EPTIt's a pretty funny (and sad) read in a few places.
http://www.the-ghetto.org/content/battle-net-2-0-the-antithesis-of-consumer-confidence
Bnet 0.2 gets rightfully smashed
| Blogs > Sadistx |
|
Sadistx
Zimbabwe5568 Posts
It's a pretty funny (and sad) read in a few places. http://www.the-ghetto.org/content/battle-net-2-0-the-antithesis-of-consumer-confidence | ||
BLinD-RawR
ALLEYCAT BLUES50105 Posts
But why blog about it insted of posting it in the sc2 forum? | ||
|
snotboogie
Australia3550 Posts
| ||
|
seRapH
United States9756 Posts
On June 10 2010 22:46 snotboogie wrote: I am pretty sure that is the personal site of Ghetto_Overlord, Firstborn of Battle.Net SC2 General Discussion Forum trolls. does not detract from the truth in the article. do you not agree? or are you part of blizzard? edit: or activision? | ||
|
motbob
United States12546 Posts
On June 10 2010 23:00 majesty.k)seRapH wrote: does not detract from the truth in the article. do you not agree? or are you part of blizzard? edit: or activision? Since he doesn't agree with you, he must work for Blizzard? What? | ||
|
Boonbag
France3318 Posts
| ||
|
Durak
Canada3684 Posts
To quote Icesong of the Battle.net forums: “Battle.net was fucking name brand. Battle.net wasn’t some fucking trash service you should be lucky to even have working, like ESO or The Zone, it was the fucking standard." Sums it up for me. Battle.net was the greatest online gaming service. Battle.net 2.0 destroyed the brand for me. I was one of the people thinking, "Oh, I'll boycott Battle.net 2.0 during beta. I'll make sure Blizzard knows they've made a mistake and fix the major flaws of Battle.net 2.0 before release." but I've since changed my mentality to, "I'm not buying StarCraft 2. There are too many other good games to play that don't fight against me. I'll check out SC2 when a private server that doesn't suck comes around." | ||
|
Senx
Sweden5901 Posts
:/ | ||
Ares[Effort]
DEMACIA6550 Posts
In an internet where Google can supply seven gigabytes of storage for a free e-mail account, the Battle.net map publishing system gives you twenty megabytes for your five maps From this comment I honestly don't know where blizzard is going with this whole limitation on map making | ||
|
Misrah
United States1695 Posts
I have not watched a game of sc2 and i don't ever plan too. | ||
|
Sadistx
Zimbabwe5568 Posts
Their business model went from "make great games" to "make the customer agree to being robbed by using legalese" PS: replying to Ares | ||
|
myopia
United States2928 Posts
On June 10 2010 23:19 Ares[EffOrt] wrote: Just quoting this because I strongly am against the fact we can only publish 5 maps and 20 mb?considering I am a map maker. From this comment I honestly don't know where blizzard is going with this whole limitation on map making Yeah I'm glad he pointed this out. At first I thought it'd be unreasonable for us to expect Blizzard to have massive storage space on their servers, but the gmail comparison makes Bnet look pretty sad indeed. | ||
|
Ares[Effort]
DEMACIA6550 Posts
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 =\ | ||
|
See.Blue
United States2673 Posts
| ||
|
ProoM
Lithuania1741 Posts
![[image loading]](http://www.the-ghetto.org/content/pictures/battlenet5.jpg) | ||
|
Volshok
United States349 Posts
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. | ||
|
Kaolla
China2999 Posts
| ||
|
Excalibur_Z
United States12235 Posts
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.. Now the other issue.. 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. | ||
|
Irrelevant
United States2364 Posts
Hopefully they get their shit together before they kill diablo 3 | ||
|
Lysis
United States147 Posts
| ||
|
Butigroove
Seychelles2061 Posts
On June 11 2010 00:08 Excalibur_Z wrote: 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. | ||
|
Excalibur_Z
United States12235 Posts
| ||
|
Mickey
United States2606 Posts
| ||
|
BroOd
Austin10831 Posts
| ||
|
Severedevil
United States4835 Posts
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... | ||
|
Boonbag
France3318 Posts
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. | ||
|
Slaughter
United States20254 Posts
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? | ||
|
zealing
Canada806 Posts
 but the truth is blizzard simply failed and i wont buy the game untill blizzard unfails itself | ||
|
Hidden_MotiveS
Canada2562 Posts
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! | ||
|
Impervious
Canada4198 Posts
On June 11 2010 00:08 Excalibur_Z wrote: 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..... ..... | ||
|
Nightmarjoo
United States3360 Posts
| ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17238 Posts
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. | ||
|
BrTarolg
United Kingdom3574 Posts
heres to me hoping that good private servers appear and we can ditch blizzard and make them pay for their stupidity | ||
|
Boblion
France8043 Posts
On June 11 2010 01:26 Manit0u wrote: 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 ! | ||
|
fabiano
Brazil4644 Posts
On June 10 2010 23:59 Volshok wrote: 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? | ||
|
besiger
Croatia2452 Posts
| ||
|
Excalibur_Z
United States12235 Posts
On June 11 2010 01:26 Manit0u wrote: 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. | ||
|
EcterA
United States949 Posts
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. | ||
|
InRaged
1047 Posts
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. On June 11 2010 01:01 Hidden_MotiveS wrote: 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 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. | ||
|
MorningMusume11
United States3490 Posts
Thats why bw for life seriously lol | ||
|
Zilver
Finland282 Posts
On June 11 2010 00:13 Irrelevant wrote: and honestly over the last month or so I couldn't be paid to play sc2, or anything dealing with bnet0.2 Harsh times man... harsh times. | ||
|
Salv
Canada3083 Posts
| ||
|
avilo
United States4100 Posts
 | ||
|
CynanMachae
Canada1459 Posts
| ||
|
Pufftrees
2449 Posts
| ||
| ||
