|
|
On November 27 2016 14:59 notgayDragon wrote:
A lot of people are in now but the start was blatantly cherry picked. tec27 can deny it all he wants but TL staff and writers getting invited before everyone else? Come on
So he's giving to people that are heavily invested in the scene, and can possibly help promote it as it goes into wider beta?
I fail to see the problem.
|
On November 27 2016 15:52 TT1 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 27 2016 14:59 notgayDragon wrote:
A lot of people are in now but the start was blatantly cherry picked. tec27 can deny it all he wants but TL staff and writers getting invited before everyone else? Come on It's his product and he's offering it for free to the public, he can do whatever he wants.
I'm not mad at him, I have a lot of respect for this entire project. Eighteen years with nobody else doing it just shows how difficult this shit is. I'm just sad..
|
On November 27 2016 17:00 notgayDragon wrote:Show nested quote +On November 27 2016 15:52 TT1 wrote:On November 27 2016 14:59 notgayDragon wrote:
A lot of people are in now but the start was blatantly cherry picked. tec27 can deny it all he wants but TL staff and writers getting invited before everyone else? Come on It's his product and he's offering it for free to the public, he can do whatever he wants. I'm not mad at him, I have a lot of respect for this entire project. Eighteen years with nobody else doing it just shows how difficult this shit is. I'm just sad..
That isn't a good way to express respect or sadness....
|
I'm venting about the initial cherry picking then saying the invites were random. Aside from that I see nothing wrong with ShieldBattery at ALL and if I could donate to the project I would.
Seriously, don't lynch me. I love this project, I can complain about something that happened over four months ago that doesn't bother anybody or inhibit the project.
|
Come for the StarCraft, stay for the salt.
|
I dont understand the closed beta at this point either. SB feels great and I didnt see any bugs at all. I could see that perhaps their server is not strong enough to take an arbitrary number of users but even that shouldnt be too big of a problem. Even commercial projects have that.
|
On November 27 2016 18:21 RoomOfMush wrote:
I dont understand the closed beta at this point either. SB feels great and I didnt see any bugs at all. I could see that perhaps their server is not strong enough to take an arbitrary number of users but even that shouldnt be too big of a problem. Even commercial projects have that.
It's simply not done enough, in my opinion. At this stage, the casual player would likely come in, see that there is no notification sounds, matchmaking, replays, obs mode, TvB mode, private group channels, rating system, map selection from hard drive, etc. and be turned off by it, likely to never return. The players from fish or ICCup who are used to various launchers that include replay analysis, integrated streaming, notification sounds, customization of on-screen information, etc. would also be turned off by it and go back to their server of choice, likely to never return. (Note: I haven't played in the month since my laptop's been in repairs, so some of this might have been implemented since then and if it has, I apologize). It's not hard to see why open beta would be a marketing error at this point, imo. A few people's tears regarding favoritism being shown to people who have put time and effort into the foreign community are not worth the potential setbacks. In fact, I doubt there is anything we can say or do that would speed up the opening of the beta other than playing, bugtesting, and sending feedback. Debating about it on forums is probably more counterproductive than anything if you expect the developers to take the free time they have to work on SB and actually read every post and weigh their options every time someone feels some type of way about the way things are.
|
Canada11603 Posts
On November 27 2016 14:59 notgayDragon wrote:
A lot of people are in now but the start was blatantly cherry picked. tec27 can deny it all he wants but TL staff and writers getting invited before everyone else? Come on
That's never been denied, and why would it be denied? Because that's exactly what happened- tec27 had a built in group of people that he could present the very basic ideas and alpha versions without people leaking information. (And even that wasn't a given as I was one of the dumb ones who tended to shoot my mouth off in my excitement.) This is a very odd gripe to have to say the least.
|
I don't understand why you'd want this to leave closed beta before it is more or less feature complete, first impressions are everything.
