Logging Off: Blizzard Dropping The Battle.net Name

After twenty years, Blizzard plan to step away from the name Battle.net for their online platform and services. The Diablords and Warcrafteers today announced that they’ll be “transitioning away” from the name Battle.net, which they’ve been using since the first Diablo way back in 1996. No, Blizzard now want to name elements boring things like Blizzard Streaming and Blizzard Voice. Ah, the end of an era. Another icon falls.

Look, let’s be honest: names which are also domain names had become daggy by ooh we’ll generously say 1999. But don’t you see, Blizzard? A ’90s revival is going on – for the first time in yonks, the name Battle.net currently sounds cool.

Entirely missing that point, Blizzard said in their announcement:

“When we created Battle.net, the idea of including a tailored online-gaming service together with your game was more of a novel concept, so we put a lot of focus on explaining what the service was and how it worked, including giving it a distinct name. Over time, though, we’ve seen that there’s been occasional confusion and inefficiencies related to having two separate identities under which everything falls—Blizzard and Battle.net. Given that built-in multiplayer support is a well-understood concept and more of a normal expectation these days, there isn’t as much of a need to maintain a separate identity for what is essentially our networking technology.”

Instead, Blizzard will be individually naming components Blizzard This and Blizzard That. They say they’re making the change over the next few months. As if everyone won’t call it Battle.net anyway.

From this site

51 Comments

  1. ahac says:

    Confusing names: Battle.net, Steam, Origin, Uplay, …

    Great names: Epic Games Launcher, Bethesda.net Launcher, Nexon Launcher, …

    • HeavyStorm says:

      In Steam’s case, I’d say the confusing name is Valve.

      • Ogglar says:

        Valve released steam. It would be confusing otherwise and a failure to engineering among other things

        • Zmobie says:

          A “steam released valve” could be a valve that opens by steam

    • Jeroen D Stout says:

      This is one in a too long line of disturbing cases in which I just cannot even tell if it is sarcasm.

      • Hedgeclipper says:

        Has to be sarcasm, I mean “Bethesda.net Launcher” sounds like they asked the accounts department for naming ideas.

      • simply says:

        Never having played blizzard products on battle.net (not a fan of RTSs or fantasy RPGs), i always got a bit jealous that a company that had such a player base on different genres (starcraft vs wow) would keep an url for so many years… How rare is that?

    • Premium User Badge

      cpt_freakout says:

      “What is this the Origin of??? Is it… is it really where Games come from?? *tear in eye* This is truly a work of the Electronic Sciences!”
      “‘Uplay’, it says here – so it’s telling me I play, which means it’s an Apple product, of course.”

      • Sizeable Dirk says:

        I believe Origin is one of the murder skins the Electronic Artist is wearing on occasion while dancing to Goodbye Horses in front of a camcorder.

  2. Drib says:

    But will my Warcraft II Battle.Net edition still work?

    • Sakkura says:

      Yeah it will just run via Games For Windows Live.

      Mwahahahaaa

      • Earl-Grey says:

        The salt is starting to wear off, why don’t you go get some lemon to rub in this wound as well? Go ahead, I’ll wait.

  3. NinetySevenA says:

    battle.net is way better than blizzard voice.

    • Premium User Badge

      DantronLesotho says:

      Blizzard Voice, like “sshhhshhshhhhhhwwwhhhsssshhhhhwwwwwoooooshhhhhshhhwwwhhssshhhoooossshhhhh…” ?

  4. Author X says:

    I never was sure whether I was supposed to pronounce it “battle dot net” or “battle net”.

    • Horg says:

      The ”.” indicates an awkward pause, just long enough to make anyone listening to you wonder weather or not you’ve finished speaking, but just short enough to cut them off before they can resume their end of the conversation.

    • Sizeable Dirk says:

      The “dot” wasn’t silent in the 90’s.
      It’s a pre-google marketing thing when addresses were arcane sorcery and people used web portals and webrings to navigate the cyberspace.

  5. Kestrel says:

    It’s so weird when a company grows up and becomes more corporate; more dull.

    • P.Funk says:

      Pretty much. Business school types will hurry to inform you that this is all very rational and sensible and all that but really I think there’s something pointlessly dull about corporate level business. Its so risk averse it begins to meddle with 20 year old names of things.

      • Xiyng says:

        Very much this. This isn’t really a bad change, but it’s a really boring one. As such, it feels somewhat bad to me even though it really isn’t.

        • Eagle0600 says:

          I don’t want to live in a boring world; to me, that makes this a bad change.

