|
On February 08 2012 02:14 kuresuti wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2012 01:51 Kurr wrote:On February 08 2012 01:48 ThaZenith wrote:
And yet again Blizzard is broadcasting their stupidity to the world.
They're lucky that people are so invested in them/their games in the present, but they're losing a lot of future loyalty by purposely fucking over their player base. Completely agreed. I'm not sold on SC2 expansions yet and I'm not sold on any future games after D3 (including the expansion they will obviously sell us for the same price as the game). In the future, my purchases of Blizzard games will be judged like other games so I will be harsher. I might buy a WC4 since I like WC3 a lot more than SC but it will highly depend on if they change their approach towards their games. I'm going to buy Diablo 3 because I've been waiting a long time for it but even then that's a bit generous of me. I'll probably end up playing GW2 in the long term. Seriously, how can you even think like this. You are experiencing a temporary rage because blizzard are idiots, but you haven't even tried the final product, maybe not even the very small beta! You are not sold on the D3 expansion? What parts of it do you not like? Please list specifics.
I don't think you understand. We were forced to buy SC2 and will be forced to buy Diablo 3, but the expansions will have to run under their own merit. If they don't live up to his expectations, we won't buy them, compared to the fact that we'll buy Diablo 3 even if they make almost every decision wrong. Too invested at this point not to.
And I think the same way. HotS isn't an auto-sale for me like WoL was, because I haven't been waiting for an infinite number of years. If it isn't an improvement, I won't buy it, that simple. And if they keep ignoring the social aspect of games, they won't have many people waiting around to buy it regardless, having left due to boredom.
|
i personally dont care. i dont really miss chatchannels that much in sc2
|
On February 08 2012 04:05 ThaZenith wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2012 02:14 kuresuti wrote:On February 08 2012 01:51 Kurr wrote:On February 08 2012 01:48 ThaZenith wrote:
And yet again Blizzard is broadcasting their stupidity to the world.
They're lucky that people are so invested in them/their games in the present, but they're losing a lot of future loyalty by purposely fucking over their player base. Completely agreed. I'm not sold on SC2 expansions yet and I'm not sold on any future games after D3 (including the expansion they will obviously sell us for the same price as the game). In the future, my purchases of Blizzard games will be judged like other games so I will be harsher. I might buy a WC4 since I like WC3 a lot more than SC but it will highly depend on if they change their approach towards their games. I'm going to buy Diablo 3 because I've been waiting a long time for it but even then that's a bit generous of me. I'll probably end up playing GW2 in the long term. Seriously, how can you even think like this. You are experiencing a temporary rage because blizzard are idiots, but you haven't even tried the final product, maybe not even the very small beta! You are not sold on the D3 expansion? What parts of it do you not like? Please list specifics. I don't think you understand. We were forced to buy SC2 and will be forced to buy Diablo 3, but the expansions will have to run under their own merit. If they don't live up to his expectations, we won't buy them, compared to the fact that we'll buy Diablo 3 even if they make almost every decision wrong. Too invested at this point not to. And I think the same way. HotS isn't an auto-sale for me like WoL was, because I haven't been waiting for an infinite number of years. If it isn't an improvement, I won't buy it, that simple. And if they keep ignoring the social aspect of games, they won't have many people waiting around to buy it regardless, having left due to boredom.
Isn't it possible people could buy expansions because of the... I don't know, actual content?
|
On February 08 2012 03:10 kuresuti wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2012 02:45 papaz wrote:On February 08 2012 02:14 kuresuti wrote:On February 08 2012 01:51 Kurr wrote:On February 08 2012 01:48 ThaZenith wrote:
And yet again Blizzard is broadcasting their stupidity to the world.
