Sounds like error 37. I saw it a couple of times while others saw it more than the game itself.
1 Like
FilthieRich is online. Blog post is brewing.
But it would have been worse without it. That’s the point.
Link please. 
https://us.forums.blizzard.com/en/d3/g/trust_level_3?order=last_seen_at
FilthieRich Community Manager Jul 1, '20 1 day just now
Server/connection/congestion are hard to combat without having too many servers. It’s better to have issue than add/fix to resolve, than to have too many servers or be over prepared and you don’t get close to the amount of demand.
He is browsing thorough the forum.
He posted this:
Indeed. No amount of EA will help there. Especially since it just wont simulate the pressure the game will get at release.
These days having too many servers are likely not that much of an issue, as you can scale up and down relatively fast, unless you are owning the servers yourself (which I guess Blizzard are, but they are also big enough that they can likely switch servers around between their games).
Certainly better to have too many servers, and a smooth launch, than the opposite. It is just too hard to come back from a broken launch. Having gamebreaking issues is always the worst outcome.
1 Like
Every bug out of the way indirectly serves for better online customer experience. An online game full with bugs will create twice the stress on servers aka EA helps.
The months until now D2R is on EA without it being announced as an EA and you can see how many improvements were made due to the real player base interacting with the game. That’s something you can’t test in internal alpha/beta.
1 Like
Hence the solution is to test your game properly. Instead of releasing it intentionally bugged in EA.
You can’t do that without an EA. You need a large chunk of player base to test it properly.
The reason Blizzard aren’t doing EA is income related. They want more income on release, but worse player experience. At the same time they post their values on their website. Disgusting. If the player experience is your number one priority, do an EA.
Or just not skimping on your QA department + have a proper beta 
If you release a game early, it is guaranteed to be bugged on the other hand.
I’d like to see 200k people in such department. Something that will be easy achievable regarding D4 player base in EA.
No EA guarantees it too. But releasing D4 early at this point is out of the question. They are releasing it late and let’s hope with longer testing.
1 QA tester is worth thousands of normal players Except for stress testing of course = open beta.
I dunno how many is worth, but they need more. A lot more.
Good to know that every modern game release with early access quality then.
It doesn’t matter. Servers will crap itself from the stress of first day release regardless, because people won’t spend $60 for an incomplete game when it’s full of bugs as it opens for early access.
1 Like
That will be way worse without an EA. First day release is like a highway with control points - there’s always waiting there. The problem is when the waiting is way bigger due to factors that haven’t been taken care of. And that will be the case without an EA.
Any company that aims top user experience as its priority has to make an EA. There isn’t a downside to it for the user. The user always gets a better product due to EA.
Maybe early next week.
So are first day profits from mass sales. You don’t get it or never will. Early access will hurt first day profits, as many players are not blind buyers as you are.
With massive interest to the franchise, server performance wise first day out of early access will be as bad as the first time it goes early access. Diablo 4 or any other MMO/ARPG will have supporting data centers for first day to handle excess player traffic, and that’s costly for the company already. When some players will await to buy it at full release, developers never can estimate an interest for smooth performance. You’re suggesting company to rent extra data centers for collecting and saving player profiles when it’s out of early access too.
After company spared large budgets to the advertisement campaigns, first day sales supposed to bring massive amount of profits and give back to the investors. Declaring that you’re in early access, means game isn’t promising any kind of game integrity yet either. In that case some players will await full release instead of bucking up $60 for an incomplete game lacking content.
Early access means exclusive cosmetic rewards and bonuses for the early buyers, but that development time spent on making gimmicky cosmetics could be spent into making the game more rigid or add real content and solidifying systems.
You’re speaking of separating early access and first release; that would allow this cumulative potential interest to cease and dissolve over time. Longer the game is in early access, the interest will cease over years. Title will be out of its peak popularity when it’s out of early access which is a harder process than the initial release. That won’t make the investors happy at all. Blizzard is a slow working company, so none of their titles worths taking such risk.
There aren’t many big companies that do EA anyways since they have other revenue generating sources. EA has always been to fundraise not to get a better game through testing. A very small amount of players are really interested is testing and reporting actual issues. A beta testing period is more effective than a lengthy EA.
Also this guy wants a QA staff of 200K. Dude has lost his mind. Probably side effects of time travel.
2 Likes
Any player not wanting EA is stupid. EA serves for a better game.
Yes. They need twice more in Blizzard to put a semi-working game for launch.