|
On June 11 2010 00:08 Excalibur_Z wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2010 23:32 Ares[EffOrt] wrote:Also one thing this article made clear to me, I honestly never thought of it until now.. Blizzard wants me to marry Facebook.
Battle.net integrates Facebook alongside RealID. RealID friends will see your first and last name. It’s Blizzard’s way of giving internet enemies a reason to hack your account. Have a common name? Think they can’t discover your identity? Those other RealID names are just the missing puzzle pieces. Plan on using a fake name? When your account is compromised, good luck explaining to Blizzard why you can’t supply identification to prove you’re Michael Lowell from Plant City, Nebraska. Now the other issue.. The issue with RealID? It usurps functionality. On Battle.net 1.0, I could use “/f m [message]” to message every player on my friends list. Simple, easy, etc. In Battle.net 2.0, this function is replaced with the ability to “broadcast” messages. In order to use this, you must use RealID or Facebook. You have to render privacy a lost art to get something I had six years ago. So basically if I want to use friend message I have to add them by their email, now if I do that there is a problem (see first quote) oh man =\ First of all, the only time I ever saw /f m used was to talk to ONE PERSON, effectively spamming the rest of the people on the friends list. This is how it would go: /f m oh hey jim hows it going /f m lol ya /f m hey did you want to play 2v2 /f m maybe i havent asked yet tho /f m lmao shes preggo already lololol /f m was easier to type than /w <someone's long bnet name> for every message, or /w %f13 or whatever that silly command was to speak to an individual friend, so everyone who's not that person got spammed which was really annoying. Messaging individual friends is much easier with the GUI than it was in the original Bnet. Also the ability to add friends not using RealID was removed for a few patches, they've implied that it's going to return. I wouldn't get too scared over that issue either.
you not aware of /r?
/f m created communities between friends in minutes better than BNet 2.0 has for me in months of beta.
|
United States12240 Posts
I was aware of /r but nobody whose friends list I was on apparently was.
|
oh man. I'm conflicted. I haven't been paying attention to the controversy regarding BNET 2.0 previously, but this page certainly helped me catch up.
|
Austin10833 Posts
I actually enjoyed the /f m functionality. I didn't have people on my friends lists who were prone to spamming obnoxious messages constantly, so it was never that annoying. It was more like a room full of people having conversations, where you could overhear people talking and jump in if you felt like it.
|
On June 11 2010 00:41 BroOd wrote:
I actually enjoyed the /f m functionality. I didn't have people on my friends lists who were prone to spamming obnoxious messages constantly, so it was never that annoying. It was more like a room full of people having conversations, where you could overhear people talking and jump in if you felt like it.
There were a few people I would've liked to put on the, "Friend, but can't send me '/f m' messages" list. Use /r to talk if you only wanna talk to one of your friends, seriously.
That's not a reason to remove /f m though...
|
On June 11 2010 00:41 BroOd wrote:
I actually enjoyed the /f m functionality. I didn't have people on my friends lists who were prone to spamming obnoxious messages constantly, so it was never that annoying. It was more like a room full of people having conversations, where you could overhear people talking and jump in if you felt like it.
Exactly, quite frankly, I prolly had a good third of my laughs of my teenage years on battle net.
|
Wow that was a pretty good read. I wasn't even aware of some of those issues before. Really that quote he used at the end of the article pretty much sums it up. Bnet was amazing and they killed it. Would it be so hard to have chat channels? Come on!
Also as another note, didn't Blizz mention that they wanted people to be able to communicate cross game? As in you could somehow message someone on WoW or D3 while on SC2?
|
blizzard failed, its sad and makes me  but the truth is blizzard simply failed and i wont buy the game untill blizzard unfails itself
|
I don't really want to play devil's advocate here, but after thinking about it, I don't see the point in getting angry about some of the things he says. The article itself seems to be anger mongering. Many things he gets wrong.
Starcraft would not be pay to play. No rts does that. Even in Russia, the pay to play wasn't Blizzard's decision, and it can only help Russian casual rts campaign hoppers. http://forums.gametrailers.com/thread/clever-starcraft-ii-pay-to-pla/1048926
I don't mind facebook integration. Sure, maybe all my friends will find out I'm a huge nerd, but hey, they're all huge nerds now too since they spend as much time in front of a computer as me. Maybe it'll spread the holy word of starcraft too and convert those farmville heathens.
I'm not really that angry about anything. SC2 will probably be cracked for lan. No chat rooms sucks, but it is an opportunity for someone to make an independent chat room for SC fans, and isn't something to cry over.
I am worried about the state of bnet 2.0 in terms of stability & bugs(he mentions a college tournament that crashed), pro-gaming, not being able to play friends in other continents, and ums map advertising. It will be hard for new maps to be noticed by the SC community, harder than before. And I rather hate that Blizzard is experimenting with the whole pay to download feature. Yes, it does help map designers, but how much of a cut does Blizzard get?
So many variables to take care of, I hope they don't mess up!
|
On June 11 2010 00:08 Excalibur_Z wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2010 23:32 Ares[EffOrt] wrote:Also one thing this article made clear to me, I honestly never thought of it until now.. Blizzard wants me to marry Facebook.
