EPTedit: private chat should be less strict than public channels I guess (should they ever implement them).
[SC2B] Battle.net - 1 Step Forward, 2.0 Steps Back - Page 8
| Forum Index > News |
micronesia
United States24701 Posts
edit: private chat should be less strict than public channels I guess (should they ever implement them). | ||
|
LordLastDay
34 Posts
And that censoring makes me think of Korean mmorpgs... sounds terrible. lol When creating a game it clearly shows creator and what not: http://starcraft2.com/features/misc/images/bnet/ss7.jpg Or read the page: http://starcraft2.com/features/misc/battlenet.xml As for browsing them that's a category list. It like puts the available games in folders, so by clicking "DoTa" you get list of all DoTa games etc. or that's how I've understood it? | ||
|
Nub4ever
Canada1981 Posts
| ||
|
ionize
Ireland399 Posts
| ||
|
nagash
Australia58 Posts
But yeah, doesn't make sense not to have them in game. | ||
|
iTcouLdbeWorsE
Germany15 Posts
As for the matchmaking, it seems to do its job. I am disappointed that they didn't allow for the option to pick matchups (NOTE: I do not mean to pick your opponents race, I mean to pick YOUR race for each specific matchup - instead of picking T I could pick TvP, TvZ, PvT, TvR) but I wasn't expecting this to be available. u better think that through again... because if u would have spend at least 1sec thinking about it u would have recognized it isn't possible. so u play PvT? oh this guy plays TvT but ZvP! and now? | ||
|
Metaspace
Austria670 Posts
I am heavily disappointed by Blizzard. I think the omission of chat lobbies like in SC1 is a serious mistake - I know many people (including myself) that log on to Bnet as much to play games as to meet friends and have a chat. This social component is what makes players feel at home and integrated into a community - and it is so simple to implement from a technical viewpoint. I even know people that log on even when they cannot play. The replay restriction to one person watching is the same. My friends and me regularly watch replays together, showing off own play, analyzing other people's play, etc. I even often watch the replay of one of my games together with my (random) opponent in order to discuss. | ||
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
On February 25 2010 11:57 djWHEAT wrote: Hah. My newest reason why Battle.net needs some work. You can't use the word "came". "Who did you come here with" "I *&# with my brother" English Language 0 - Battle.Net Censoring 1 Options -> Turn off mature word filter. I did this day 1, so I can only assume this is why I haven't noticed this. Filters are fucking retarded, so I'm sooooo happy I accidently stumbled across this option early. On February 25 2010 13:44 LordLastDay wrote: I'm bit of a loner and I never really used the chat much as it's just full of bored trolls, but it probably does seem pretty empty without a chat. :/ And that censoring makes me think of Korean mmorpgs... sounds terrible. lol When creating a game it clearly shows creator and what not: http://starcraft2.com/features/misc/images/bnet/ss7.jpg Or read the page: http://starcraft2.com/features/misc/battlenet.xml As for browsing them that's a category list. It like puts the available games in folders, so by clicking "DoTa" you get list of all DoTa games etc. or that's how I've understood it? No, it shows the author of the map, not the host of the game  Sorry for the confusion of terms.On February 25 2010 17:51 iTcouLdbeWorsE wrote: u better think that through again... because if u would have spend at least 1sec thinking about it u would have recognized it isn't possible. so u play PvT? oh this guy plays TvT but ZvP! and now? I have spent a lot of time thinking about it. If matchups are incompatible you set both to their Vs Random pick. So: PvT PvZ TvP PvR vs ZvZ PvP PvT PvR = PvP | ||
|
bmml
United Kingdom962 Posts
On February 25 2010 09:15 Adeeler wrote: So a short summary of points is longer then I thought at first, maybe some points merge together
Some extra wish list type items from me at least:
A lot of things merge together in places so it doesn't seem like a lot of work to be done over the course of beta, that is if most of it isn't already being worked on already. I'd say the 1st set as put in the article are quite essential and the 2nd of bullet points is just my own musings. Good roundup, hopefully someone in power sees this. | ||
|
CTStalker
Canada9720 Posts
On February 25 2010 11:14 Stripe wrote: Online replays doesn't really matter to me, but it seems like implementing them is a large technical hurdle. I wonder what's so hard about it. I guess people can always try to sync up the replays and then use vent or whisper each other as a work around if online replays aren't implemented. My point is that these really minor don't really benefit or detriment BNET 2.0 significantly for most people. Maybe if they start to pile up though... it's not a technical hurdle at all. BW had online replays -- and even if BW hadn't had that capability, assuming it's a technical hurdle without considering what's involved is a little silly. watching a replay with another person is no different than playing a game against one | ||
|
oN_Silva
197 Posts
| ||
|
Kullosus
Canada18 Posts
| ||
|
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
On February 25 2010 22:09 oN_Silva wrote: what a crap topic, i hated the channels in starcraft and i hated them in diablo 2, iam so glad when we finally can have a nice lobby like in age of empires, this would be so sexxxxyy. bnet always sucked. What does the AoE lobby look like? I'm assuming you don't mean the old MSN zone crap but some newer Age of Empires (yeah, I haven't played AoE since the first one pretty much ;P). And if you don't like chat channels, just don't use them? | ||