|
On November 27 2016 18:47 Jealous wrote:Show nested quote +On November 27 2016 18:21 RoomOfMush wrote:
I dont understand the closed beta at this point either. SB feels great and I didnt see any bugs at all. I could see that perhaps their server is not strong enough to take an arbitrary number of users but even that shouldnt be too big of a problem. Even commercial projects have that. It's simply not done enough, in my opinion. At this stage, the casual player would likely come in, see that there is no notification sounds, matchmaking, replays, obs mode, TvB mode, private group channels, rating system, map selection from hard drive, etc. and be turned off by it, likely to never return. The players from fish or ICCup who are used to various launchers that include replay analysis, integrated streaming, notification sounds, customization of on-screen information, etc. would also be turned off by it and go back to their server of choice, likely to never return. (Note: I haven't played in the month since my laptop's been in repairs, so some of this might have been implemented since then and if it has, I apologize). It's not hard to see why open beta would be a marketing error at this point, imo. A few people's tears regarding favoritism being shown to people who have put time and effort into the foreign community are not worth the potential setbacks. In fact, I doubt there is anything we can say or do that would speed up the opening of the beta other than playing, bugtesting, and sending feedback. Debating about it on forums is probably more counterproductive than anything if you expect the developers to take the free time they have to work on SB and actually read every post and weigh their options every time someone feels some type of way about the way things are.
This is kind of true to be honest. I like using SB to play, but ever since the mcalauncher allowed me to host, I've been going back to ICCup and playing some games. It's just a lot more convenient + features.
It also feels more natural to play BW on ICCup, but i think that might have to do with my screen resolution, which I should change on sb
|
On November 27 2016 18:47 Jealous wrote:Show nested quote +On November 27 2016 18:21 RoomOfMush wrote:
I dont understand the closed beta at this point either. SB feels great and I didnt see any bugs at all. I could see that perhaps their server is not strong enough to take an arbitrary number of users but even that shouldnt be too big of a problem. Even commercial projects have that. It's simply not done enough, in my opinion. At this stage, the casual player would likely come in, see that there is no notification sounds, matchmaking, replays, obs mode, TvB mode, private group channels, rating system, map selection from hard drive, etc. and be turned off by it, likely to never return. The players from fish or ICCup who are used to various launchers that include replay analysis, integrated streaming, notification sounds, customization of on-screen information, etc. would also be turned off by it and go back to their server of choice, likely to never return. (Note: I haven't played in the month since my laptop's been in repairs, so some of this might have been implemented since then and if it has, I apologize). It's not hard to see why open beta would be a marketing error at this point, imo. A few people's tears regarding favoritism being shown to people who have put time and effort into the foreign community are not worth the potential setbacks. In fact, I doubt there is anything we can say or do that would speed up the opening of the beta other than playing, bugtesting, and sending feedback. Debating about it on forums is probably more counterproductive than anything if you expect the developers to take the free time they have to work on SB and actually read every post and weigh their options every time someone feels some type of way about the way things are.
Your points only make sense, in my opinion, for different kinds of software and/or different kinds of community.
The people who are interested in SB are not the kinds of people who would be turned off by playing an obvious beta. They dont come in here bitching because they want a finished product and they would choose the competition if you dont deliver.
Given the state of the BW community, the lack of alternatives and the already convincing features of SB I would definitely say that an open Beta would be the better choice.
|
On November 29 2016 00:26 RoomOfMush wrote:Show nested quote +On November 27 2016 18:47 Jealous wrote:On November 27 2016 18:21 RoomOfMush wrote:
I dont understand the closed beta at this point either. SB feels great and I didnt see any bugs at all. I could see that perhaps their server is not strong enough to take an arbitrary number of users but even that shouldnt be too big of a problem. Even commercial projects have that. It's simply not done enough, in my opinion. At this stage, the casual player would likely come in, see that there is no notification sounds, matchmaking, replays, obs mode, TvB mode, private group channels, rating system, map selection from hard drive, etc. and be turned off by it, likely to never return. The players from fish or ICCup who are used to various launchers that include replay analysis, integrated streaming, notification sounds, customization of on-screen information, etc. would also be turned off by it and go back to their server of choice, likely to never return. (Note: I haven't played in the month since my laptop's been in repairs, so some of this might have been implemented since then and if it has, I apologize). It's not hard to see why open beta would be a marketing error at this point, imo. A few people's tears regarding favoritism being shown to people who have put time and effort into the foreign community are not worth the potential setbacks. In fact, I doubt there is anything we can say or do that would speed up the opening of the beta other than playing, bugtesting, and sending feedback. Debating about it on forums is probably more counterproductive than anything if you expect the developers to take the free time they have to work on SB and actually read every post and weigh their options every time someone feels some type of way about the way things are. Your points only make sense, in my opinion, for different kinds of software and/or different kinds of community. The people who are interested in SB are not the kinds of people who would be turned off by playing an obvious beta. They dont come in here bitching because they want a finished product and they would choose the competition if you dont deliver. Given the state of the BW community, the lack of alternatives and the already convincing features of SB I would definitely say that an open Beta would be the better choice.