    • Gormongous says:

      I’m trying to parse my response between desire not to resist change and skepticism of change for change’s sake, but I’m definitely falling on the side of resenting this as an obvious attempt at brand consolidation. Notice how Google went from calling its products a series of related names like Gchat and Gmail to Google Hangouts and Google Inbox? God forbid you’re playing a Blizzard game and it’s not spelled out which company it came from.

      • inspiredhandle says:

        This. If they treat us like we are stupid, that is what we become. As an aside my most hated word pairing is “brand recognition” *shudder*

  6. Monggerel says:

    This is the end, beautiful friend
    This is the end, my only friend, the end
    Of all elaborate plans, the end
    Of everything that stands, the end
    No safety, no surprise, the end
    I’ll never look into your eyes
    Again

  7. Turkey says:

    My uncle that works at Blizzard says the new name is going to be Blackthorne.org

  8. Bostec says:

    Maybe concentrate on a decent client first? Its ugly, its slow to load up and the download speeds are snail paced.

    • Siimon says:

      Anecdotal, but I’ve yet to have a download not use my full pipe (350mbit down).

      That said, I like blizzard.net. Then again my favorite Blizzard games are Warcraft 1 and 2 so I might be a bit old-timey.

    • that_guy_strife says:

      Ugly is subjective, however, I find it far more elegant and practical than uPlay or Origin.

      Sounds like you might have computer issues – b.net has always been first to load on my system, which loads Steam, Origin, uPlay and Galaxy as well.

      B.net has also always used max bandwith, as opposed to uPlay which used to be about 1/20. Steam has spikes, whereas b.net is consistent. Also, it allows you to launch and play games while they are still downloading, a feature that works really well, and has only been implemented recently by Origin, where it is quite wonky (funny, since Origin makes a big fuss of it, literally saying ”Play your games while they download. Technology, eh !?!?”).

  9. Premium User Badge

    gritz says:

    I’m cool with it as long as they charge themselves $10 for the name change.

    • pandiculator says:

      We can close this comment thread, here’s the winner.

    • moisan4 says:

      This should win comment of the week! LOL.

    • Czrly says:

      Don’t they still have one free change per account? I’m fairly certain my Battle…

      … net account still has that.

  10. racccoon says:

    Battle.net is far more pungent and in your face than blizzard! blizzard is far too cold, battle means what it does, it is still cooler than the blizzard. Battle.net is sunk inside net users, its a whole lifestyle. I see no point in the change, other than they are penny pinching. It seems to be the case when they are loaded, its a typical procedure when money becomes no object, the money earner makes its their priority to be tightfisted, instead of relaxing and taking it in and using it nicely. I can not mention the 3 letter word with an ish on the end that I want to use, but the rich all become that.

    • SingularityParadigm says:

      Are you honestly trying to say they all become Jewish? Because that anti-semitism is just a mite fucked up, Eichmann.

  11. Chillicothe says:

    “Battle.net is too dated with the 90s, now let us replace it with something that is too dated with the New Tens…”

  12. lorcas says:

    If they really want the “Blizzard” name in there, why not just call it Blizzard Network, Blizzard.net for short and bnet for shorter. Whatever the case, I will still refer to it as bnet no matter what stupid name they choose.

  13. mollemannen says:

    remember WON?

  14. Uberwolfe says:

    Seems pretty dumb to drop that name…

    Battle.net just works.

    • d3vilsadvocate says:

      Tell me about it… no reason to change a perfectly good and “well-known to everyone” name…

      Maybe that pointless name change is a preview of the good corporate things yet to come? I sure hope not…

      • Aldehyde says:

        Fail to see how Blizzard could become more boring already. It’s basically the poster boy for how to act like a corporation.

  15. Premium User Badge

    keefybabe says:

    Should call it AOL. Short for adventures online.

    • Premium User Badge

      keefybabe says:

      Or Geocities, you know, cities without geography. It indicates you can be part of the community wherever you are.

  16. Kashi says:

    Blizzard Battle.net
    Boom!

  17. milan.jirkovsky says:

    According to their explanation in order to make everything click together nicely and considering they have BlizzCon, this could only be called BlizzNet.

  18. RNGod says:

    I’ll keep going to battle.net regardless, in protest and out of habbit. I doubt they’ll release the domain anyway.

    • Blutsuechtiger says:

      Yes, I will keep the old Icon and rename it to Battle.Net !
      Brace yourself – resistance is coming!

  19. Don Reba says:

    Someone didn’t like having a childish name on his business card.