EPTQ&A w/ Chris Sigaty & David Kim - Page 19
| Forum Index > News |
|
price
United States297 Posts
| ||
|
IheartBANELINGS
United States8 Posts
On October 22 2011 14:48 Senzlol wrote: Remember in warcraft 3 how there was open tournaments every week or few days.... i sure miss that. i'm suprized no one else mentioned it  i so agree with this. those things were so fun and cometitive that was IMO one of the best/fun in-game ideas that blizzard ever had | ||
|
Fuzzymonkey
United States28 Posts
| ||
|
fourColo
United States363 Posts
On October 25 2011 00:35 price wrote: Do they want SC2 to be a game or to become a sport? I think the best thing that they could do would be to release "pro" edition of SC2 with the additional features that tournaments need. I assume piracy would still be a worry, but if they removed single player & b.net from this version (maybe having only one computer in the lan hub connecting to b.net), wouldn't that solve the problem? Am I missing something? Is this a lot of work on the coding side? Relative to the amount of programmers and money they have? It's practically free compared to, say, making their map editor or their graphics engine or creating all the 3d models and textures in the game. | ||
|
Alakaslam
United States17336 Posts
| ||
|
Nausea
Sweden807 Posts
| ||
|
mufin
United States616 Posts
Kennigit even worded it in a way to ask if the community could do ANYTHING to get offline play into sc2. Blizzards response? still "fuck you". | ||
|
furerkip
United States439 Posts
| ||
|
Fuzzymonkey
United States28 Posts
| ||
|
price
United States297 Posts
On October 25 2011 06:19 Fuzzymonkey wrote: LAN = Local Area Network. In short its a way of playing multi-player games without using the internet. This means that you are not at the mercy of bad connections from ISPs which are not your fault. See: MLG Dallas. Didn't IPL3, NASL finals, and other tourneys suffer from issues, too? From what I remember, MLG had to fork over a bundle to improve their connectivity, too. | ||
|
MildSeven
Canada311 Posts
| ||
|
Coeus1
Finland160 Posts
On October 24 2011 09:19 fourColo wrote: .....better. Riot can do reconnecting, are they smarter than all of blizzard? Probably not. Riot's pretty rich too but nowhere near as rich as Blizzard. I think everyone feels like saying "If I were in charge of hundreds of programmers and had unlimited money, I would do X, Y, and Z which are really obvious and easy and it would make the game so much better". This reminds me.. If you work/are close to the industry, you know that everyone thinks he/she is a game designer. Anyway, unfortunately in a big company like Blizzard adding a feature is not like one guy coding new feature in Minecraft over the weekend and BAM it's there. You have this battle.net team that handles those million concurrent users and then the SC2 team. Already during development they had disputes on what to do and how (or so i read). I have no idea how their whole process goes. But looks like it's a pain in the ass to get anything new implemented in the game. Anything except balance changes / unit changes, because they knew from the start that it's a big deal. And maybe all the core guys are already doing something more important which slows things down. You can't just let some noob programmer implement your group replay system because it requires changes to many places and rewriting some of the code. *speculating* Anyway, small developers seem to be more agile with these things. | ||
|
GathFox
United States58 Posts
I will be able to point out exactly what your talking about and wont have to go through the hassle of e-mailing replays. Otherwise the way my cousin shows me his replays is he comes over to my house and takes along his entire desktop with its monster screen lol. | ||
|
aethereality
Canada62 Posts
On October 25 2011 06:52 Coeus1 wrote: This reminds me.. If you work/are close to the industry, you know that everyone thinks he/she is a game designer. Anyway, unfortunately in a big company like Blizzard adding a feature is not like one guy coding new feature in Minecraft over the weekend and BAM it's there. You have this battle.net team that handles those million concurrent users and then the SC2 team. Already during development they had disputes on what to do and how (or so i read). I have no idea how their whole process goes. But looks like it's a pain in the ass to get anything new implemented in the game. Anything except balance changes / unit changes, because they knew from the start that it's a big deal. And maybe all the core guys are already doing something more important which slows things down. You can't just let some noob programmer implement your group replay system because it requires changes to many places and rewriting some of the code. *speculating* Anyway, small developers seem to be more agile with these things. That's actually really good insight, I'd never considered that. Even working for a large, non-gaming-related corporation, I can definitely see that viewpoint. Executives aren't flexible at all. SHAREHOLDERS SHAREHOLDERS SHAREHOLDERS, basically. Anyway, I'm super excited for group replays! What a great avenue to make fun of my scrub friends. | ||
