+- The Lurker Lounge Forums (https://www.lurkerlounge.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Lurker Games (https://www.lurkerlounge.com/forums/forum-6.html)
+--- Forum: World of Warcraft (https://www.lurkerlounge.com/forums/forum-16.html)
+--- Thread: How true, how true... (/thread-4195.html)
Pages:
1
2
How true, how true... - Lissa - 06-22-2006
Penny Arcade on the Blizzard Downloader
How true, how true... - Quark - 06-22-2006
Only I found it to be completely not true at all. I experienced no problems while the background downloader was running, and I patched in 10 minutes on patch day in prime time.
How true, how true... - Legedi - 06-22-2006
I think the blizzard downloader has worked once for me. I've opened all the ports they say to. I think it must be something with my router now. But the comic is right. I pay $15 a month. You'd think they get a system that works for everyone.
How true, how true... - Lissa - 06-22-2006
Quote:Only I found it to be completely not true at all. I experienced no problems while the background downloader was running, and I patched in 10 minutes on patch day in prime time.
And you are one of the lucky few then Quark. Just about everyone here had troubles with it and there are posts all over the Blizzard boards about it. Sorry Quark, but you're in the minority on this one... ;)
How true, how true... - Quark - 06-22-2006
Quote:And you are one of the lucky few then Quark. Just about everyone here had troubles with it and there are posts all over the Blizzard boards about it. Sorry Quark, but you're in the minority on this one... ;)
I can't believe you bought into that. You should know that the people upset are those most likely to talk about something. I spoke with at least 3 other people on patch day who had similar situations to mine ... started, went to 83% for a bit, got some connection info, then finished quickly.
Yes, it has some problems. No, it's not nearly on the level that some people make it out to be. Remember when the downloader first start and people went nuts? Everyone who disabled it still kept lagging -> it was our server sucking, not the downloader. 1.11 was the smoothest patch day I ever had. That's not coincidental.
How true, how true... - Pesmerga - 06-22-2006
Quote:I can't believe you bought into that. You should know that the people upset are those most likely to talk about something. I spoke with at least 3 other people on patch day who had similar situations to mine ... started, went to 83% for a bit, got some connection info, then finished quickly.
Yes, it has some problems. No, it's not nearly on the level that some people make it out to be. Remember when the downloader first start and people went nuts? Everyone who disabled it still kept lagging -> it was our server sucking, not the downloader. 1.11 was the smoothest patch day I ever had. That's not coincidental.
Mine was damn smooth as well.:D
How true, how true... - Lissa - 06-22-2006
Quote:I can't believe you bought into that. You should know that the people upset are those most likely to talk about something. I spoke with at least 3 other people on patch day who had similar situations to mine ... started, went to 83% for a bit, got some connection info, then finished quickly.
Yes, it has some problems. No, it's not nearly on the level that some people make it out to be. Remember when the downloader first start and people went nuts? Everyone who disabled it still kept lagging -> it was our server sucking, not the downloader. 1.11 was the smoothest patch day I ever had. That's not coincidental.
Yet is wasn't the smoothest for the vast majority of Blizzard users Quark. Between 1.10 and 1.11, they changed something in the downloader. A lot of people started getting "you are behind a firewall" messages that they weren't getting prior to 1.11 (and this was occuring with the background downloader as well).
While the background downloader wasn't causing the lag issues, something did change in it that made patching to 1.11 the most horrible experience of patching to date (and I've seen all their patch methods from Beta phase 3 on).
And the fact that Penny Arcade nailed Blizzard with the last comment, "yeah, we don't pay a dime," is the real truth in that comic. All other MMORPGs out there do a single massive server download, usually hosted by the server the person is playing on so as to spread out the traffic and reduce general latency for all users. Blizzard is the only MMORPG runner that uses a busted version of BitTorrent to download the patches. With the other MMORPGs I've played, Blizzard wins in the game play department, but in the patching department, they come in dead last.
How true, how true... - MongoJerry - 06-22-2006
I have to agree with Lissa here. This patch was really wierd. I liked the idea of pre-downloading most of the patch ahead of time, but when it came to patch day, the patcher wouldn't work for me. I finally did what I've done for most of the previous patches -- downloaded it off a third party site. Actually, it took downloading off of two different sites, because the first site was missing one of the patch files.
