Multyplayers servers down?Cant sign in game. [Solved]

[Chameleon_Silk]

also for what its worth they are working on it but still having problems, now the error is please validate your email first. one problem into another, but at least they must be doing something to try and fix it.

 

[SGMRock]

This started for me last night around 6pm or so EST, but I haven't really played any online yet so didn't seem to bother me much that I could tell so far.

 

[MaxVebaneta]

I think you really underestimate how much game development costs.

HBS staff levels peaked at around 40 people during the development of this game. They aren't some huge EA subsidiary with offices spread across timezones (Which is likely how big companies get 24 hour support, rather than paying for round-the-clock shifts.)

Every person they pay to sit babysitting servers is money taken away from actual content.

But if it doesn’t work they won’t have a community to make the content for.

 

[Chameleon_Silk]

also for what its worth they are working on it but still having problems, now the error is please validate your email first. one problem into another, but at least they must be doing something to try and fix it.

nevermind I had my email typo'd *FACEPALM*, they don't love us.

 

[MaxVebaneta]

Also the game was funded ahead of time. They weren’t in a hole while making this game and hoping that sales of the game would off set the cost they had the costs already paid for so any game day sales would be profit pure profit.

 

[Codezombie]

Also the game was funded ahead of time. They weren’t in a hole while making this game and hoping that sales of the game would off set the cost they had the costs already paid for so any game day sales would be profit pure profit.

It *really* was'nt funded ahead of time at all.
If you think you can make a game for three years with 40ish people for two million, then I have a bridge I'd also like to sell you, right after a quick game of poker.

 

[ItWasRhetorical]

But if it doesn’t work they won’t have a community to make the content for.

I don't think that many people play multiplayer, tbh.

Also the game was funded ahead of time. They weren’t in a hole while making this game and hoping that sales of the game would off set the cost they had the costs already paid for so any game day sales would be profit pure profit.

Uhh, what? Crowdfunding was a big help, but it definitely didn't pay for the game beforehand.

well maybe they should hire me I reported the bug like 15 hours ago... which would be what time in Seattle?

Just because it was reported does not mean they saw it. Battletech isn't the kind of game that you'd expect to develop critical, urgent bugs unexpectedly. Take this with a pinch of salt, I'm not a game developer - but if I was, on a game like this with a small team, I'd probably have a couple of hours in the morning for reviewing reported bugs, to give me the rest of the day to work on them and put them into the next patch.

 

[MaxVebaneta]

It *really* was'nt funded ahead of time at all.
If you think you can make a game for three years with 40ish people for two million, then I have a bridge I'd also like to sell you, right after a quick game of poker.

Then they needed to update their costs for the funding goals. People would have continued to fund it if it needed the funds. Also the game is by no means a triple a game that would require a budget that large. The models were already made from mwo so youu had very little to no content creation needed.

But this is besides the point that a games multiplayer ( although not the main focus) should not go down for over 12 hours with 9 hours of that time not having a response. And then the response that is given is just letting us know that there is a problem and that’s it, no eta and no follow up on the issue.

 

[Codezombie]

I'm not a game developer - but if I was, on a game like this with a small team, I'd probably have a couple of hours in the morning for reviewing reported bugs, to give me the rest of the day to work on them and put them into the next patch.

I *am* a game dev (for a reasonable sized UK game dev company, not HBS). It works like this. (After release)

I come in an grab a coffee, if I don't have any bugs on Jira I start work on the pre-production for the *next* product (be it a new title or DLC for the existing)!

Event! *A wild bug appears*

Most likely the community managers pick up the bug, either on the forums, or their in box. (If you are really lucky I'll see it myself if I dare brave the forums)
They compile this bug into the bug list and submit it to Jira.
Some poor producer then goes through the bug list, and starts assigning the bugs.
This takes a day or so.
Eventually I get a list of bugs assigned to my area and I start assigning them to either myself or my minions.
Once all that paperwork is done, I'll start squashing the bug, this alone might take either 10 minutes, to a couple of days.
That bug then goes onto the server, and at some point a build engineer makes a patch. Which has to be sumbmitted to QA for testing, then onwards to Sony/Microsoft for testing (consoles)

Eventually a few weeks down the road, the players finally get the fix.

They are annoyed it took two weeks, because "lazy developers"...

I see the Lazy Devs post, become sad, and go and get drunk.

 

[DJO Maverick]

Just because it was reported does not mean they saw it. Battletech isn't the kind of game that you'd expect to develop critical, urgent bugs unexpectedly. Take this with a pinch of salt, I'm not a game developer - but if I was, on a game like this with a small team, I'd probably have a couple of hours in the morning for reviewing reported bugs, to give me the rest of the day to work on them and put them into the next patch.

Honestly, standards are different the second you decide all multiplayer is going to have to be managed through a central server. If you want to throw it in and forget it, to leave players to sort it out, then you should allow individual players to host or set up dedicated hosts for friends to IP into.

If multiplayer is a defined feature and marketing bullet point, and clearly the game is relatively new, forcing players to use your servers comes with an obligation to maintain them.

That being said, I think the biggest failure here is less the outage itself, and more the tragic failure (or utter lack) of communication about it.

 

[GShock]

My usual luck... game just bought and installed... and can't login.
ETA on Comstar going up again?

 

[mjbroekman]

Also the game was funded ahead of time. They weren’t in a hole while making this game and hoping that sales of the game would off set the cost they had the costs already paid for so any game day sales would be profit pure profit.