|
lipebra
Brazil130 Posts
Whisper Commands= There ll be at realease On-line Group Replay Viewing= There ll be but later Simpler Logging In=Not gonna have, because they dont want to..... Off-line Messaging(or in-game mail'esqe system)= How to send a offline message if the game is 100% online??/ There ll be ingame messanger system Game Preferences Matchmaking (TvP, TvZ, etc)= U cant use this on ranked maches... and we ll now why.... U can choose in custom maches League Details= There ll be at release. Overall League Placement = Dont know, but there ll be final league tornament to see who is the best Replay Filters/Sort Columns= dont know Game Creator Name/Ping etc=dont know Switch Map in Private Games=dont know Password Protected Games= Sure there ll be some sort of it 5 Second Countdown Timer= Only good point. It funny to analyse the game that is in beta, Because most of features isnt usable. If those things dont ship, u can complain, but now...... | ||
|
CTStalker
Canada9720 Posts
On February 26 2010 00:09 lipebra wrote: Chat Channels= Cant u guys read?? There ll be chat channels at release. Whisper Commands= There ll be at realease On-line Group Replay Viewing= There ll be but later Simpler Logging In=Not gonna have, because they dont want to..... Off-line Messaging(or in-game mail'esqe system)= How to send a offline message if the game is 100% online??/ There ll be ingame messanger system Game Preferences Matchmaking (TvP, TvZ, etc)= U cant use this on ranked maches... and we ll now why.... U can choose in custom maches League Details= There ll be at release. Overall League Placement = Dont know, but there ll be final league tornament to see who is the best Replay Filters/Sort Columns= dont know Game Creator Name/Ping etc=dont know Switch Map in Private Games=dont know Password Protected Games= Sure there ll be some sort of it 5 Second Countdown Timer= Only good point. It funny to analyse the game that is in beta, Because most of features isnt usable. If those things dont ship, u can complain, but now...... the point of a beta is for the community to use it, analyze it, and give feedback. thanks for trying, though | ||
|
Angryhorse
Sweden387 Posts
| ||
|
Metaspace
Austria670 Posts
| ||
|
rererebanned
67 Posts
In fact the ability to have 2 chat channels open at the same time is good. I know why they dont want to implement it though. It results from the number of players. If few million people buy the game and say 500 thousand play at the same time on a server, implementing such a simple function as "whisper" probably requires few dedicated servers to keep track of the players. Even the problem of making an account name might be hard - since all the "cool" names will be quickly taken. Diablo2 has few layers of specially dedicated servers just to handle the lobbies and identifiing logged on players. One might think that this is a simple programming task - but with all the people joining/leaving/dropping it requires a lot of work. And probably some greedy CEO decided to cut it out of the game, because in diablo they had big problems to implement it. If a game doesnt have a name and password, there is no requirement for few servers dealing with a game list. Wonder if they thought how can one join "new" games though - with the maps you dont have. There has to be a form of a list after all. Unless the maps need to be downloaded "off-line". As for the "black screens" mentioned in the OP, they are not a bug, they are specially designed features - if you try to refresh the list too often, you get a 10 or 30 second ban, thus the blank screen (in starcraft) or communicate (in diablo2). This is designed to protect the servers from being killed by too many requests. And the servers, even in starcraft still have problems with coping with the sheer number of users. The /stats command comes to my mind. If you go to europe and try it on some random player the command wont work like 50-80% of the time. They skipped it, because it was too hard to implement. And they skip many other things. But perhaps instead of skipping, they should use the old ideas, that maybe arent the best, but WORK and are SCALABLE! Iccup lags so much, because it has crappy servers AND poor design. Bnetd or w/e emulator is used by them, poorly handles big numbers of users. Blizzards solutions do it pretty well, but require much more resources + they required a lot of time to be created. Someone decided to cut conrers I think to spend a bit less cash. Maybe they should drop the idea of "social bnet" anyway; do they want to make anohter facebook, but for nerds? | ||
|
Metaspace
Austria670 Posts
I do not think it would be a problem host much more - computing power has increased by a factor of 100 in the last ten years. | ||
|
rererebanned
67 Posts
On February 26 2010 02:41 Metaspace wrote: I am a software dev. Bnet 1.0 is 10 years old, and copes with the average of ~100,000 players online per server. I do not think it would be a problem host much more - computing power has increased by a factor of 100 in the last ten years. Yea, computing power is not a problem; but maintaining servers and developing sophisticated code to do the task requires big ammounts of resources. I suppose they dont want to use the current system at all. Not sure why, there are some bugs client side; not sure how it looks like server side. edit: I also wonder how are the players supposed to meet for the tournaments. There are different timezones etc. I think playing vs people from own division might be hard in "real" circumstances. | ||
| ||