How true, how true... - Quark - 06-22-2006
Quote:Yet is wasn't the smoothest for the vast majority of Blizzard users Quark.You seem to be my sticking point is in believing anyone had difficulties. It's not. It's this "vast majority" your spouting and yet have completely and utterly failed to show. I saw about the same amount of people complain about the patch as mentioned how easy it was. Many, many more people said nothing at all. That's your "vast majority"?
Quote:While the background downloader wasn't causing the lag issues, something did change in it that made patching to 1.11 the most horrible experience of patching to date (and I've seen all their patch methods from Beta phase 3 on).Qualifier missing: "for you". You're saying my experience that is was the best patch simply doesn't exist? I must be imagining it.
Quote:And the fact that Penny Arcade nailed Blizzard with the last comment, "It doesn't cost us a dime," is the real truth in that comic.Of course, significantly cheaper is not equal to "doesn't cost a dime". It's an exaggeration to say Blizzard uses no bandwidth of their own to push patches. BitTorrent is notoriously awful without enough seeders, and people are pretty quick about making sure they don't become a seeder by closing their connection once their download is complete. The last 10% or so in particular is always a sticking point.
Quote:All other MMORPGs out there do a single massive server download, usually hosted by the server the person is playing on so as to spread out the traffic and reduce general latency for all users. Blizzard is the only MMORPG runner that uses a busted version of BitTorrent to download the patches. With the other MMORPGs I've played, Blizzard wins in the game play department, but in the patching department, they come in dead last.
Here's one area where I partially agree with you. But isn't Stormrage in bad enough shape without people leeching bandwidth to download a patch? Besides the fact that what works for many other MMORPGs may be complete failures for WoW. Having bandwidth available that you only utilize at most once a month is much easier for a company to stomach when it's 1/10th the bandwidth required.
How true, how true... - Sword_of_Doom - 06-22-2006
Patch was smooth for me. It did stop at 83% but a couple of minutes later moved and downloaded fairly fast. I have never had any problems downloading any of their patches. I would say the majority of my guild experiences no problems downloading the patch while some have to use 3rd party sites.
How true, how true... - Monkey - 06-22-2006
Separate from discussions of whether the downloader is good or bad, I'd just like to say that I always appreciate Penny-Arcade nailing Blizzard as they see fit. Sure, that's the comic's method vis-a-vis the entire game industry, but as a recovering WoWcoholic, jabs at Blizzard hold a greater relevence to my life.
I used to consider the WoW forums a serious opportunity to discuss my concerns with Blizzard representatives, a place to make my suggestions and criticisms heard. I'd write carefully thought-out and balanced comments on features of the game (Like the Honor System) that I saw as potentially flawed. Then, my comments or new threads would sink beneath an ocean of "ZOMG BLU ENERF TEH ROUGES". Not many iterations later, I gave up.
In spite of all the fluid communication in the internet, there are still few ways for reasonable commentary from an average player to make it back to Blizzard. These days, I just wait for PA to lay out stuff like: WoW Patch Notes 1.9 or Treachery Manifest, and am grateful when it lines up with me.
How true, how true... - Lissa - 06-22-2006
Quote:You seem to be my sticking point is in believing anyone had difficulties. It's not. It's this "vast majority" your spouting and yet have completely and utterly failed to show. I saw about the same amount of people complain about the patch as mentioned how easy it was. Many, many more people said nothing at all. That's your "vast majority"?
Were you even paying attention to any of the boards at all on Tuesday or Yesterday Quark? There were tons of people mentioning issues with the downloader or outright just going to other sites to get the download. Look at the thread on this board, look at the thread in the General BS board at CA, then look at the crap that is all over the Blizzard boards. Sounds to me like a lot more people had trouble with the downloader than people that didn't. (So far, only you and Mio have spoken up about not having issues and you and three people that you talked to didn't have any, yet over half the Lurkers on SR had issues downloading the patch Quark, that's 50% atleast right there and I will bet that is low for the number of people with issues downloading this patch.) Just because you aren't looking for it, doesn't mean it wasn't a more of a mess than you think.
Quote:Qualifier missing: "for you". You're saying my experience that is was the best patch simply doesn't exist? I must be imagining it.
When a majority of people are having issue (atleast 50% of the SR Lurker population did), that tells me that it wasn't the best patch at all. A lot of people have experienced bad downloads before, but when the number of people having issues increases, you cannot say that this is the best patch experience by far.
Quote:Of course, significantly cheaper is not equal to "doesn't cost a dime". It's an exaggeration to say Blizzard uses no bandwidth of their own to push patches.
