The login issues and you: Why most posts here are uninformed and pointless

[Zangerfain]

The OP's post while well thought out and written also correct in my opinion has only done one thing... Added another thread in which to debate about the issue in.

[Zack85]

Lots of good information here and plenty of informed opinions. Although I can't verify half that mess I can say on general principal I agree with most of it. Which ever side of the fence your on you have to see that this sort of discussion is healthy and good for the market. Will it enact change on a grand scale in the corporate level? Probably not, but it does educate consumers and in some cases force consumers to educate themselves. Education is key, and when conveyed professionally and intelligently this sort of dialogue helps people.

[Squ7]

/Respect

A well written post. This 'message' was exactly what we needed. Yes, I had my share of frustrations but I've cooled down since.
I guess that, in a couple of weeks/months, we've all forgotten about this login issue and will already be discussing more pressing matters.

[Goromaia]

[Matty86]

Gw2 didn't have this issue, not even close, GW2 had some sever crash the first 2 days, fixed in.... 20/30 minutes? Then you could play for hours whitout any issues. And GW2 had (and still have) 2x the concurrent user online.
Diablo III sold 10x what this game will ever sold, still it wasn't unplayble for 10 days... yes Diablo III release was bad, 1 of the worst release ever, but NOT as bad as FFXIV ARR.

[ZombieLover84]

Gw2 didn't have this issue, not even close, GW2 had some sever crash the first 2 days, fixed in.... 20/30 minutes? Then you could play for hours whitout any issues. And GW2 had (and still have) 2x the concurrent user online.
Diablo III sold 10x what this game will ever sold, still it wasn't unplayble for 10 days... yes Diablo III release was bad, 1 of the worst release ever, but NOT as bad as FFXIV ARR.

Yes GW2 did have this issue. It crashed the first two days and they stopped digital sales, just like FF 14 has. And it wasn't fixed in 20-30 minutes. They fixed the login issues rather quickly, but at the sacrifice of taking The trade post down for over a week.

http://www.inquisitr.com/312183/guil...tivity-issues/

And guess what, it happened about 4 hours after headstart....just like FF 14.

You just said Diablo 3 was unplayable for ten days...but said this game was worse....when it's only 7 days old.....How is your math that bad.

[Matty86]

Yes GW2 did have this issue. It crashed the first two days and they stopped digital sales, just like FF 14 has. And it wasn't fixed in 20-30 minutes. They fixed the login issues rather quickly, but at the sacrifice of taking The trade post down for over a week.

http://www.inquisitr.com/312183/guil...tivity-issues/

And guess what, it happened about 4 hours after headstart....just like FF 14.

You just said Diablo 3 was unplayable for ten days...but said this game was worse....when it's only 7 days old.....How is your math that bad.

This game is out from 10 days 24/08, 04/09.
I said: "Diablo III sold 10x what this game will ever sold, still it wasn't unplayble for 10 days" Diablo III had problems for days/a week, but not this long, also I was there at the release of GW2 and Diablo, I don't need an article, GW2 release was flawless, you could log in any time, any day and play, some server crash happened, but you could log back in minutes.
Again, GW2 have 2x the concurrent users of FF.
This is not how MMO releases are, this is the worst release I ever seen.

[VeriferVenti]

Yes GW2 did have this issue. It crashed the first two days and they stopped digital sales, just like FF 14 has. And it wasn't fixed in 20-30 minutes. They fixed the login issues rather quickly, but at the sacrifice of taking The trade post down for over a week.

http://www.inquisitr.com/312183/guil...tivity-issues/

And guess what, it happened about 4 hours after headstart....just like FF 14.

You just said Diablo 3 was unplayable for ten days...but said this game was worse....when it's only 7 days old.....How is your math that bad.

Your original post was very nice, and meant to assuage anger, but your responses since have been... troubling. Each post seems slightly more biased, using information that is misrepresented to put SE in the best light as possible. I would just like to clarify some of the points that have been made.

With regard to the launch of GW2, the developers at ArenaNET managed to restore service by disabling the trading post, and in doing so, the majority of the people who purchased the game, a game which did not require a monthly subscription, were able to continue to play. And when unexpected numbers of people began to log on, these players were pushed into overflow servers, allowing them and the players already logged in to continue to enjoy the game. There were errors, but they were handled in such a way as to impact players as little as possible. All in all, they worked hard to mitigate the errors that arose, and they did so while maintaining service for the majority of their players.

This is the first launch of this decade where it has taken over a week for service to be restored after diagnosing the problem. At least, that has been my experience, but I have not played every MMO that has launched since 2010.

And to the quote that you are referencing, Matty86 was saying that Diablo III was not unplayable for 10 days, a double negative to emphasize that FFXIV has been unplayable for 10 days since Early Access, which is when, according to your earliest posts, they diagnosed the problem. His math is just fine.

However that leads to another misrepresentation of facts. It was not solely the Duty Finder which failed during Open Beta, but an inability of the servers to handle the number of players attempting to connect to instances at the same time. This is the bug that drove SE to take down the servers, and this is the bug that reappeared in Early Access.

[Ghemyni]

Bravo! I like your attitude.

[Derceto]

Beta 4 was a train wreck in motion. One thing after another went wrong. That alone, should have been reason enough to delay this game a week or two and have it done properly. Namely, because of how important it is to not fail again.

Personally, I would have been much happier had it been delayed 2 weeks, and launched properly. What's done is done however. I was never very angry or vocal myself, as I've been through a few harsh game launches. However, I can't blame those who were. The arguments are most certainly valid, that the more we tolerate these failures, the more acceptable they become.

I just get the impression that SE launched the "bare essentials" in place, when good practice is to over shoot expectations to be well prepared for potentially high adoption. When SE themselves claim along the lines of "Another mistake like FF XIV could be the end of SE", I just expected this to be taken "far" more delicately and with "far" more care and preparation. All in all, my fingers are crossed for a smooth movement forward with this maintenance. I truly hope everyone can play without worry after this.