|
^ I think a better, more full, competitive, skill-based multiplayer core game is MUCH more important than clan support or name changes.
It really bugs me how people keep claiming blizz is 'just after profit'. First off, they are a company, and making a game that lasts another 10+ years as a competitive esport and as THE RTS game to play for the next decade is side by side with "make mad profit and swim in a pool of cash thats in my yacht". Secondly, you think they are keeping away lan, or clan support... because somehow, this leads to higher profits? Well, I sure hope so, in the sense they can focus on making a better game, but besides that, you think it's some ulterior motive? Like, are you stupid?
I could care less about chat channels, clan name tags, playable replays, etc. I want a competitive game that's balanced, well-rounded out, with races full of units that are full of utility, fun to use, fun to watch, and no gaping holes in the race's ability to deal with specific problems.
These threads are full of people who don't know much, but I think everyone who went to blizzcon left with full faith and trust in the design team at blizzard. They are much more aware of the problems plaguing balance and gameplay, and esports, than you may think.
Get over LAN. Yes, it sucks, but the reason is pretty simple. What happened with the BW ladder? Oh yea, it got hacked and everyone went to 3rd party servers and ladders like iccup. I really don't want the same experience in SC2, and I have yet to run into a hacker or mher yet.
This is an amazing game, anyone thinking you need to bash bliz is just ridiculous. You paid $60 for this game for a reason, and I can't think of a single game out on the market more worth the money. Halo? Call of duty? counter strike? These games aren't nearly as in-depth as SC2. Not to mention the thousands of just... bad games out there.. just so many bad games. I will be playing this game for years to come, and it will definitely be worth the $60. I will gladly buy HOTS, and if it turns out to be a disaster, even the single player will still make it worth the $60 when you compare it to other games (and bear in mind, WoL is the only game I've ever played single player on since Sonic 2, and taht's only because I was worse than bronze when I started and had zero rts experience).
|
Honestly two things that I don't personally care about but I am constantly surprised to see everyone make a big deal of is LAN support and group replays..
|
The reason LAN support and group replays are important is because they are essential to the participation in and broadcasting of esports, not because they are vital to the average end user. The average consumer will generally be fine with the Battle.net experience alone, but LAN is completely crucial to the smooth running of tournaments and ensuring the absolute best conditions for professional players. Group replays are a necessity for any casts done from replays. The vast majority of us obsess about these two features as fans and audience members of esports, not necessarily because they impact us personally.
As for LAN support... what does that have anything to do with hacks? People didn't use hacks via LAN; they used them on Blizzard's own Battle.net. Perhaps you'd like to explain how including LAN suddenly makes the game "hackable"? And for the record, as closely monitored as SC2 is, there have been plenty of hacks (autosplit, autoblink, autoburrow, drophacks, and yes, maphacks) available and used for Wings of Liberty.
|
On October 28 2011 07:48 pretensile wrote:
As for LAN support... what does that have anything to do with hacks? People didn't use hacks via LAN; they used them on Blizzard's own Battle.net. Perhaps you'd like to explain how including LAN suddenly makes the game "hackable"? And for the record, as closely monitored as SC2 is, there have been plenty of hacks (autosplit, autoblink, autoburrow, drophacks, and yes, maphacks) available and used for Wings of Liberty.
Not hacks as in autosplit, autoblink, autoburrow, drophacks, and yes, maphacks or whatever.. Piracy of the game is what theyre talking about. Lan allows for players to play away from battlenet. This allows for privates servers which means people don't need to have a battlenet account to play the game. Look at iCcup... You can play for free if you dl the multiplayer only, blizzard doesn't benefit at all from it.. The only reason why its not been shut down is cause the game is so old blizzard couldn't give a flying fuck if people download it anymore..
|
On October 28 2011 05:03 Belial88 wrote:
I could care less about chat channels, clan name tags, playable replays, etc.