They're lucky that people are so invested in them/their games in the present, but they're losing a lot of future loyalty by purposely fucking over their player base. Completely agreed. I'm not sold on SC2 expansions yet and I'm not sold on any future games after D3 (including the expansion they will obviously sell us for the same price as the game). In the future, my purchases of Blizzard games will be judged like other games so I will be harsher. I might buy a WC4 since I like WC3 a lot more than SC but it will highly depend on if they change their approach towards their games. I'm going to buy Diablo 3 because I've been waiting a long time for it but even then that's a bit generous of me. I'll probably end up playing GW2 in the long term. Seriously, how can you even think like this. You are experiencing a temporary rage because blizzard are idiots, but you haven't even tried the final product, maybe not even the very small beta! You are not sold on the D3 expansion? What parts of it do you not like? Please list specifics. SC2 is losing more and more players. I don't know why that is but I can only speak for myself when I say that I stopped logging in because of bnet without going through the complete list of things I don't like with it. I expected SC2 to be like WoW, that is the population increasing over time not declining a year after release. What made WoW was the social aspect of the game. I played so many years and thinking of what I actually did in the game it was like playing half the time and chatting the other half. The social aspects of the game were great. I got to knew a lot of people thanks to believe or not global chat/trade channels. What will make players keep playing Diablo 3 and increasing its playerbase won't be a new set of weapons or new areas. It will be the social aspect of the game. If the game or environment will make you feel lonely like bnet with SC2 does I'm afraid D3 will not have an increasing playerbase over time. I'd say if the playerbase declines just after a year the game is quite fail. I think you are overestimating the importance of chat channels, they are important but they are not integral. Many single player games do fine without any social aspect at all. The single player portion of D3 will most likely do just as well. How do you define success anyway? SC2 is a success of giant proportions, but it is losing players, is it a failed game after all? You do have a valid point in that the social aspect is important in a game focused on multiplayer, but I think the majority of players will either play alone or with previous friends. I might be wrong about this but didn't most people use d2jsp or similar sites to do their socializing in D2? Also comparing SC2 to D3 is difficult, since D3 can be played without competing. SC2 is a very competitive game and if you are not willing to compete, there isn't much content for you to enjoy. Casual bronze league games might be what they are, but they are still competitions. In D3 there will be a lot of content for the solo and/or non-competitive player to explore.+ Show Spoiler +Don't get me wrong, I want chat channels because they are convenient. It won't ruin the game if they aren't there though in my opinion. EDIT: Missing word :O
This pretty much, it's mind-boggling why people keep bringing up SC2.
It's like comparing apple & pears, just makes no sense whatsoever. :/
|
I've honestly been so utterly dissapointed with everything in Diablo 3 and most of SC2, and these are most likely the reason I stopped gaming in the first place. If I ever do some back, most likely will play GW2 or PoE, both are lightyears ahead of D3 atm.
edit: typo
|
On February 08 2012 02:44 AimlessAmoeba wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2012 06:05 KenNage wrote:
i bought sc2 and regreted it, seems like this one will go to the same path so im not making the same mistake again (: Says the person with over 500 posts on an sc2-related forum.
I've been here for like 8 years and I assure you, it's not because of sc2. I don't know who comes to these decisions in the blizzard conference rooms but damn, I never thought I'd see such a lackluster sequel while having the potential to be better in every single way.
It's like tuning in to watch Usain Bolt run the 100 meter sprint through the shallow end of a pool while wearing snow shoes and a straight jacket.
|
I do like the new Battle.net and I couldn't care less about chat channels or clan support. Seing that I will not be buggered by goldspammer or other idiots makes me happy. I do see the reason though why others might disagree.
|
This is pathetic, no reason for blizzard not to implement chat channels. They already have them, they just need to make the windows bigger and add moderation / access priveleges.
|
Yea well Id say after AH system this is the second reason why d2jsp will remain super important in D3.
Its just that RMAH will allow to trade pretty much only basic items because trading rares and now even uniques with too many variables can take literally weeks even if you already know people who might be interested, its totally unrealistic that anonymous RMAH with limited time to offer could ever be good tool for trading really interesting items.
As it goes for community, is Blizzard really saying that having it is bad thing? That there should be only closed groups of people, just like guilds or clans, with no way to meet new people? On the side note, I must say that year after year I feel more that I dont belong to thins world anymore ^^
Anyway, my point is that this is just another thing that is not going to have ingame solution... But since we are totally used to that from D2, I personally dont see such a big issue in it anymore.
