Blizzard, AT&T Sign Multimillion Dollar Hosting Deal
AT&T will sport the hosting for World of Warcraft, StarCraft II, and Diablo III.
Wednesday AT&T said that it reached an agreement with Blizzard that expands their current ten-year relationship. In a new multimillion dollar, multi-year, multi-services contract, Blizzard will use AT&T's Enterprise Hosting Services in North America for World of WarCraft and the upcoming StarCraft and Diablo franchises.
AT&T said that it will also provide voice and data services for Global Call Center Support, the backbone behind Blizzard's call centers around the world including the U.S., Europe, and Asia. "Multiple voice services, domestic and international, to support gamers’ customer service calls, and billing are now supported by AT&T’s global network," the company said.
In addition to the servers and call center support, the contract also allows AT&T to provide its Intelligent Content Distribution service, a network-based Content Distribution Network service that will "quickly and reliably" transmit patches and content updates to the players.
AT&T's Gaming Core Team, originally launched back in 2004 to meet the infrastructure needs of gaming operations on AT&T's IP network, will monitor and manage the technology infrastructure powering Blizzard's games on a proactive, 24/7 basis.
"Over the years, AT&T has demonstrated that it understands the needs of our business," said Paul Sams, Chief Operating Officer of Blizzard Entertainment. "The services and support AT&T provides have helped us to consistently deliver high-quality online-gaming experiences to our players."
- Intel Moves Nehalem to ULV for Ultra-Thin Laptops
- Nvidia Unleashes 'Release 256' Graphics Drivers
- We Spent 4,819,352 Hours on Google PAC-MAN
- Deals for May 25: Don't Forget Your Towel
- Get a Free Trial of Norton and Enter to Win [USA]
- MUIs Render Win7 Pro, Home OS ''Non-genuine''
- Intel Demos System Based on 48-Core Processor
- 3M Launches 20-Finger Multi-Touch Display
- Nvidia Announces 480M Fermi GPU for Notebooks
- Nvidia CEO: Z6 Moorestown Won't Be Competitive
- Steamworks Now Integrated into UDK
- Zombie King George Romero Speaks on L4D2
- Intel Kills Off Larrabee Discrete Graphics, For Real
- Robbie Bach, Head of Entertainment, Leaves MSFT
- DOJ Examining Apple's Online Music Practices
- Foxconn CEO Says, ''We Are Not a Sweatshop''
- Apple Passes Microsoft as Largest Tech Company
- Half-Life 2 Launches on Mac With 1984 Commercial
Great dropped games inc
For the millionth time, ATT doesn't have the network it needs for this...it doesn't have the network it needs for any of it services.
Miltimillion eh?
Nothing against ATT's wired networks, but, still, no lan no sc2 for me.
so that's why they wont have tethering, because they want to make sure they have room for world of warcrap. 2 of the worst companies teaming up, bad idea.
I haven't had any insanely weird connections issues with blizzard "so" far hopefully it will keep up. Most of any issues have been with the game itself, Patches etc..
AT&T and Blizzard an unholy alliance.
The big fish always eats the smaller fish, when they are the same size the band together. :s
I haven't had any insanely weird connections issues with blizzard "so" far hopefully it will keep up. Most of any issues have been with the game itself, Patches etc..
I'm of the same mind. The only reason I raise a skeptical eyebrow is due to the fact that AT&T has a tendency to bite off more than they can chew in regards to their network infrastructure, iPhone anyone? With Blizzard's growth, and soon to be released SC2, will we see an increase in users which will negatively impact AT&T's networks? I hope not, but I'm wary.
Blizzard has had very good service from ATT for the past 5 years, no reason they would not continue with it. What is the other option anyway? Comcast?
Mark my words. The average Starcraft player is most likely someone that has above average computer skills. Not to mention the many software programmers that play. Therefore, most likely one or a group of them will create a lan patch for Starcraft 2. Here is my problem with a battle.net only Starcraft. I recently played the Beta version playing only versus computer opponents and I got disconnected from Battle.net and my game got scrapped. I was not playing vs other people? WOW... no pun intended
For the millionth time, ATT doesn't have the network it needs for this...it doesn't have the network it needs for any of it services.
Wireless != Wired
LOLz, at first I thought "strange article to headline on toms", it's largely irrelevant who hosts game services since every host is just about the same. Then, I remembered the fascination with AT&T thanks to the iPhone. Got it, carry on.