You might care less, but it's definitely a bit foolish to watch players like Destiny, or Desrow who are still flying defunct (ROOT) or outdated team tags that have been so for months, on their main/GM accounts. I remember seeing people assuming Desrow was still on vVv based on his in game name, months after he was picked up by another team.
It might not seem so, but in an age when people are being introduced to Starcraft through Husky VODS or watching replays, name recognition goes a long way for esports teams. Ultimately it shouldn't be a massive undertaking for them to have something like this or a payable name change system in the next expansion.
On October 28 2011 05:03 Belial88 wrote:
I could care less about chat channels, clan name tags, playable replays, etc. I want a competitive game that's balanced, well-rounded out, with races full of units that are full of utility, fun to use, fun to watch, and no gaping holes in the race's ability to deal with specific problems.
The "I'd rather have this, than that" is a pretty worn out argument when we're talking about a company with the resources that Activision/Blizzard has behind it. Most of the time it amounts to, "Would I rather go to work today, or get the mail?". Why not both? Especially when we're just talking about a clan tag or a name change, and not something absurdly ridiculous like implementing Frostbite 2.0 dynamic physics when my immortal is blowing your Barracks to smithereens.
As an example, I'm sure most people didn't care much for the fact that creep now grows on enemy buildings. That's an intensive change that probably took fundamental graphical updates and modifications to the engine to implement. Or the fact that marines now ragdoll-tumble down a ramp thanks to an improved physics system.
Was that all development time that could've been spent balancing the game or creating fun units? Maybe? Maybe not.
We can't know for sure, but I think it's reasonable to think that in the time it took them to make the graphical enhancements needed for creep to dynamically spread over each unique building model, or make more realistic looking physics effects, they could've probably modified their database to accommodate a simple name change operation. Maybe that isn't a reasonable assumption, I don't know.
Ultimately we can't know for certain and we just have to have faith that Blizzard knows what they're doing. Until then as a community we'll probably continue to provide input on things that are important to us in hopes that Blizzard adapts their priorities accordingly.
|
"It's on the list"
Well blizz, if you want me to cough up sixty big ones they better be crossed off that list. Does anyone else get the feeling that blizzard is refusing to implement any more balance changes for sc2 because they want everyone to just forget WoL in favor of HotS?
|
^Didn't they just release a new balance patch, for a game that besides the changes implemented, was balanced except in those regards?
The idea that blizzard is not putting in things like clan name support because of some ulterior motive is ridiculous. I get it, it's bad that it's still ROOTDestiny, but it's not like david kim is just sitting there doing nothing all day.
Maybe that isn't a reasonable assumption, I don't know.
Right, you don't, and it's completely unreasonable to think there is some shadow reason why blizzard doesn't implement these changes.
|
On October 29 2011 01:26 Belial88 wrote:
^Didn't they just release a new balance patch, for a game that besides the changes implemented, was balanced except in those regards?
You seriously think WoL is completely 100% balanced because of the very slight EMP nerf? Even Dustin Browder does not think WoL is completely balanced, or else blizz would not be making such radical changes in HotS. Your statement is both ignorant and contradictory, but what else should one expect from the blizzard defense force.
|
It's pretty damn close to perfectly balanced.
They are making radical changes in HOTS because WOL is so near perfectly balanced right now, that introducing anything new would drastically affect balance. So the attitude with HOTS is 'fuck it' because they know anything new would totally change balance.
Dustin Browder, David kim, most pros... everyone pretty much agrees the game is pretty close to balanced right now. The only imbalances are KR TvP due to EMP, which has been fixed, 1-1-1, which was fixed and the metagame has figured out... and that's really it. Game fixed.
YOUR statement is ignorant. Blizzard defense force? I'm the idiot, because I actually like blizzard? Yea, they are such fucking assholes, now let me go back to playing their games all day! Fuck them! And your comments are so totally skewed too... everyone, the balance stats, it all shows WOL is pretty damn close to balanced. I know you just want an expansion that does nothing, to maintain balance, but eveyrone else wants an expansion that has something in it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
