So when does SE plan to credit our accounts for the multiple ongoing service issues?

[winsock]

An operation with the scale of FFXIV can't just cut ties with their hosting service and ISP without giving them reasonable time to address an issue like DDoS attacks.

It amount of time it takes to solve a problem doesn't at all change the obligation/responsibility of SE to provide quality service. They aren't suddenly more responsible after X many days, they are continually responsible.

The difference in our stances appears to be the amount poor quality we are willing to let slide. If this were one of the many F2P MMOs, I wouldn't care, but when a company charges premium prices to play, the bar is raised.

[silverlunarfox]

It amount of time it takes to solve a problem doesn't at all change the obligation/responsibility of SE to provide quality service. They aren't suddenly more responsible after X many days, they are continually responsible.

The difference in our stances appears to be the amount poor quality we are willing to let slide. If this were one of the many F2P MMOs, I wouldn't care, but when a company charges premium prices to play, the bar is raised.

But they are providing quality service on their end(I.E servers still up and running). The DDoS are attacking ISP's. Unfortunately it includes the one the servers are on for FFXIV as well as other game servers. However I noticed they finally targeted JP so maybe theres a slight end to the NA issues. However its the holidays, it's going to get worse before it gets better....

[Baingoleth]

It amount of time it takes to solve a problem doesn't at all change the obligation/responsibility of SE to provide quality service. They aren't suddenly more responsible after X many days, they are continually responsible.

The difference in our stances appears to be the amount poor quality we are willing to let slide. If this were one of the many F2P MMOs, I wouldn't care, but when a company charges premium prices to play, the bar is raised.

Go ahead and try to get a refund. I don't care if you try or if you don't try. Like most people who are commenting here, I don't see the value in trying to get a few bucks back because SE chose to do business with an ISP who ended up under DDoS attack, even if that ISP is starting to look really incompetent at solving DDoS trouble. I fully expect SE to give NTT time to figure this out because of the hassle of moving to a different data centre and I'll continue to give SE grace accordingly. I'm only irritated with NTT at this point. When I was working with a national ISP here in Canada, I saw more than a few DDoS attacks and I never saw our security people take more than a week to find a permanent solution. As per my last post, I'm considering doing something more constructive by sending the NTT abuse email a traceroute every time my connection has trouble.

My issue with you, winsock, and with the others who share your sentiment, is that you are trying to get the forum users riled up against SE. Just go try and get your credit if you want. Trying to make SE look bad is mean and uncalled for. SE chose to go with NTT in good faith that the connection would be robust. SE's intention in moving to NTT datacentres was to improve the user experience and I am sure they made their decision after diligent research.

[Xerek]

Go ahead and try to get a refund. I don't care if you try or if you don't try. Like most people who are commenting here, I don't see the value in trying to get a few bucks back because SE chose to do business with an ISP who ended up under DDoS attack, even if that ISP is starting to look really incompetent at solving DDoS trouble. I fully expect SE to give NTT time to figure this out because of the hassle of moving to a different data centre and I'll continue to give SE grace accordingly. I'm only irritated with NTT at this point. When I was working with a national ISP here in Canada, I saw more than a few DDoS attacks and I never saw our security people take more than a week to find a permanent solution. As per my last post, I'm considering doing something more constructive by sending the NTT abuse email a traceroute every time my connection has trouble.

My issue with you, winsock, and with the others who share your sentiment, is that you are trying to get the forum users riled up against SE. Just go try and get your credit if you want. Trying to make SE look bad is mean and uncalled for. SE chose to go with NTT in good faith that the connection would be robust. SE's intention in moving to NTT datacentres was to improve the user experience and I am sure they made their decision after diligent research.

You're not going to get through to him. He's having interruptions and is attacking the easiest target. Your attempts to reason with him can be summed up with a reply I made on page 13...

Some people don't wanna listen. This thread is really just...

"My game time is inturrepted. I demand SE compensate us!"
"It's not really SE's fault. They're being attacked..."
"Don't care. Game time interrupted. I demand compensation."
"Yeah but, it's not the servers, if you look at these traces, you'll see..."
"DON'T CARE! GAME TIME INTERRUPTED! SE COMPENSATE ME!"
"SE's not the one responsible! Look at all the evidence proving it's not their fau..."
"DON'T CARE!!! SE COMPENSATE NOW!!!"
"*sigh*"

[Moonlite]

When I was working with a national ISP here in Canada, I saw more than a few DDoS attacks and I never saw our security people take more than a week to find a permanent solution. As per my last post, I'm considering doing something more constructive by sending the NTT abuse email a traceroute every time my connection has trouble.