Quark, if the other method that other MMORPGs used is so bleeding expensive, why don't they do what Blizzard does when it comes to downloading patches? And fact is, the number of concurrent players on SR at Peak isn't that much different than the number of concurrent players on other MMORPGs out there during peak. So why is it that Blizzard goes with this when they have nearly $50 Million coming in each month (not everyone is pay month to month, some are paying for 6 months at a time) chooses to use this downloader when other MMORPGs out there choose not to and probably are paying similar bandwidth prices (in truth, I bet Blizzard is getting a deal because they are using so much bandwidth)? If it was such a bandwidth issue price, don't you think the other MMORPGs would have jumped on the Blizzard bandwagon? So why haven't they Quark, because if it was revenue saving, I would bet they would do it in a heart beat.
Quote:BitTorrent is notoriously awful without enough seeders, and people are pretty quick about making sure they don't become a seeder by closing their connection once their download is complete. The last 10% or so in particular is always a sticking point.
Quark, were your paying attention to what I said? Something changed in the downloader. Prior to 1.11, a number of people were not getting the message, "you are behind a firewall," from the downloader, but as soon as the background downloader went in, this started occuring. I don't know about what piece of hardware you use for your internet connection, but I use a Cisco 678 which has some built in features to help protect the Cisco from intrusion attacks from outside sources. I had the Cisco 678 setup to download without this firewall issue before 1.10, but now with 1.11, Blizzard changed something and the 678 isn't getting through like it use to (and there are a lot of people having this issue Quark, I'm not the only one). Blizzard changed around something in the downloader, probably the ports it uses, but refuses on their technical support pages to update those changes (I've had the ports openned that they say to have openned for months now and had little to no issue with the downloader, now I get "you're behind a firewall".) Something changed Quark. You may not have seen it, but other are.
Quote:Here's one area where I partially agree with you. But isn't Stormrage in bad enough shape without people leeching bandwidth to download a patch? Besides the fact that what works for many other MMORPGs may be complete failures for WoW. Having bandwidth available that you only utilize at most once a month is much easier for a company to stomach when it's 1/10th the bandwidth required.
If that were true Quark, why do other companies continue with the method I outlined while Blizzard refuses? Blizzard has upwards of $50 Million coming in a month on WoW, they probably have such a large amount of Bandwidth need that they get a break on the cost (the more Bandwidth you buy, the less per MBit you spend). These other companies have less bandwidth yet, they go with the method of a direct download while Blizzard that has more bandwidth and pays less per MBit than the competition refuses to take on that model. Blizzard is not hurting for cash by a long shot Quark (most other MMORPGs cannot feasibly put up a test realm each month for the general user populace to try, let alone 2 to 3 like Blizzard does). The reason Blizzard is king in regards to MMORPGs, as I said in my previous post, is game play, they have the best game play of anyone on the block, but they have by far the worst patching scheme of any MMORPG (and it's the one complaint you hear over and over about Blizzard from Game Reviewers when they look at MMORPGs).
How true, how true... - Pesmerga - 06-22-2006
One more thing, then I'm out of this post:
When something goes wrong, some people will complain.
When something doesn't, most people won't generally speak up.
So even if the forums were deluged with tons of people complaining, you can hardly call that a majority because you don't know how many people are NOT complaining or have no complaint. There also exists no evidence that a majority of people had an easy time.
Just because our little subsection of people had issues (also not a majority of us) doesn't mean there was a problem at large either.
Generalizations piss me off.
How true, how true... - Lissa - 06-22-2006
Quote:One more thing, then I'm out of this post:
When something goes wrong, some people will complain.
When something doesn't, most people won't generally speak up.
So even if the forums were deluged with tons of people complaining, you can hardly call that a majority because you don't know how many people are NOT complaining or have no complaint. There also exists no evidence that a majority of people had an easy time.
Just because our little subsection of people had issues (also not a majority of us) doesn't mean there was a problem at large either.
Generalizations piss me off.
Mio, while you're right about people not speaking up, but that extends to both complaints and when people are satisfied. Over the weeks leading up to 1.11, there were a fair number of Avarice folks reporting that they were seeing "you are behind a firewall" when they had never seen that before. There is already a given issue that a number of people had, but this was new and increased the number of people that are having issue with the downloader.