|
pretensile
135 Posts
At the end of the day, we're all complicit with Blizzard in its handling of these hot-button issues. Sure, we might mumble and grumble and gnash our teeth -- but grumbling never cost Blizzard a cent: our dollars and financial support speak loudest. Why implement LAN at all if including it would surely cost them some sales, but excluding it doesn't lose them a single transaction? Similarly, why include multiple ID support (even though Broodwar had limitless IDs per game copy, if memory serves) when people and teams will happily snap up smurf accounts with nary a complaint? The power is supposed to be in our hands as the consumers, not Blizzard's. What's the ultimate solution then? I am not certain; but I doubt it was showing up in droves at the Anaheim Convention Center to shower Browder and Co. with thunderous applause! (Where were the pickets demanding LAN, and therefore tarnishing Blizzard's reputation at their very own signature event?) As for action on my own part, I don't know what to do, though I'm open to suggestions. I have a strong feeling I'll end up caving to peer pressure and becoming Blizzard's (un)willing accomplice yet again with Heart of the Swarm's release. And when that happens, it'll be back to looking at myself in the mirror with disdain whenever I think of why there isn't LAN in Starcraft 2. | ||
|
TeH_CaRnAg3
United States239 Posts
| ||
|
D_K_night
Canada615 Posts
but there's still no RTS from Valve, why is that | ||
|
A x i o M
United States78 Posts
On October 25 2011 20:00 pretensile wrote: It's easy for us to shake our pitchforks and heap abuse on Blizzard for being uncaring, soulless cashvacuums, but do you know what I actually do when I look for someone to blame? I stand in front the mirror, look myself in the eye, and shake my head sadly in disgust. Because even though I swore I wouldn't shell out $150-200 for a single game, even though I begged my friends to hold off on purchasing Wings of Liberty until there was a price reduction (a pipe dream, in retrospect) -- who was the one who ultimately ended up meekly handing over $60 and saying, "Thank you, Blizzard"? That's right: Me. At the end of the day, we're all complicit with Blizzard in its handling of these hot-button issues. Sure, we might mumble and grumble and gnash our teeth -- but grumbling never cost Blizzard a cent: our dollars and financial support speak loudest. Why implement LAN at all if including it would surely cost them some sales, but excluding it doesn't lose them a single transaction? Similarly, why include multiple ID support (even though Broodwar had limitless IDs per game copy, if memory serves) when people and teams will happily snap up smurf accounts with nary a complaint? The power is supposed to be in our hands as the consumers, not Blizzard's. What's the ultimate solution then? I am not certain; but I doubt it was showing up in droves at the Anaheim Convention Center to shower Browder and Co. with thunderous applause! (Where were the pickets demanding LAN, and therefore tarnishing Blizzard's reputation at their very own signature event?) As for action on my own part, I don't know what to do, though I'm open to suggestions. I have a strong feeling I'll end up caving to peer pressure and becoming Blizzard's (un)willing accomplice yet again with Heart of the Swarm's release. And when that happens, it'll be back to looking at myself in the mirror with disdain whenever I think of why there isn't LAN in Starcraft 2. Wiser words have never been said. | ||
|
Sweetfrost
Sweden213 Posts
| ||
|
VsTerminus
Canada42 Posts
On October 22 2011 11:55 Dental Floss wrote: Its really weird that they see group replays being less important than the marketplace. Its such basic functionality! When I read that I thought about the fact that blizzard has put profitability ahead of consumer satisfaction. It's somewhat sad to see that with how great of a game SC2 is, the Dev team seems to be focusing more on their profitability rather than what the fans and players want from it. Clan support, Lan support, Name Changes, all of these should be a priority prior to HotS. These things should've been a priority the minute WoL launched and/or the moment it boomed as big as it has. | ||
| ||
