|
On November 02 2010 13:42 Highways wrote:
Bnet is just so epic fail it's unbelievable. Props to Valve for delivering what people actually want.
Can't disagree with the first sentence, but you do realize that Valve hasn't delivered anything yet, right? Game companies always promise the moon when they announce a game, and years later when the game is actually released, a lot of those features don't make it. I can absolutely guarantee you that DoTA2 will not have all these things as advertised. Also, it's ridiculous to compare a launched game to one that was just announced, and as others have said, many of those features don't even make sense for SC2.
As Gamjadori pointed out, Steam was a pile of shit for a few years after it was released too, and now it's great. That doesn't excuse Blizzard for releasing Bnet2 in its current shape, but people really need to keep it in mind when they're fawning over Valve and wondering why Blizzard can't be as good. Perhaps creating a social multigame platform for millions of people is a little harder than you think?
|
As long as blizzard can come through on the things they have promised and really change bnet 2.0 I will be happy. I am content with the current system but really could see it getting much better, and I would really love for blizzard to integrate some sort of actual esports ability into bnet2.0 itself. The GSL and MLG series are just so much fun to watch, craft cup and the like, I really do want it to succeed and it just seems like blizzard isn't devoting as much as they could to doing so.
Then again they are company and the company must make profits so that isn't too suprising.
|
On November 02 2010 14:35 ShadowDrgn wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2010 13:42 Highways wrote:
Bnet is just so epic fail it's unbelievable. Props to Valve for delivering what people actually want. Can't disagree with the first sentence, but you do realize that Valve hasn't delivered anything yet, right? Game companies always promise the moon when they announce a game, and years later when the game is actually released, a lot of those features don't make it. I can absolutely guarantee you that DoTA2 will not have all these things as advertised. Also, it's ridiculous to compare a launched game to one that was just announced, and as others have said, many of those features don't even make sense for SC2. As Gamjadori pointed out, Steam was a pile of shit for a few years after it was released too, and now it's great. That doesn't excuse Blizzard for releasing Bnet2 in its current shape, but people really need to keep it in mind when they're fawning over Valve and wondering why Blizzard can't be as good. Perhaps creating a social multigame platform for millions of people is a little harder than you think?
We are talking about Valve, though. They are the direct Blizzard equivalent.
They have learned an awful lot during their TF2 experience. I have a sneaking suspicion that they may be able to deliver on some of their promises.
With all that said, I have some major reservations:
The one thing I would not like to see is a TF2 approach to DOTA. It should be ferocious and competitive, and every time you join a game it should be a serious investment. You should be playing THAT game to WIN that game. None of this "drop-in, drop-out" bull **** that actually made Call of Duty MW1 more fun to play on consoles than on PC.
When you join a TF2 game, you're messing around, firing rockets here, switching classes there, teams are getting autobalanced etc. It's great fun, absolutely, but aside from the really top end clan scrims, there's nothing competitive about it. I have no sense that the other team is desperately trying to win so much as both teams are just sort of chilling out and having fun like you might with three buddies when you play smash brothers.
That's great for TF2. But not for DOTA. I want to see a really serious ladder system, not the standard FPS model of having 12 vs. 12 and people just checking through their server browser to find a game they can hop into that valve seems to love on the basis that it "promotes community."
DOTA 2 should be all about eating carebears alive.
|
On November 02 2010 14:16 deek wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2010 13:54 Gamjadori wrote:
I disagree. Up till recent years Valve handled their community and community feedback rather poorly. I can't remember a single instance in between 1998 and sometime in 2007 when Steam started getting good that Valve managed to produce a decent patch or feature for any of their games I played. I want to remember Blizzard being miles ahead of Valve at the start of this century in regards to community feedback, but recently it would seem the tables have turned. Valve has constently been ahead of other developers when they released models that moved with players talking way back on the goldsrc engine, the release of steam back in 2003 changed the gaming industry and how we get games, half-life 2 was a huge success in features, the source engine is one of the most flexible engines out there. The dates youve specified are interesting because valve didnt really release a lot untill steam, but consider that they were making steam, so only smaller games such as opposing force/blue shift. Things like counter-strike although originall mods, have been taken in by valve and while some may argue that they have been made worse or not, Valve still has a large list of the most popular titles on the planet, from single player games to mutliplayer. Another note is how many of valve's developers are from the valve community, former mod developers etc, from your statement it seems like youve only really been around valve games since 2005/6 most likely with the release of HL2 ep one The interesting feature of course replays and how they will do them as of atm current demos, the source engines current replay system is about 10mb for an hour game but steam cloud only allows about 1mb storage per game. As for DotA and lawsuits, valve already have DotA trademarked but so does a lil company called Dota allstars, so it will be interesting how that pans out, but valve did have it passed before dota-allstars LLC TLDR; Valve good, blizzard naughty naughty boys
Actually contrary to your assumption I haven't really been around Valve since 2005, after the release of HL2. Once my HL2 mod project ended in early 2006 I've only come back to play the occasional HL2 episodes and Portal, which is why my opinion on Valve might be a little skewed towards how they used to operate in the older days.