I mean its not like Blizzard doesnt think its needed, they clearly said its a wrong thing to have. I could never ever agree with that, but nvm this game is made for 15 years old to last next 5 years, I cant really see myself playing it for even part of that time... So Ill just have to deal with it as it is - I mean, I dont agree with about 1/3 decissions Blizzard is making, but new generations somehow like it.
|
On February 08 2012 04:05 ThaZenith wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2012 02:14 kuresuti wrote:On February 08 2012 01:51 Kurr wrote:On February 08 2012 01:48 ThaZenith wrote:
And yet again Blizzard is broadcasting their stupidity to the world.
They're lucky that people are so invested in them/their games in the present, but they're losing a lot of future loyalty by purposely fucking over their player base. Completely agreed. I'm not sold on SC2 expansions yet and I'm not sold on any future games after D3 (including the expansion they will obviously sell us for the same price as the game). In the future, my purchases of Blizzard games will be judged like other games so I will be harsher. I might buy a WC4 since I like WC3 a lot more than SC but it will highly depend on if they change their approach towards their games. I'm going to buy Diablo 3 because I've been waiting a long time for it but even then that's a bit generous of me. I'll probably end up playing GW2 in the long term. Seriously, how can you even think like this. You are experiencing a temporary rage because blizzard are idiots, but you haven't even tried the final product, maybe not even the very small beta! You are not sold on the D3 expansion? What parts of it do you not like? Please list specifics. I don't think you understand. We were forced to buy SC2 and will be forced to buy Diablo 3, but the expansions will have to run under their own merit. If they don't live up to his expectations, we won't buy them, compared to the fact that we'll buy Diablo 3 even if they make almost every decision wrong. Too invested at this point not to..
I'm confused, how are you invested in a game that hasn't been released?
If anything, I can understand being invested in HoTS because having spent a bunch of time with WoL (even though I still see that as a stretch), but on D3?
How are we forced to buy anything? Is Blizz hypnotizing people or something?
|
On February 08 2012 05:49 Moliere wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2012 04:05 ThaZenith wrote:On February 08 2012 02:14 kuresuti wrote:On February 08 2012 01:51 Kurr wrote:On February 08 2012 01:48 ThaZenith wrote:
And yet again Blizzard is broadcasting their stupidity to the world.
They're lucky that people are so invested in them/their games in the present, but they're losing a lot of future loyalty by purposely fucking over their player base. Completely agreed. I'm not sold on SC2 expansions yet and I'm not sold on any future games after D3 (including the expansion they will obviously sell us for the same price as the game). In the future, my purchases of Blizzard games will be judged like other games so I will be harsher. I might buy a WC4 since I like WC3 a lot more than SC but it will highly depend on if they change their approach towards their games. I'm going to buy Diablo 3 because I've been waiting a long time for it but even then that's a bit generous of me. I'll probably end up playing GW2 in the long term. Seriously, how can you even think like this. You are experiencing a temporary rage because blizzard are idiots, but you haven't even tried the final product, maybe not even the very small beta! You are not sold on the D3 expansion? What parts of it do you not like? Please list specifics. I don't think you understand. We were forced to buy SC2 and will be forced to buy Diablo 3, but the expansions will have to run under their own merit. If they don't live up to his expectations, we won't buy them, compared to the fact that we'll buy Diablo 3 even if they make almost every decision wrong. Too invested at this point not to.. I'm confused, how are you invested in a game that hasn't been released? If anything, I can understand being invested in HoTS because having spent a bunch of time with WoL (even though I still see that as a stretch), but on D3? How are we forced to buy anything? Is Blizz hypnotizing people or something?
Well kind of!
We grew up with Blizz' games and we saw them getting better and better. I really liked the bnet-features of WC3. Also everytime i opened a blizzgame-package i got surprised. I was surprised when i could play starcraft with a bunch of my friends with 1 cd in a lan without swapping the disc around. I was surprised when D2 got better with almost every patch and so on.