Battle.net integrates Facebook alongside RealID. RealID friends will see your first and last name. It’s Blizzard’s way of giving internet enemies a reason to hack your account. Have a common name? Think they can’t discover your identity? Those other RealID names are just the missing puzzle pieces. Plan on using a fake name? When your account is compromised, good luck explaining to Blizzard why you can’t supply identification to prove you’re Michael Lowell from Plant City, Nebraska. Now the other issue.. The issue with RealID? It usurps functionality. On Battle.net 1.0, I could use “/f m [message]” to message every player on my friends list. Simple, easy, etc. In Battle.net 2.0, this function is replaced with the ability to “broadcast” messages. In order to use this, you must use RealID or Facebook. You have to render privacy a lost art to get something I had six years ago. So basically if I want to use friend message I have to add them by their email, now if I do that there is a problem (see first quote) oh man =\ First of all, the only time I ever saw /f m used was to talk to ONE PERSON, effectively spamming the rest of the people on the friends list. This is how it would go: /f m oh hey jim hows it going /f m lol ya /f m hey did you want to play 2v2 /f m maybe i havent asked yet tho /f m lmao shes preggo already lololol /f m was easier to type than /w <someone's long bnet name> for every message, or /w %f13 or whatever that silly command was to speak to an individual friend, so everyone who's not that person got spammed which was really annoying. Messaging individual friends is much easier with the GUI than it was in the original Bnet. Also the ability to add friends not using RealID was removed for a few patches, they've implied that it's going to return. I wouldn't get too scared over that issue either.
/w "username" oh hey jim hows it going
/r lol ya
/r hey did you want to play 2v2
/r maybe i havent asked yet tho
/r lmao shes preggo already lololol
Is a lot easier, and doesnt spam everyone.....
In some ways, I like the new chat setup. It allows me to have multiple msn-style conversations going on. But implementing the old chat commands would make it soooooo much easier. Why not do both?
.....
Oh, yea.....
.....
No chat channels.....
.....
|
I think he did a pretty good job of summing up the problems. I really hope that the widespread retelling of this story, of our complaints and why they're legitimate really strikes home =/
|
On June 11 2010 00:13 Irrelevant wrote:
Hopefully they get their shit together before they kill diablo 3
Don't even scare me like that... If there won't be LAN or direct connection available in D3 I will cry a river of tears.
|
I really like this article, it sums up everything pretty nicely, and puts emphasis on all the right areas, especially the bit about xrealm play
heres to me hoping that good private servers appear and we can ditch blizzard and make them pay for their stupidity
|
On June 11 2010 01:26 Manit0u wrote:Show nested quote +On June 11 2010 00:13 Irrelevant wrote:
Hopefully they get their shit together before they kill diablo 3 Don't even scare me like that... If there won't be LAN or direct connection available in D3 I will cry a river of tears.
Hardcore mode will be funnier !
|
On June 10 2010 23:59 Volshok wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2010 23:21 Misrah wrote:
Great article- read it in entirety- glad i did lol
I have not watched a game of sc2 and i don't ever plan too. I played for most of Beta and had a lot of fun, but I cancelled my preorder after the Pearce interview. Starcraft 2 really looks like it's going to be Modern Warfare 2 all over again, which Blizzard will be totally happy with. And why wouldn't they be? MW2 made absurd amounts of money, which is what Activision Blizzard is after. I know I'd be pretty excited if my company could release a sub-par product, with less features then the original, and make a killing.
So Blizzard is ok with the fact that they will make a shitload of money selling teh game on a server that wont live up for its expectations, and eventually fail at the cost of killing SC:BW korean pro-scene?
|
/f m was awesome on bnet, I couldn't have lived without it, be it asking everyone on my list for a game, sharing some news, or just overhearing someone talk about something and me joining in, I really felt connected with my friends. I dont know about the rest of you, but there have been times where I would just drink a few beers, log on to bnet and talk for hours with friends, or just pop in random channels making new friends talking to people, or just seeing what they were talking about, and it was almost as big of a part of bnet as playing the game was, I really want the old bnet back
|
United States12240 Posts
On June 11 2010 01:26 Manit0u wrote:Show nested quote +On June 11 2010 00:13 Irrelevant wrote:
Hopefully they get their shit together before they kill diablo 3 Don't even scare me like that... If there won't be LAN or direct connection available in D3 I will cry a river of tears.
They said there would be no LAN in D3 before they said there would be no LAN in SC2.
|
On June 11 2010 02:01 besiger wrote:/f m was awesome on bnet, I couldn't have lived without it, be it asking everyone on my list for a game, sharing some news, or just overhearing someone talk about something and me joining in, I really felt connected with my friends. I dont know about the rest of you, but there have been times where I would just drink a few beers, log on to bnet and talk for hours with friends, or just pop in random channels making new friends talking to people, or just seeing what they were talking about, and it was almost as big of a part of bnet as playing the game was, I really want the old bnet back
This. One thousand times this. Now if I want to just chill and chat with a group of my friends, we all have to be in a party, which means no one can play 1v1 if they want to, or 2v2 depending on how many people are in the party. I pre-ordered for the beta key, but I'm honestly questioning if I want this game or not.
|
On June 11 2010 00:15 Lysis wrote:
While most of his stuff is funny and pokes fun at things in a hilarious manner (look at his WC3 guides for examples) this is actually probably the first serious thing I've seen him write.
Haha, I agree. Reading his earlier stuff was like I never left battle.net forums. This one though is totally different story.
His Kespa vs Blizzard article is also very good actually and I'd recommend it for anyone who found this one joyful to read.
The hell it wasn't? You do know that Russian cheaper version (just like Singaporian or Latin American versions) are going to be region locked? That means that gamers who bought those versions will be limited to specifically setup for them regional servers. Activision-Blizzard is fully responsible for this decision because they're the only ones who have control over such stuff. Activision-Blizzard is an official game distributer in Russia since last month, so there's no one to shift blame to.
|
<3 Sadistx
Thats why bw for life seriously lol
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
