EPTQ&A w/ Chris Sigaty & David Kim - Page 16
| Forum Index > News |
|
Go1den
England116 Posts
| ||
|
hummingbird23
Norway359 Posts
| ||
|
Mykill
Canada3402 Posts
oh well. | ||
|
Onlinejaguar
Australia2823 Posts
| ||
|
villageidiot
353 Posts
On October 23 2011 17:07 Onlinejaguar wrote: I'm pretty sure there are guys in blizzard who would want LAN. Its not like they are just omitting it to piss customers off. I cant nail what it is, whether its anti piracy or what but there is probably a very good reason why they are so against it. Yeah, they probably dislike MLG. | ||
|
GaRFyelD
Bulgaria31 Posts
edit: I am asking about their plans on tournaments the way they were implemented @ Warcraft 3. I see no reason why we would not be able to play for small rewards here and there directly in battle.net. There will be sponsors to help this out for sure  | ||
|
SoFool
Malaysia96 Posts
quite contradicting lol oh well | ||
|
Xapti
Canada2473 Posts
In fact for 1v1 purposes of big games I think they are already pretty good. It currently isn't viable for ALL games to use it though, since it supports very few players, so it requires a bit work to set up and switch players and stuff, which is both a hassle and a challenge for players. KeSPA and ICCUP were/are giving Blizzard the finger for years... why not do it again? On October 23 2011 17:47 SoFool wrote: quite contradicting lol oh well I often talk about two sort of imbalances: 1. Often not what most people call imbalance. For instance in the quote you wrote, they called them problems — they didn't say it was imbalance problems. This type of "imbalance" I like to call non-winrate imbalance, or playability/diversity/fun-factor/mechanics balance. 2. win-loss balance... general traits of a race (across 1 unit or various units) and/or a map which causes a certain race to win more often in a certain matchup, over an average of many games at a certain estimated skill level. Sometimes the two are kind-of related, such as with the usefulness of some units like the hydralisks. Hydralisks are both a lackluster unit in general to play and use, as well as overall considered to be quite weak. If it was given an ability or something, it would very likely be buffing zerg overall for some (not all) scenarios. | ||
|
Teradur
97 Posts
I don't know about the rest of you, but back in the days, when they announced the whole b.net 2.0 and what they are planning to do with it, I was really excited. I thought they would continiously be working on it, implementing new features, makeingn changes and patches (non-balance) where needed. Now, over a year after release, it is basically still the same. The best change they have made so far, was the update of the observer interface. Still no clans, still no group replays, at times it feels like nobody is working on it at all. So far, Blizzard has not delivered what they promised, overall it feels like a step back compared to WC3. They have taken full controll of the online-experience of the game, but are simply not able to provide the kind of support that, for past games was mostly provided by creative communities. | ||
|
Roflhaxx
Korea (South)1244 Posts
On October 22 2011 12:36 Sinensis wrote: Activision Blizzard revenue: $4.768 billion per year (US dollars per year) (trailing 12-month value as of June 30, 2011) Valve's isn't half of that. And still Valve makes better games =/ | ||
|
sOvrn
United States678 Posts
On October 23 2011 19:18 Teradur wrote: I don't know about the rest of you, but back in the days, when they announced the whole b.net 2.0 and what they are planning to do with it, I was really excited. I thought they would continiously be working on it, implementing new features, makeingn changes and patches (non-balance) where needed. Now, over a year after release, it is basically still the same. The best change they have made so far, was the update of the observer interface. Still no clans, still no group replays, at times it feels like nobody is working on it at all. So far, Blizzard has not delivered what they promised, overall it feels like a step back compared to WC3. They have taken full controll of the online-experience of the game, but are simply not able to provide the kind of support that, for past games was mostly provided by creative communities. Agreed on every point. I still just really can't believe that war3's b.net interface (not matchmaking) was and is much better than sc2. B.net 2.0 has always felt cheap to me honestly and I'm just still amazed that after a whole year there has been 0 progress in basic things that were already implemented into the game. I'd further like to know why the lack of name changing (especially in absence of a clan tag system). There have been previous threads on the official forum and here, BEGGING blizzard to implement a paid name change system and it still has not been done. I think it's honestly crazy that ppl would be asking to pay money for a service that easily could be free, but either way Blizzard has not moved its ass on this and they've been saying it's been on the way for about a year already... >.< | ||
|
Cele
Germany4016 Posts