Then they needed to update their costs for the funding goals. People would have continued to fund it if it needed the funds. Also the game is by no means a triple a game that would require a budget that large. The models were already made from mwo so youu had very little to no content creation needed.

But this is besides the point that a games multiplayer ( although not the main focus) should not go down for over 12 hours with 9 hours of that time not having a response. And then the response that is given is just letting us know that there is a problem and that’s it, no eta and no follow up on the issue.

I'm not sure how to break this to you, but your understanding of the funding model is flawed in unspeakable ways...

First, there's campaign period where a majority of the funding is gathered...for most Kickstarters this is the ONLY funding period and goals are pretty rigidly fixed because this is the amount of money it will take to get the project off the ground (i.e. the amount of money needed to even think about completing the project at a minimum)
This project was wildly successful in that it pulled in far more money than the devs thought they would need for the base game and so they had stretch goals to encourage more backing.

After the kickstarter campaign, more and more people wanted to fund it so it was moved to BackerKit to keep a flow of money for people to buy into the game. Again, this is not talking about profit yet.

And then there are all the hurdles and roadblocks and detours that happen throughout the development process... like a game engine update breaking the game... like problems with the networking code forcing a redesign of multiplayer... etc etc etc ... all of which costs $$$$

So no... game release day sales are not "pure profit". Hell, I doubt release MONTH sales are entirely profit especially given that there are still stretch goals that need to be delivered.

So, please... please stop with the "hire more people" or "this is unacceptable for a profitable game" nonsense.

 

[Chameleon_Silk]

If they want player retention they better not leave multiplayer dead for 2 weeks and the inability to create your profile for new players just joining the fray....

 

[Codezombie]

More worryingly, the only crowd funded game which appears to make enough each month to actually fund development, Star Citizen, is a basket case of a project.

I really don't see Crowdfunding as that viable a method for completely funding all but the smallest indie games.

 

[mjbroekman]

If they want player retention they better not leave multiplayer dead for 2 weeks and the inability to create your profile for new players just joining the fray....

Given the track record of HBS, I don't think you need to worry about that. The problem is less than 24 hours old. I would expect someone will post an update some time after 9am PDT but before the end of the day PDT. Chill.

 

[AlyssaFaden]

Then they needed to update their costs for the funding goals. People would have continued to fund it if it needed the funds. Also the game is by no means a triple a game that would require a budget that large. The models were already made from mwo so youu had very little to no content creation needed.

But this is besides the point that a games multiplayer ( although not the main focus) should not go down for over 12 hours with 9 hours of that time not having a response. And then the response that is given is just letting us know that there is a problem and that’s it, no eta and no follow up on the issue.

Wow.

Okay, there's so much wrongness here and so much self-entitlement, that I can't even begin to break it down, so instead some simple math.

40 people.

We pay developers over here around 100k, that would be a fair wage. But let's assume that the team averaged closer to 75k per annum.

Multiply by 40 people.

That's the costs of just paying people per year. Even if they were on stupidly low wages (50k) the budget PER YEAR far exceeds your current comprehension.

Then add employment taxes, building costs, operating expenses, and equipment. You know: business stuff.

 

[MaxVebaneta]

I'm not sure how to break this to you, but your understanding of the funding model is flawed in unspeakable ways...

First, there's campaign period where a majority of the funding is gathered...for most Kickstarters this is the ONLY funding period and goals are pretty rigidly fixed because this is the amount of money it will take to get the project off the ground (i.e. the amount of money needed to even think about completing the project at a minimum)
This project was wildly successful in that it pulled in far more money than the devs thought they would need for the base game and so they had stretch goals to encourage more backing.

After the kickstarter campaign, more and more people wanted to fund it so it was moved to BackerKit to keep a flow of money for people to buy into the game. Again, this is not talking about profit yet.

And then there are all the hurdles and roadblocks and detours that happen throughout the development process... like a game engine update breaking the game... like problems with the networking code forcing a redesign of multiplayer... etc etc etc ... all of which costs $$$$

So no... game release day sales are not "pure profit". Hell, I doubt release MONTH sales are entirely profit especially given that there are still stretch goals that need to be delivered.

So, please... please stop with the "hire more people" or "this is unacceptable for a profitable game" nonsense.

But is is unacceptable. Even for a game that is has not fully made a profit. Like someone posted above if one of the games points for sale is multiplayer then the multiilayer has to be maintained. And the lack of response from anyone for 9 hours and still no fix for 12 hours from the original post is unacceptable.

 

[OneTomboNation]

Got the same Bug.

Playing from Brooklyn.

 

[Chameleon_Silk]

Given the track record of HBS, I don't think you need to worry about that. The problem is less than 24 hours old. I would expect someone will post an update some time after 9am PDT but before the end of the day PDT. Chill.

I'm sure it will be fixed it's just a bummer... especially since I just beat the campaign on Saturday.

 

[MaxVebaneta]

Wow.

Okay, there's so much wrongness here and so much self-entitlement, that I can't even begin to break it down, so instead some simple math.

40 people.

We pay developers over here around 100k, that would be a fair wage. But let's assume that the team averaged closer to 75k per annum.

Multiply by 40 people.

That's the costs of just paying people per year. Even if they were on stupidly low wages (50k) the budget PER YEAR far exceeds your current comprehension.

Then add employment taxes, building costs, operating expenses, and equipment. You know: business stuff.

It’s a sense of entitlement that I buy a game notice an issue wait hours for it to be fixed or at least a reply about it get nothing and ask that it be fixed? Or at least have communication from them about it in a timely manner?