Diablo III Rage is Fleeting, Review Scores are Forever

Michael Futter writes: When I woke up this morning and worked through my morning news ritual, I was unsurprised by the number of Diablo III stories that were flooding my feed. Speed runs, game breaking bugs (yikes!) and the “best” way to maximize different classes. Heck, there was even something really cool on Kotaku about the one piece of Diablo gaming history that Blizzard didn’t have a hand in.

The story is too old to be commented.
ardivt3657d ago (Edited 3657d ago )

to me those rage "gamers" destroy modern gaming culture. look at mass effect 3, every new cod title, bf3 or now this. everybody has to polarize and normal ratings don't seem to be possible anymore. I hate what some haters do to our hobby!
people should use their time to play the games, not to rant on the internet.

brish3657d ago

If gamers could play Diablo III they would be. The reason they are pissed off is they can't play the game!

A simple way that Blizzard could have avoided this issue is ensured that their game could be played on release.

PaladinXII3657d ago

There eis a completely logical reason why server capacity isn't geared toward launch. I cover that in my article.

brish3657d ago (Edited 3657d ago )


I'm a software developer.

I understand that on release day the capacity for users will be higher than it will ever be at any point afterwards.

I also understand that users have every right to expect a product that works.

Spikes in server capacity has been solved by companies providing support for a large number of servers that are rented for a limited time.

If you need a cluster that contains 1000 extra computers to handle the load on release day you can rent them from Amazon here:

There are many companies that provide similar services.

Blizzard choose to force log ins for a game that could have had an offline way to play the game.

Blizzard could have rented a server cluster on release day so people could play the game they purchased but they didn't.

The reason that people are having problems is a direct result of Blizzards actions.

PaladinXII3657d ago

Fair points, Brish. I appreciate the insight

browland13657d ago

I see this practice on many sites and it's annoying as hell, especially since it artificially depletes the overall score and it makes finding useful reviews a frustrating experience. It's also quite juvenile.

chrisyoung04223657d ago


Your piece is 100% on the mark. Review bombing screws all the wrong people.

metsgaming3657d ago (Edited 3657d ago )

Really low scores are for games that are just plain broken and if these people cant even play the game then a zero is justified imo. Luckily the problem can be fixed but it leaves a real bad taste in people mouths that such a thing can happen. If you look this isnt the only thing they are complaining about with the game either in that case a zero is uncalled for and just based off of emotion, sure it may not be what you want but it isnt nearly as low at the score they give. Then you have the other side of the coin of people giving 10's when they know its not a 10 or do it only to negate the 0's. If people actually gave a true score the number that it would be would be vastly different in some cases better in some worse. The score isnt important its why, that what people should be looking at.

BlackjackCF3657d ago

Seriously... Diablo 3 is going to be down for a week or so. It's just what happens. There was no way for Blizzard to have stress tested to prepare for a load like this.

The game is amazing. I'm willing to be patient while the good folks sort it out. And just after a day of hiccups, it happens.

Honestly though, didn't people have the same issues with CoD?

PaladinXII3657d ago

Yup. Call of Duty Elite was a crapfest early on. It's to be expected, though. There is no such thing as a smooth online rollout for the exact reasons I detailed in the piece.