
"no company wants to overestimate demand" - scalable servers means that new servers are added dynamically. for example once you hit 90% another server starts up and you only pay what you use.

I seriously doubt that someone like Blizzard doesn't have such servers ready for a big title.
I get that but they didn't have them otherwise they would have used them. Why create more bad publicity.
 

Puiu

Posts: 4,962   +3,833
TechSpot Elite
I get that but they didn't have them otherwise they would have used them. Why create more bad publicity.
It can also create the fake impression that a lot of people are buying the game. It's commonly used tactic to create interest.

And it also allows for articles like this to be written. D2 was just buried under the lawsuit articles until now.
 

yukka

Posts: 993   +155
It can also create the fake impression that a lot of people are buying the game. It's commonly used tactic to create interest.

And it also allows for articles like this to be written. D2 was just buried under the lawsuit articles until now.
Seems a bit scooby doo but ok. “It was you all the time blizzard strategic publicity team”
 

Puiu

Posts: 4,962   +3,833
TechSpot Elite
Seems a bit scooby doo but ok. “It was you all the time blizzard strategic publicity team”
It really isn't. Blizzard isn't just your run of the mill gaming company, they live off games connected to servers. They shouldn't be lacking in scalable servers (not like WoW and OW are eating their hardware recourses these days anyway :D ).

There is a pretty high chance that they intentionally limited the logins or they had big servers bugs they passed off as a more positive "too many players" excuse.