Korea Sues Blizzard Over Diablo 3 Set-up
The government has launched an investigation into Blizzard Entertainment over allegations that the American computer gamemaker has refused to refund Koreans who purchased its latest real-time role-playing game Diablo 3.
The Fair Trade Commission (FTC) said the firm is suspected of having violated the country’s law on electronic commerce and commercial contracts. The FTC said Tuesday that it raided the firm’s Seoul office Monday and secured related documents and other evidence with which it will determine whether Blizzard broke the law.
The investigation comes only two weeks after the release of the game, which has sold more than 6.3 million copies worldwide.
Larger-than-expected traffic to the online game’s severs made it extremely difficult for its users to access the game, particularly on weekday nights and weekends, according to Blizzard Korea.
Some buyers of the game vented frustration over server shutdowns and asked for refunds, but the company refused to do so, citing sales contract terms, which the FTC says is disadvantageous to consumers.
Blizzard said it doubled the capacity of servers Friday and pledged to improve services further in order to prevent a recurrence of the problem.
Despite the move, major portals have already been receiving messages denouncing Blizzard’s poor service. Hundreds of users have filed formal complaints with the FTC, calling for an investigation by the regulator.
“We have received many complaints from Diablo 3 users,” said Kim Hyung-bae, a spokesman for the FTC. He admitted that an investigation into Blizzard is underway, but refused to elaborate.
Why is this happening? The gang over at Reason explains.
Diablo III is the latest (and the largest) representation of relatively new trend in computer gaming, requiring constant Internet connection and access to a company’s servers in order to play, even if the game does not have multiplayer components. In Diablo III, up to four players can run around slaying demons together and ignoring its tragicomically awful storyline, but it can also be played completely solo. Even alone, though, players must have a working internet connection at all times.
The connection requirement exists for several reasons, most of which are connected to fighting piracy and cheating. If you’re a non-gamer wondering why Blizzard would care if people cheat in the games they bought, the game has an online auction house that will eventually allow people to buy items in the game from each other for real-world money. In Diablo II (which did not have such an auction house and did not require constant Internet connection), the game’s “economy” suffered from hackers figuring out ways to duplicate items in the game and selling them to other players in a virtual black market. In Diablo III, parts of the game are on the players’ computers, but some assets are on Blizzard’s servers to make it much harder for hackers to engage in virtual counterfeiting and manipulating the market. The issue is complicated and controversial and no doubt it will be a focus of discussion with Hit and Run commenters below for anybody who wants to drill down deeper into the subject.
What has happened here is that Blizzard’s servers are currently unable to accommodate the number of people who want to play their game. So even those who have Internet access might not be able to play their copy of the game because of problems on Blizzard’s end. The complainants are demanding refunds because they can’t play their games when they want to, even though the games themselves are not broken, a complicated consumer issue that is bound to get more complex as games and information become less and less tied to personal pieces of equipment (like a PC).
Complicating matters further, Diablo III isn’t a subscription-based game like World of Warcraft, which has a monthly fee. Blizzard has credited World of Warcraft accounts in the past when unexpected server problems rendered the game unplayable for long lengths of time. Consumers pay for Diablo III entirely up front. There’s no mechanism for determining the value of being unable to play for two days in a month, for example.
During the course of my gameplay of Diablo III, I’ve suffered through two prolonged server outages. The first was on the day of game launch which showed the strain of what Blizzard — a French Company with its US arm once being called “Blizzard North” — had not anticipated for gamers.
The second was after the first patch to game was added on Wednesday. Blizzard told users it was having server issues trying to coordinate gamers across the globe to the new updates.
It ticks you off, especially since the majority of my game play has been solo, with maybe six hours total over the Memorial Day Weekend being co-op play. But on one level, I understand why Blizzard is trying to avoid hacks, piracy, and other shenanigans in its game (and the game’s black market economy which tends to exist outside of it).
Then again, I could be my friend with a dial-up connection. He’s told me he can’t play the game at all.