Call me an optimist, but I saw SB as an opportunity to expand Brood War to new players (or at least the "I played the campaign in 2001" type of new players) and not just cater to existing ones. In 2016, that community is accustomed to having all the bells and whistles a server can offer; the things I listed in my post, for example. As SB is right now, I just don't think it's appealing enough for a person who is not already at least a solid ICCup D level in Brood War and a fairly longtime member of the community. For that reason alone, I would rather that the product be complete before its advent is heavily marketed and shared.
|
|
|
Croatia9555 Posts
On November 29 2016 03:28 SCC-Faust wrote:
I like shield battery.
And shield battery likes you!
|
Wow, thread reached 100th page! Maybe it's time to make open beta or another invite?
|
On November 29 2016 03:16 Jealous wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2016 00:26 RoomOfMush wrote:On November 27 2016 18:47 Jealous wrote:On November 27 2016 18:21 RoomOfMush wrote:
I dont understand the closed beta at this point either. SB feels great and I didnt see any bugs at all. I could see that perhaps their server is not strong enough to take an arbitrary number of users but even that shouldnt be too big of a problem. Even commercial projects have that. It's simply not done enough, in my opinion. At this stage, the casual player would likely come in, see that there is no notification sounds, matchmaking, replays, obs mode, TvB mode, private group channels, rating system, map selection from hard drive, etc. and be turned off by it, likely to never return. The players from fish or ICCup who are used to various launchers that include replay analysis, integrated streaming, notification sounds, customization of on-screen information, etc. would also be turned off by it and go back to their server of choice, likely to never return. (Note: I haven't played in the month since my laptop's been in repairs, so some of this might have been implemented since then and if it has, I apologize). It's not hard to see why open beta would be a marketing error at this point, imo. A few people's tears regarding favoritism being shown to people who have put time and effort into the foreign community are not worth the potential setbacks. In fact, I doubt there is anything we can say or do that would speed up the opening of the beta other than playing, bugtesting, and sending feedback. Debating about it on forums is probably more counterproductive than anything if you expect the developers to take the free time they have to work on SB and actually read every post and weigh their options every time someone feels some type of way about the way things are. Your points only make sense, in my opinion, for different kinds of software and/or different kinds of community. The people who are interested in SB are not the kinds of people who would be turned off by playing an obvious beta. They dont come in here bitching because they want a finished product and they would choose the competition if you dont deliver. Given the state of the BW community, the lack of alternatives and the already convincing features of SB I would definitely say that an open Beta would be the better choice. Call me an optimist, but I saw SB as an opportunity to expand Brood War to new players (or at least the "I played the campaign in 2001" type of new players) and not just cater to existing ones. In 2016, that community is accustomed to having all the bells and whistles a server can offer; the things I listed in my post, for example. As SB is right now, I just don't think it's appealing enough for a person who is not already at least a solid ICCup D level in Brood War and a fairly longtime member of the community. For that reason alone, I would rather that the product be complete before its advent is heavily marketed and shared.
But this thread alone, and the discussion surrounding it, is already quite heavy marketing. The celebrity endorsements (if we can call it that) of streamers, casters and other community figures, have created a certain hype. People know that its there but they cant get in. Dont you think you are driving away all those unlucky ones who really would like to try it right now? People with passion that burns a little too bright; if it is not fed it might just burn out.