When getting a feel for what a populous may be afflicted by the interviewers never grab the whole that is effected, they look at a significant percentage of the group and go from there. Take a look at how Polling is done some times. You'll notice that when something is Polled, they take a representative percentage and go from there. The same theory is used here.
How true, how true... - castille - 06-22-2006
I, for one, welcome our new BitTorrent overlords.
Seriously, I didn't have an issue. So, there's 4 people now, because you can lump Kross in with me on this one.
And, no, people almost always complain more than praise. Mostly because they have the spare time when they're complaining.
Also, this has got to be one of the smoothest patches I've ever been involved with simply from a addons perspective. Wow. Not a single one of my addons really is causing me headaches other than AllInOne Inventory.
BTW, if anyone has an addon similiar (I hate having to have seperate bags), let me know. I tire of having to force something into my backpack or doing a /console reloadui to see what's in it.
How true, how true... - MongoJerry - 06-22-2006
Quote:Also, this has got to be one of the smoothest patches I've ever been involved with simply from a addons perspective. Wow. Not a single one of my addons really is causing me headaches other than AllInOne Inventory.
I'll agree with you there, and compared to other patches, the servers have been fairly stable with the patch. We ended up calling off a raid about half-way through because of server restarts on the first evening, but that meant that we still got to play for a couple hours largely lag and instability free. The second night ran completely smoothly.
How true, how true... - oldmandennis - 06-22-2006
2c - the new downloader didn't work great for me or the person down the hall. It was stuck at 83% for an unreasonable amount of time. I was smart enough to start it while eating breakfast, it hadn't budged when I left for work. My friend wasn't so thoughtful, and it cost him the ability to play that night.
How true, how true... - Artega - 06-22-2006
Quote:Only I found it to be completely not true at all. I experienced no problems while the background downloader was running, and I patched in 10 minutes on patch day in prime time.
22 minutes, counting patching and finding and installing updated versions of CTMod and the few other mods I use, by getting it from FilePlanet; it really is worth the $20/year:)
How true, how true... - Pesmerga - 06-22-2006
Quote:When getting a feel for what a populous may be afflicted by the interviewers never grab the whole that is effected, they look at a significant percentage of the group and go from there. Take a look at how Polling is done some times. You'll notice that when something is Polled, they take a representative percentage and go from there. The same theory is used here.
It is never a significant percentage of the group though. It's nigh impossible to get the kind of numbers to even get a semi-accurate account of what's going on. This is why polling sucks.
I mean, hell, polling is what screwed the 2000 election up so badly. That and chads, but I digress.
This really is my last post for this thread.:P I'm going home now.
How true, how true... - TheWesson - 06-22-2006
Quote:One more thing, then I'm out of this post:
When something goes wrong, some people will complain.
When something doesn't, most people won't generally speak up.
So even if the forums were deluged with tons of people complaining, you can hardly call that a majority because you don't know how many people are NOT complaining or have no complaint. There also exists no evidence that a majority of people had an easy time.
Just because our little subsection of people had issues (also not a majority of us) doesn't mean there was a problem at large either.
Generalizations piss me off.
Sure, generalizations irk me too.
However, I have no trouble believing that a large percentage of people have trouble with the downloader.
I am pretty computer-literate, writing software for a living. The downloader is very slow for me; I get about 30K/sec at most, intermittently (I can d/l 100K/sec steadily from other sites). It claims I am behind a firewall, despite the fact that I have cleared out all the mentioned ports a few times (and indeed the Blizzard torrent app is uploading to other people, somewhat faster than I am able to download.)
Does it slow itself down because it thinks I am being 'selfish' (behind a firewall) and keeping my bandwidth to myself??
It's true you mostly hear from the complainers. On the other hand, most people who have a bad experience don't complain about it; they just struggle with it.
My most recent download experience was the worst. It seemed slower than usual. I left it running all day while I was at work but my wife shut off my comp (didn't tell her I was dng). Finished the download, but something got damaged, because the patcher failed halfway through. The Blizzard repair utility reported nothing wrong. Downloading the patch again didn't help. I eventually got things working by downloading the full (1.3 -> 1.11) patch executable.
Anyhow, I don't think Blizzard's downloader really works, and I think they should provide something better.
If something basically fails for even 15% of your customers, and they depend on mirror sites to get YOUR patch, then I think your software has failed. If your software works by taking 8 hrs to download your patch, I still think you have failed. If your software needs Joe User to adjust obscure router settings, then you have failed.