As for Steam, sure it did (somewhat) change the way we distribute games today, but back in 2003 when it was released, it was a HUGE mess. Bugs everywhere, nothing worked like intended, and it ushered in the dreaded age where online connections are required to play even in a LAN environment (which was a hugh deal back then when most smaller LAN parties couldn't muster a decent Internet connection). While they eventually solved most problems, back then, most Valve games were pretty much unplayable for a few mouths due to Steam, and there were even people talking about setting up their own WON servers to bypass Steam.
As for Valves support for the modding community I agree that it's gotten pretty good, but at the release of HL2 it wasn't all that great. The actual modding tools where not released until way later than they initially promised, and modding HL2 upon release was not a pleasant experience, far from what Valve had promised.
As for modders being hired, back then I only remember a few of the original CS developers being brought on the team as Valve bought CS back in 2000. At that time it was pretty much the only multiplayer game they ran on their own, and in my opinion, since Valve acquired CS in 2000 they didn't release a single good patch in their 6 years of managing the game. The refused to fix the simplest of bugs yet continued to add "features" and changing gameplay that the community mass petitioned against.
Frankly, a lot of things with Valve back then were the same as things are with Blizzard right now. The whole "new system being shoved down our throats" despite being a downgrade is quite the same now with B.net 2.0 as it was with Steam back in the day. Perhaps Blizzard will, just like Valve, eventually sort things out. But lets not forget it's 2010 now, and not 2003 as with Steam. B.net 2.0 isn't some revolutionary experiment, it's the system that is running the games we love and play every day. As paying costumers we have the right to demand some functionality, especially when it's regarding simple problems that have either been solved by Blizzard themselves on previous occasions (such as chat channels and cross realm play) or by other companies (meaning it's proven doable). Most of what people are asking for is completely reasonable, and I see no reason why Blizzard can't solve these problems save greed or laziness.
|
On November 02 2010 12:47 TheYango wrote:
It's been discussed that in a game centered around 1v1, reconnect isn't practical. Spending a minute out of 45 minutes is a slight, but not terrible disadvantage in a MOBA. A minute disconnected in a 1v1 SC2 game is basically an unwinnable advantage, except in situations where the person remaining in game was already ridiculously behind..
But the game is already paused for that 45 seconds during a disconnect. I don't see why there can't be an option to rejoin if that timer is still counting down. I've lost team games due to my teammate's internet going out for a split second, and he's sitting there watching the timer countdown from across the room unable to do anything.
|
Australia7069 Posts
I hope that when this releases it'll force blizzard to implement the same features to match
|
Power to steam and Dota2. Good competition makes the other racers push even harder to produce great games.
|
On November 02 2010 14:04 Shana wrote:
pretty sure b.net 2.0 capable of recon things, but it won't change a thing. Even if you can recon on 1v1, it will take some time and by the time you reconnected maybe your enemies have destroy your base. 5v5 sure missing 1 person in 1-2 minutes won't matters much, but on 1v1 RTS game it matters.
The game is paused, no?
|
On November 02 2010 15:00 Meta wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2010 12:47 TheYango wrote:
It's been discussed that in a game centered around 1v1, reconnect isn't practical. Spending a minute out of 45 minutes is a slight, but not terrible disadvantage in a MOBA. A minute disconnected in a 1v1 SC2 game is basically an unwinnable advantage, except in situations where the person remaining in game was already ridiculously behind.. But the game is already paused for that 45 seconds during a disconnect.
That is a lag timer, not a disconnect timer.
If you your net D/C's you get dropped straight away in SC2.
|
On November 02 2010 13:59 andeh wrote:
do you really want chat channels?
Ironically, DOTA 2 won't have traditional chat channels either (apart from steam group chats) from what i know up until now.
soooooo ...
|
On November 02 2010 12:38 Lunares wrote:
Why can't SC2 support this when DOTA 2 can?
