"1) We didn't make up the word "fast patch." It's a term used by software developers in general, and we've been using it since long before Diablo III released (most often for World of Warcraft). I don't imagine it's a popular term, though.
2) The patch actually wasn't the main reason for the downtime. We had scheduled maintenance for all Blizzard games in North America this morning.
3) I provided a bit more info about the differences between a normal patch and a fast patch here: http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/7379007846?page=3#52
Hope that helps clears some things up!"
Since the thread was locked (not sure why), making this in post in response. Apparently we as a player base are wrong to assume that actual work is being done for diablo. Players (those of us still loyal to the game) are chomping at the bit for new content (or the game to finally leave beta stage). It's insulting to deal with community managers (those who are in the end supposed to represent the player base to the development team and likewise) who rely on jargon and technicalities to avoid having to admit that little to no work is being done and the game is in a very unsatisfactory state. Botting is out of control, none are being banned. Reflect Damage is a problem for most. Errors so numerous I don't even know where to begin with. Rubberbanding still a major issue, AH still incomplete (SOJ search issues and so on). Crafting is trite, I could go on but I would be beating a dead horse. My only point is that there is work to be done, a lot. So is wrong to expect that even just one thing gets fixed? Just tell me that I am wrong for expecting any show of work or progress, I mean it's touted on your end about "all the hard work" but where are the results? Just tell me it's absurd to expect these things and I can drop the issue, but don't avoid the issue and dance around the truth it's deplorable.
Every voice matters...Source
In this day and age, it’s not unusual for a community to expect that a game will have some form of continued development after its release, even if it’s a game like Diablo III (which doesn’t really have the same content model as something like World of Warcraft, for example).
A lot of you have been concerned about the lack of game-changing adjustments in patch 1.0.6 and 1.0.6a, and we can certainly sympathize since they’re not the kind of patches you’ve been used to seeing for Diablo III. Smaller patches like those aren’t unusual for Blizzard games, though, and are often needed to address important issues quickly (issues that can’t be resolved with a hotfix or really wait for a larger content patch that might be scheduled for a later date). Similarly, sometimes patches will contain a lot of behind-the-scenes changes that aren’t visible to players, but are still necessary to keep the game running smoothly or enable testing for new features that are coming down the line. This was the case for both 1.0.6a and 1.0.6, respectively. Lylirra provided a bit more transparency about that here and here. They’re a bit technical, but that’s doesn’t mean they’re made-up jargon – that’s really just how patching works.
But, just because the latest patches have been smaller, that doesn’t mean we haven’t been working on improvements to the game. We commented on some stuff already that we have planned for future patches (to provide a very recent example, here’s some info on Reflects Damage). In many cases, though, we may not be in position to comment on what the developers are working on, either because they’re still working on the design process or we’re not really sure if what we have is actually going to make it into the game. Over the years we have found it is better to avoid promising anything about future content (until we are as close to 100% certain about it as possible) than to retract previous communication when something gets cut or delayed from a patch, or changed to something completely different. Even acknowledging that an issue exists is enough for some players to walk away with “they know, so something will be done immediately” and can be harmful if said issue’s resolution doesn’t make it into a patch.
Acknowledging community’s concerns is very important, but requires some finesse when we do. Some of you will disagree with that philosophy and for very good reasons. We promise the community team is listening, relaying to development teams and working hard to make sure information is digestible and ready to go as soon as the proverbial light turns green.
A lot of you have been concerned about the lack of game-changing adjustments in patch 1.0.6 and 1.0.6a, and we can certainly sympathize since they’re not the kind of patches you’ve been used to seeing for Diablo III. Smaller patches like those aren’t unusual for Blizzard games, though, and are often needed to address important issues quickly (issues that can’t be resolved with a hotfix or really wait for a larger content patch that might be scheduled for a later date). Similarly, sometimes patches will contain a lot of behind-the-scenes changes that aren’t visible to players, but are still necessary to keep the game running smoothly or enable testing for new features that are coming down the line. This was the case for both 1.0.6a and 1.0.6, respectively. Lylirra provided a bit more transparency about that here and here. They’re a bit technical, but that’s doesn’t mean they’re made-up jargon – that’s really just how patching works.
But, just because the latest patches have been smaller, that doesn’t mean we haven’t been working on improvements to the game. We commented on some stuff already that we have planned for future patches (to provide a very recent example, here’s some info on Reflects Damage). In many cases, though, we may not be in position to comment on what the developers are working on, either because they’re still working on the design process or we’re not really sure if what we have is actually going to make it into the game. Over the years we have found it is better to avoid promising anything about future content (until we are as close to 100% certain about it as possible) than to retract previous communication when something gets cut or delayed from a patch, or changed to something completely different. Even acknowledging that an issue exists is enough for some players to walk away with “they know, so something will be done immediately” and can be harmful if said issue’s resolution doesn’t make it into a patch.
Acknowledging community’s concerns is very important, but requires some finesse when we do. Some of you will disagree with that philosophy and for very good reasons. We promise the community team is listening, relaying to development teams and working hard to make sure information is digestible and ready to go as soon as the proverbial light turns green.