Curious, question. So they have paid the ISP, is their priority traffic or infrastructure. If the route is being attacked did they prioritize some other service over SE or do they all get equal treatment? Is the ISP just a victim and by association SE or possible they were told to pay for X and they decided that the extra insurance/resources was a silly cost.

[ManuelBravo]

It amount of time it takes to solve a problem doesn't at all change the obligation/responsibility of SE to provide quality service. They aren't suddenly more responsible after X many days, they are continually responsible.

The difference in our stances appears to be the amount poor quality we are willing to let slide. If this were one of the many F2P MMOs, I wouldn't care, but when a company charges premium prices to play, the bar is raised.

Premium prices? Poor quality? time frame? wow talk about lack of common sense. Must be nice to have multiple plans, can you tell me what is the standard and premium plans options? or do you mean you volunteer to pay extra for retainers as an optional service and you are naming it premium? As for the poor quality...hmmm connection speeds vary so not sure what you consider quality. As for your F2P....really if it's such a big deal just quit and stick with a F2P game the? If your playing FFXIV understand that it is NOT a F2P and experience may vary. IF you really want your money soo badly do what most ignorant people do when they don't get result other means. Dispute the charge....after all what is the worst that can happen? You get your subscription back, SE cuts your service and you know that justice has been served as per your perception.

[Avatre]

Curious, question. So they have paid the ISP, is their priority traffic or infrastructure. If the route is being attacked did they prioritize some other service over SE or do they all get equal treatment? Is the ISP just a victim and by association SE or possible they were told to pay for X and they decided that the extra insurance/resources was a silly cost.

Let's say they have a major bank that they also do business with. Which would you prioritize? A major bank, or a gaming company? Hell, it's possible that a military base, government office, or something essential to the running of a country/protection of a country could be using that same ISP.

[Chronons]

I feel like the middle ground here is:

SE is not directly at fault for the connection issues cause by DDoS attacks on their ISP. SE has an obligation to provide a certain level of service to its consumers bc of our contractual agreement with them. However, they have a vague ToS clause in our contract to help cover their liabilities. Has the problem reached a point where the clause is no longer an excuse for non-compensation? Maybe for some, for others no. Those saying yes have every right to feel that way and voice their opinions, and aren't wrong (in the legal sense) unless a court upheld SEs ToS. However, common sense would tell you that the damages incurred by individuals as a result of the issues in no way necessitate the kind of legalistic approach that would be required for compensation. Further, it would be more appropriate for them to take action as opposed to yelling into the forum void if they actually feel so strongly about the issue.

TL;DR
If your mad, say what you want but tone it down. We are talking dollars in losses, if even that much.
If your chill, tell others to be be chill. Don't just tell them to shut up.

[Baingoleth]

Curious, question. So they have paid the ISP, is their priority traffic or infrastructure. If the route is being attacked did they prioritize some other service over SE or do they all get equal treatment? Is the ISP just a victim and by association SE or possible they were told to pay for X and they decided that the extra insurance/resources was a silly cost.

I'm not sure what you are asking with the first question. We know that SE's servers are in an NTT datacentre and that datacentre is on the NTT global network. From the traceroutes I've done, it would appear specific NTT routers are being DDoSed to the point where the routers are saturated with bogus packets so that nothing is getting through at all. I imagine any service that someone needs to access through those routers will be inaccessible during an attack. Are other services accessible through redundant NTT connections that failover when the attacks start? I can't tell you because the only time I have packets traversing NTT's network is when I am playing FFXIV. I'd hope that NTT is prioritizing all traffic equally but ISPs are generally not in favour of net-neutrality.

[Moonlite]

I'd hope that NTT is prioritizing all traffic equally but ISPs are generally not in favour of net-neutrality.

That is what I was trying to ask. I can't imagine that in this day and age that they have no back up routing plans/options. It would seem to think you wouldn't get attacked, would be like thinking you don't need insurance. When they negotiated is it a straight line and that is all that can be provided so in the future these attacks will always have an easy target. I thought US gave up on net-neutrality and the best service goes to the ones who pay?