I fear that all the hype generated right now with a closed beta is more damaging than opening the beta up and risking potential disappointment. If the SB team really wanted to keep the beta closed for so long they should not have put it out in public and paraded it like this at this point in time. It creates sort of an "old-boys-club" image; new members not welcome.
|
On November 29 2016 04:15 RoomOfMush wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2016 03:16 Jealous wrote:On November 29 2016 00:26 RoomOfMush wrote:On November 27 2016 18:47 Jealous wrote:On November 27 2016 18:21 RoomOfMush wrote:
I dont understand the closed beta at this point either. SB feels great and I didnt see any bugs at all. I could see that perhaps their server is not strong enough to take an arbitrary number of users but even that shouldnt be too big of a problem. Even commercial projects have that. It's simply not done enough, in my opinion. At this stage, the casual player would likely come in, see that there is no notification sounds, matchmaking, replays, obs mode, TvB mode, private group channels, rating system, map selection from hard drive, etc. and be turned off by it, likely to never return. The players from fish or ICCup who are used to various launchers that include replay analysis, integrated streaming, notification sounds, customization of on-screen information, etc. would also be turned off by it and go back to their server of choice, likely to never return. (Note: I haven't played in the month since my laptop's been in repairs, so some of this might have been implemented since then and if it has, I apologize). It's not hard to see why open beta would be a marketing error at this point, imo. A few people's tears regarding favoritism being shown to people who have put time and effort into the foreign community are not worth the potential setbacks. In fact, I doubt there is anything we can say or do that would speed up the opening of the beta other than playing, bugtesting, and sending feedback. Debating about it on forums is probably more counterproductive than anything if you expect the developers to take the free time they have to work on SB and actually read every post and weigh their options every time someone feels some type of way about the way things are. Your points only make sense, in my opinion, for different kinds of software and/or different kinds of community. The people who are interested in SB are not the kinds of people who would be turned off by playing an obvious beta. They dont come in here bitching because they want a finished product and they would choose the competition if you dont deliver. Given the state of the BW community, the lack of alternatives and the already convincing features of SB I would definitely say that an open Beta would be the better choice. Call me an optimist, but I saw SB as an opportunity to expand Brood War to new players (or at least the "I played the campaign in 2001" type of new players) and not just cater to existing ones. In 2016, that community is accustomed to having all the bells and whistles a server can offer; the things I listed in my post, for example. As SB is right now, I just don't think it's appealing enough for a person who is not already at least a solid ICCup D level in Brood War and a fairly longtime member of the community. For that reason alone, I would rather that the product be complete before its advent is heavily marketed and shared. But this thread alone, and the discussion surrounding it, is already quite heavy marketing. The celebrity endorsements (if we can call it that) of streamers, casters and other community figures, have created a certain hype. People know that its there but they cant get in. Dont you think you are driving away all those unlucky ones who really would like to try it right now? People with passion that burns a little too bright; if it is not fed it might just burn out. I fear that all the hype generated right now with a closed beta is more damaging than opening the beta up and risking potential disappointment. If the SB team really wanted to keep the beta closed for so long they should not have put it out in public and paraded it like this at this point in time. It creates sort of an "old-boys-club" image; new members not welcome.
You are completely right, I don't disagree with you. There is a subset of the community who is butthurt about the fact that they:
1. Never did anything of value for the community or became prominent figures on the forums, and therefore weren't hand-picked to earn a spot in the closed beta, or
2. Didn't win the lottery that followed and continues until now (although, I am sure that players who have XP machines get glossed over by default, as XP is not supported as I just found out recently). More about this later.
Those people are getting pushed away, sure.
By the same token, I will add that activity on SB, meaning the playing habits of players to whom these points do not apply, isn't as high as it could be given that there are some QoL features still missing. A person logs on, asks "Game?" and then gets no answer for 2-3 minutes, and then logs off and goes to play on ICCup or goes AFK. Their question falls on deaf ears. Even if you send your friend a message, unless they pull up the window, they are oblivious to it. You host a room, people come and go, but you are none the wiser unless you have multiple monitors or are using windows side-by-side. In other words, the absence of these ease-of-access features puts a damper on activity even among the most dedicated (1. above) and most fortunate (2. above) players in the community. How would that be any different with a new wave of players who are not familiar with the community and thus have few to no friends in the existing playerbase?
As I said before, you can call me an optimist, but I think that they hype surrounding the closed beta and the article that was published (on Red Bull?) are only a fraction of what is the potential for this server and Brood War in general. My dreams may be lofty but I see more publicity, more community outreach (especially to foreign communities in Russia, China, Korea, and ... *sigh* yes, even Peru), more featured streamer/"celebrity" support, so on and so forth. Even if the whole package is by no means a certainty, each individual aspect is an undeniable possibility. When that time comes, I want SB to be the best it could be, and that takes time and effort for the development teams and patience from the existing fanbase. Simple math states that the community of potential new players is immeasurably larger than the community of non-prominent, unlucky, butthurt posters who whine on TL forums about not getting in. I would be much more concerned with retaining a better % of the former than pleasing a greater % of the latter.