AT&T's 3g network sucks because GSM wasn't really designed for an entire city worth of apple fans to click "refresh" on the apple homepage repeatedly until something new about the iPad shows up.
As someone who has worked on site on their hosting facilities, I can say that their wired network is sufficiently massive. What do you think they are doing with all that connectivity that used to carry landline phone calls? As for their services, rest assured they spare no expense when they build out a hosting site; they have close to 100 of them across the US which is something unheard of for any hosting company that's not also a telco.
Oh, and LOL@ the starcraft head pic. That guy is in for a world of hurt once the cigar burns down to his lips (considering it's out of reach thanks to his helmet). "Hmm, burn the lips, or let it drop and burn other, lower body parts... decisions decisions..."
I didn't know AT&T offered this kind of service... Learn something new every day.
No wonder Blizzard's killing LAN support!
If the Death Star company can't make this work, it needs to be Yamato'ed!
For the millionth time, ATT doesn't have the network it needs for this...it doesn't have the network it needs for any of it services.
It looks like they are already IN a contract, just expanding it. And Blizzard does not have many network issues that I can find. Play WoW quite a bit with the wife and son, can't recall a time there was an issue with server connections that was not my ISPs fault.
Att has been hosting the wow servers from day 1. You think this changes anything? They are only expanding the length of their contract with them.
You mean the same servers were patches were downloaded at 100KB/s and I got 5000ms ping?
Blizzard has had very good service from ATT for the past 5 years, no reason they would not continue with it. What is the other option anyway? Comcast?
Mzima, they already host the WoW datacenter in Seattle. (=
What is the other option anyway? Comcast?
Likely Verizon (now that they own MCI Worldcom). Comcast isn't a major carrier so anything they contracted with to provide would be from someone else.
You mean the same servers were patches were downloaded at 100KB/s and I got 5000ms ping?
Funny. I get 500Kbps and ~25ms Ping... Maybe your problem is a bit closer to home
Well, I didnt know that ATT has had an existing contract with blizzard, but the title caught my attention as an ohs noes! With the recent problems ATT has had with some of their services, it seemed like a bad deal, however, since reading the article, this particular deal is probably good for both companies. Im sure that ATT makes SURE to keep blizzard in business. Forget the little guys, they dont count, but keep the big bucks rolling in. Thats how they roll yo.
Nothing against ATT's wired networks, but, still, no lan no sc2 for me.
Ditto, FU Activision/Blizzard. $59 price 3X for the final product, again FU.
For the millionth time, ATT doesn't have the network it needs for this...it doesn't have the network it needs for any of it services.
You don't seem to understand what hosting is vs. a phone network...
Ditto, FU Activision/Blizzard. $59 price 3X for the final product, again FU.
Define "Final Product" please. Was Warcraft III not a final product? Starcraft? Diablo II? All had expansions to carry on the storyline...this story arc is just being made bigger and spanning the expansions in a different way. The total of 3 games will be absolutely gigantic in scope for an RTS.
I'm worried that in Diablo III, battle.net access will require a monthly fee, WoW-style, instead of the free Diablo II model.
I'm worried that in Diablo III, battle.net access will require a monthly fee, WoW-style, instead of the free Diablo II model.
Diablo III is not an MMO, it doesn't require huge database servers crunching persistent data across multiple realms. It's peer to peer, like Guild Wars, and will remain free, like Guild Wars. Blizzard knows it can't maintain a bunch of subscription games, as new content is also expected with those games...and a lot of moderation. I really wouldn't worry about it.
"The services and support AT&T provides have helped us to consistently deliver high-quality online-gaming experiences to our players."
LOL!!!! MY A$$ nothing but lagg and dropped games is what they can provide just like their phone service.
Likely Verizon (now that they own MCI Worldcom). Comcast isn't a major carrier so anything they contracted with to provide would be from someone else.
I would choose verizon over att any day.
Maybe they can finally upgrade their crappy network instead of limitting the customers speeds...
Next WoW expansion. Wrath of the Cingular King= Big Orange drops from the sky and steals the most Super Epic Communications Gear. You will have to decide to play as Alliance to obtain this Epic Gear. Or play as the Hord and use a open source anti epic gear almost near as cool.