Because DOTA2 was in development much longer than sc2... no wait, that's not right.
|
Valve has HLTV, best spectator program ever! Nothing beat being able to watch a CS match from whatever POV I wanted to watch. HLTV was very spoiling for all CS players when it comes to watching other live games because nothing can compare to the functionality and awsomeness of controlly what you see while listening to a cast to keep track of what you might be missing. Seriously, Blizzard needs to pick that up from them. I tried making a couple posts during beta on their suggestion forums but no one seemed to care 
However, I'm assuming in DotA-2 the game would continue after someone disconnects thereby making the person that dropped behind in game. You really can't support that in Starcraft, I mean seriously, how would the logic behind that work? In a 1v1 your opponent drops you just rush their base and kill them before they reconnect. And to Hell if I'm waiting for them to "maybe" be able to reconnect.
A reconnect feature does not belong in SC2 ladder games, an argument can be made, however, for custom games and would make sense for Blizzard to possibly add, assuming you can actually use the vote kick on the chat box to get rid of players if you don't want to wait.
|
On November 02 2010 13:08 da_head wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2010 13:04 Navi wrote:On November 02 2010 13:00 da_head wrote:
oh wow.. lol.
well personally i think bnet 2.0 has the capacity to perform most of these functions. however, what people fail to realize is that blizzard released sc2 as an unfinished product. they did it as a favor really. they could have spent another year or so polishing up the game (with colored icons, etc) and bnet 2.0, but they decided to give us a fully playable version while adding in the features over time (watching replays with friends, chatrooms etc). i don't think its fair for us to fully judge sc2 until blizzard is done (with the final expansion). yeah that's gonna take a while, but that's how blizzard does things. I don't think they've mentioned this at all. Is this like a conspiracy and/or your hopes or did they say it anywhere?  they've mentioned repeatedly that many of the features will be added after release since there wasn't time to do so before hand. also, given that they completely rehauled bnet (which is a massive undertaking), it will take years for them to fully optimize it. But once they do, it will serve as a platform for their new games years to come (diablo III, warcraft IV, their new mmo, etc)
The question still remains: why the hell weren't those things planned from the beginning? Apart from being a really good game, these features (ability to play with people all over the world, chat channels, shared replays, clans) made Starcraft the game that it is today.
|
Valve is inherently superior to blizzard in the sense that they have a very powerful infrastructure in the server/connection/logistics side of things..
|
if Blizzard adds LAN, i would call it a tie easily. Man, hope they release a gameplay trailer soon....
|
Just wait Starcraft 2 is very young and Blizzard is still very actively patching it. Starcraft 2 will get better overtime. Valve has been constantly working on updating Steam and their Source engine for 6 years. Just give Blizzard some time, they are the best developer in the world, and Blizzard DOTA will be a vastly better game than DOTA 2.
|
On November 02 2010 13:12 Dommk wrote:
This is so stupid. Someone dropping for 2mins in a 5v5 Dota game isn't the same as someone dropping for 2mins in a 1v1. Pretty much a auto loss at that stage, anyone who isn't stupid will just roll the D/C'd player.
Adding this reconnect feature to SC2 would have been a waste of time and money.
Facebook integration is a waste of time and money, sort of.
But a reconnect feature... don't think only about yourself laddering. Think about those tournaments ruined because 1 player was dropped. With a reconnect feature they would be able to pause the game until the player is back in the game.
|
Well sc2 definatly got the short stick on this one...
|
Well dota 2 is just a editor game in sc2  So the least they can do is add the replay and all the other stuff.
I think it sucks that ice frog doesnt use the sc2 editor :/ He should have rather made a deal with blizz than valve. I dont think dota 2 will ever come close to dota's fame..
|
On November 02 2010 13:23 nihoh wrote:
Can valve sue Blizzard for making Blizzard DOTA then? @@
And why would you think that?
Because Icefrog is working for them?
First of you don't own the maps or content created in the editor, and even if you would , it wouldn't make any diference.
Icefrog only took Dota over from version 5.96b.
Previosly the developer was Guinsoo and the original creator was Eul.
Eul make Dota, Guinsoo made Dota: Allstars and Icefrog continued Dota: Allstars from version 5.96b. Also dota was actualy designed after an old sc1 custom map AoS.
So Icefrog is the least deserving person of all dota creators. People give him way to much credit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
