#0 - July 30, 2009, 6:04 p.m.
Instances full come 3.2?
#5 - July 30, 2009, 6:32 p.m.
#17 - July 30, 2009, 7:39 p.m.
Q u o t e:
This is blizzard, even when they do "fix" it there will be a ton of problems causing downtime. And they tell people that this has been going on since BC (or something like that). You'd think by now they'd have fixed it. I'm beginning to think they just don't care.
Normally I wouldn't reply to something like this, but I wanted to point out that a lot of time and effort has been spent on this issue already and we are continuing to focus on it. If we didn't care, I can guarantee things would be much worse.
Q u o t e:
I'm glad you guys are working on it and I know hindsight is 20/20, but I have to ask again, why is it that no one at Blizzard saw this coming? This seems like a problem that should have been avoidable.
We have known about this for awhile, that is why we have been pointing out that the solution(s) are not as simple as buying a new stick of RAM and being done with it overnight. It took a lot of investigating and planning before we could physically do something and now that we have plans, they still aren't something that we can do very quickly and easily as we want to try and make sure it is done right.
#45 - July 30, 2009, 8:52 p.m.
Q u o t e:
It just seems to me that someone at Blizzard must have known this would happen before it actually happened to players. I wonder how long this has been a known issue? Since the beginning?
The instances being capped isn't something that is surprising. We intentionally implemented this cap because after a certain point when too many instances were active they would all run into various issues like lag. As much as this is an issue we want to solve, we feel it is a better situation to have a large number of players enjoying stable instances instead of nobody able to play anything. We aren't happy with the fact that having these stable instances includes preventing others from getting into instances, but that is why we are working very hard on a more long term solution.
#78 - July 30, 2009, 11:10 p.m.
Q u o t e:
While I appreciate your response to the issue, what you basically just said is that when 3.2 comes out the game will likely become more unplayable (as far as dungeons are concerned) than it is now. I feel like this should be on the top of your developers priority list, not something that you will get around to and is being worked on.
My guess is simply based on the idea that when major content patches launch, you tend to see people play more than they were the couple weeks before. The point is mainly that patch 3.2 won't resolve the issue as the fixes that are being worked on are more on the hardware side.
Currently we are trying to find ways to minimize or (hopefully) completely get rid of the issue. Not everybody runs into this capacity issue, but we understand the frustration for those who do encounter it.
#84 - July 31, 2009, 12:01 a.m.
Q u o t e:
I think some of the less understanding players might benefit from more detailed explanations of what's being done to resolve issues such as this one. Something along the lines of "We're buying X new servers at a cost of over $Y, and we're adding to our 2,700 employees who also happen to like drawing a salary."
Many players assume $10 million per month (or whatever it is) is essentially infinite, and that infinite money solves all problems. While this obviously isn't true, I think some people just like seeing concrete numbers.
Numbers like this are things that would just get used against us. For example: "Well you said you purchased X why haven't you fixed everything yet?!" And then it would get brought up again anytime we provided an update without numbers like this. In the end, this won't be happening.
When we have updates on what has happened we will be providing them, but they won't be numbers like this, they will be focused directly on the solution that is happening.