But from what i have learned on newer products, and decisions concerning them, im not suprised anymore by anything, concerning "Blizzivision". i mean, are you seriously shocked Lan mode isnt coming in HOTS? im not. neither am i shocked that blizz will sell in-game stuff for Diablo III for real money. This company has just plain changed. So for everyone who had high expectations to HOTS due to a dwindling, now overcome, idea of blizzards high credibility, innovativeness, user-friendliness, or something alike, i recommend you try to get it off your head. By doing so, im less dissapointed | ||
|
Sergio1992
Italy522 Posts
You should have asked these questions, instead. -Why you refuse to add lan? If you go into torrent site you are able to find program that allow you to play lan with SC2. - Why are you still asking for time for clan functionalities? Are you trying to find a way to gain money even with clan functionalities? - Why don't you add a lag check at selection screen so games aren't ruined by laggers? - Why don't you add a selection menu when you join custom melee games where you can choose the league which you wanna play with and which race? It is so boring when people leaves at game start or while game is starting, and I'm not claiming I never did it. -Why you, as a major competitive industry don't join on making the prize pool higher on tournaments, but instead you drain the events organizers? People, be smart. DON'T BUY DOTA FROM BLIZZARD. Do you want an incomplete game? BUY DOTA FROM VALVE, YOU WILL WAIT MORE TIME BUT AT LEAST YOU WILL HAVE A COMPLETE GAME AND IT WILL BE AMAZING. VALVE IS THE OLD BLIZZARD. | ||
|
AJMcSpiffy
United States1154 Posts
| ||
|
haegN
Norway531 Posts
On October 23 2011 11:26 vSaUCE wrote: I'm sorry, but this is just straight horse shit. Even horse mascot knows it. Just more typical commitment dodging and refusal to acknowledge serious issues with the game, particularly Battle.net. I... I don't even understand what their problem is anymore! I mean, God forbid a company ACTUALLY LISTEN to its customers for once and try to act on their concerns. It's like they think we're all over-exaggerating and unnecessarily whining about so many different problems just to be difficult. Well I'll tell you what, people wouldn't whine so much if they could see some ACTUAL PROGRESS for a change. The community WANTS eSports to be huge. The community WANTS enhanced Battle.net features and support. The community WANTS StarCraft 2 to be the "end all, be all" RTS. But based on Blizzard's actions lately, I think it's obvious that they couldn't care less about what the community wants. They're just a bunch of closed-minded developers who think they know best and claim that they're working on future support, but we still see no results from it. Yes, you do the hard part, Blizzard. You make the game. None of us could do that. But for the love of God... could it kill you to add a few highly demanded features every once and a while?! Oh yeah, and not just wait every 2-year expansion pack to release them?!! This is so true, this interview gave me nothing.. How effing hard is it to implement something you have made before?!? Bnet 0.2.. Jesus | ||
|
deafhobbit
United States828 Posts
Also, Valve is a much smaller company. Per employee, they make more than Google or Apple - http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2011/0228/technology-gabe-newell-videogames-valve-online-mayhem.html Of course, most of that is from steam, but the point stands. | ||
|
Railin
Canada96 Posts
Blizz q&a's like this one which more or less point out how other companies such as Riot, Valve are leaving them in the dust with their interface, user experience and support. Ahahah, you did NOT seriously call Riot a company with good "interface" and "user experience"? Battlenet is MILES ahead of Riot interface. LoL has no replay feature at all (unless you use a 3rd party mod!!), pvp.net or game client is crashing or has issues every 2nd day, and they STILL have not implemented observer mode that they have been promising for 2 years - a feature that Guild Wars had already back in 2005! Not saying League is not an amazing game, because it is, and I love it, but feature wise Riot's system cannot even be compared to battlenet. | ||
|
FetusFondler
United States246 Posts
| ||
|
Jerglings
United States104 Posts
On October 22 2011 11:45 Kennigit wrote: Blizzard Arcade The new name for the market place to release premium blizzard content and user content. Blizzard Dota will be the first major Blizzard release which will come around HotS. They will have some ranking/rating features and will have a system to make sure only good user-submitted content is being charged for. Haha, oh wow. They were actually serious about charging for maps? Gaming today: Killing fun one micro-transaction at a time. | ||
|
labbe
Sweden1456 Posts
They basically know that no one will skip HotS due too lack of some of these features, so they feel no rush implementing them. I personally feel this is a really shitty attitude to have as a company. Not trying to do the best game possible, but instead just try to getting away with doing the "bare minimum" I used to be a fan of Blizzard. Not just their games, but a fan of the company as a whole. Now though, I have lost all faith in the company, as I feel that Blizzard simply does not give a shit about their customers. | ||
| ||