These days i really just want to see the new graphics, meet the heroes of my youth again, see how they do and play some games. Its not like i really mind paying 60 euros for a game anymore, i will buy the sc2 expansions for sure, no matter how bad they are and even though i shouldnt.
But it makes me sad, that blizzards "suprises" these days are not the ones i expected from them. They are just not the "cool young guys making great games with features nobody else dares" anymore, they are the mainstream-establishment now.
Regards
|
Yeah, I miss having to search through a host of a-holes and BMing neanderthals, not to mention the spambots, in order to find a decent game on a map that I actually want to play.
As for the people who are vowing not to buy the game unless the game is made according to your exact, and admittedly faulty, conditions, good! Maybe you'll find something important to get angry about instead of what amounts to a game.
|
I don't really care, chat channels are just spamfests and I don't usually make friends through game chats, I usually play with m friends and if I don't I mostly don't make any type of contact. If I just enjoy playing with someone I randomly find while gaming I add him to friends list and play some more, but that's it.
I understand many people's complaints about this, in my personal case it doesn't matter. I think they're mostly just annoying. People in chat channels are childish and annoying mostly, it's almost as bad as Blizz forums, which is already disastrous.
|
Honestly my biggest complaint with the game is only 4players....really? Hell I can log on d2 right now "the game no one plays anymore" and find more than 7 friends to play with, just splits the community up even more.
|
On February 08 2012 08:36 NotSorry wrote:
Honestly my biggest complaint with the game is only 4players....really? Hell I can log on d2 right now "the game no one plays anymore" and find more than 7 friends to play with, just splits the community up even more.
In terms of balance and difficulty it works. In terms of Blizzards goal for how the game ought to be played, it works. Yes, it would be nice to play with more. But we have to argue this sensibly. When you mention 8 players, why 8?
Does it benefit the current game, or the current dungeons? Does it either hinder or compliment how the game current is set up? If 8, why not 9, 10, 11..etc? Must be able to actually make arguments for why and why not we should have X amount if players. From what I have seen, Blizzard has a pretty good reason for it. Whereas the complaints against usually revoles around; it was in D2 and or that I just want to play with more of my friends.
|
Blizzard is not run anymore by nerds, but from professionals.
Blizzard is not anymore the company you could blindly buy games from, but they still make very good games.
|
I miss being able to log onto Battle.net and getting distracted chatting with friends and random people for an hour before playing a single game.
|
On February 08 2012 07:33 suspiria wrote:
Yeah, I miss having to search through a host of a-holes and BMing neanderthals, not to mention the spambots, in order to find a decent game on a map that I actually want to play.
I don't think anyone suggested getting rid of Battle.net 2.0 matchmaking. Good chat and good matchmaking aren't mutually exclusive. If everyone you ever met was a neanderthal, the problem is either that you need a thicker skin, or that you weren't hooking up with the right people and finding the right channels for you. And I don't think it's helpful to pretend it's easy to find good custom games in SC2.
|
On February 08 2012 08:01 mordk wrote:
I don't really care, chat channels are just spamfests and I don't usually make friends through game chats, I usually play with m friends and if I don't I mostly don't make any type of contact. If I just enjoy playing with someone I randomly find while gaming I add him to friends list and play some more, but that's it.
I understand many people's complaints about this, in my personal case it doesn't matter. I think they're mostly just annoying. People in chat channels are childish and annoying mostly, it's almost as bad as Blizz forums, which is already disastrous.
Exactly, also Real-ID should help keeping in touch with friends, you can actually see how much room there is in your friend's games. Also you store a list of the last x "random" people you've played with so you can easily get in contact with them again later if you want.
|
So we've established that people that are antisocial don't care about chat channels....ok. That doesn't mean they shouldnt exist. There's no feature that 100% of people will use or like unless it's a mandatory part of the game. I don't understand the "well I PERSONALLY won't use it....therefore it's fine being gone." It's close minded. It's just like the offline/online debate the game has brought up. I want everyone to get as much use and enjoyment out of the game and would love chat channels.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