Onto the "old boys club" and the lottery point earlier: I've met people on SB that have NO presence on TeamLiquid and have only joined after being accepted into SB. I've met people on SB who are not prominent TL posters by any measure. The waves of invites are impartial. As others have said above, the "old boys club" image is a consequence of the fact that people who have had a stable presence on this site and can be trusted were trusted early enough. This is a win/win situation as those people have already proven their dedication and are more likely to bugtest/bugreport, and for those people it is a form of recognition for their contributions thus far. Have you noticed how only the people who haven't been fortunate to be randomly selected for an invite wave complain about this "favoritism?" And how they quickly silence themselves after they get in themselves (Telecom)? So even though this server is invite-only right now, it isn't as selective as you and others are trying to make it seem.
|
On November 29 2016 04:37 Jealous wrote:
By the same token, I will add that activity on SB, meaning the playing habits of players to whom these points do not apply, isn't as high as it could be given that there are some QoL features still missing. A person logs on, asks "Game?" and then gets no answer for 2-3 minutes, and then logs off and goes to play on ICCup or goes AFK. Their question falls on deaf ears. [...]
And my opinion is that this situation would actually improve with more people having access to SB. There is certainly a problem with a lack of QoL features, but there is also a problem with not too many active players. Many people, me included, got the random invite, tested SB, played one or two games, and never logged back on. In the meantime there is people who could certainly be active players and actually contribute by testing, suggesting changes, and keeping the server alive. The random invite waves are not a great tool to get "quality people" into SB. Thats not a problem with an open beta or large invite waves because you get the good to counteract the bad. But if you really want to keep it a small closed beta I think it would be more beneficial to invite the people who feel really strongly about it instead of random members who sign up just because they can.
I actually thought about giving my invite away to somebody who really wants to play but unfortunately I already claimed it and used the same account as on TL. I think SB would have gotten more milage out of somebody else getting my place in the beta.
On November 29 2016 04:37 Jealous wrote:
[...] So even though this server is invite-only right now, it isn't as selective as you and others are trying to make it seem.
Considering that I actually got an invite I know that the "regular" joes who are not popular or known have a realistic chance of getting in. I am not saying it actually IS an "old-boys-club" but I am saying it kind of seems that way. Having a bad imagine does not mean you need to be a bad person.
|
On November 29 2016 05:29 RoomOfMush wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2016 04:37 Jealous wrote:
By the same token, I will add that activity on SB, meaning the playing habits of players to whom these points do not apply, isn't as high as it could be given that there are some QoL features still missing. A person logs on, asks "Game?" and then gets no answer for 2-3 minutes, and then logs off and goes to play on ICCup or goes AFK. Their question falls on deaf ears. [...] And my opinion is that this situation would actually improve with more people having access to SB. There is certainly a problem with a lack of QoL features, but there is also a problem with not too many active players. Many people, me included, got the random invite, tested SB, played one or two games, and never logged back on. In the meantime there is people who could certainly be active players and actually contribute by testing, suggesting changes, and keeping the server alive. The random invite waves are not a great tool to get "quality people" into SB. Thats not a problem with an open beta or large invite waves because you get the good to counteract the bad. But if you really want to keep it a small closed beta I think it would be more beneficial to invite the people who feel really strongly about it instead of random members who sign up just because they can. I actually thought about giving my invite away to somebody who really wants to play but unfortunately I already claimed it and used the same account as on TL. I think SB would have gotten more milage out of somebody else getting my place in the beta. Show nested quote +On November 29 2016 04:37 Jealous wrote:
[...] So even though this server is invite-only right now, it isn't as selective as you and others are trying to make it seem. Considering that I actually got an invite I know that the "regular" joes who are not popular or known have a realistic chance of getting in. I am not saying it actually IS an "old-boys-club" but I am saying it kind of seems that way. Having a bad imagine does not mean you need to be a bad person.
i think right now is this way and proly must be this way,but when more features come to play like match making,lets hope it comes way more open and i myself can grab an invitation 
|
Are you guys planning a future feature where there is a separate phone app for just the chat channels?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
