EPTDo you like the direction B.net 2.0 is taking? - Page 4
| Forum Index > Polls & Liquibet |
|
EleanorRIgby
Canada3923 Posts
| ||
|
QueueQueue
Canada1000 Posts
Criticizing people for voting yes is pretty unfair. For a lot of people, chat channels are not an important thing (myself included), or the fact that it just doesn't seem polished (which is my issue) is not a concern for some. People assume everyone else has the same vision as to what is important to a good b.net experience, and that is just the wrong way to look at it. B.net does effectively get you into games pretty quickly, and the match ups are fairly decent. To a lot of people, B.net is a means to get them into games, and for them to say they like B.net for this reason is 100% justified. | ||
|
HaFnium
United Kingdom1078 Posts
They should explain their reasons here... | ||
|
sLiMpoweR
United States430 Posts
| ||
|
Butigroove
Seychelles2061 Posts
On May 29 2010 23:54 sLiMpoweR wrote: While i voted no i can see while some people voted yes. Its much easier to find games against similar skilled opponents. From the casual gamers perspective you dont lose much without chat channels because on bnet 1.0 they never left brood war usa-1 anyway. And instead of having to search through 3v3 bgh and and fastest games you can now quickly find a game and play. You mean like automatchmaking that existed in wc3? (Only broken because of lack of players, not functionality) | ||
LosingID8
CA10835 Posts
On May 29 2010 23:54 sLiMpoweR wrote: While i voted no i can see while some people voted yes. Its much easier to find games against similar skilled opponents. From the casual gamers perspective you dont lose much without chat channels because on bnet 1.0 they never left brood war usa-1 anyway. And instead of having to search through 3v3 bgh and and fastest games you can now quickly find a game and play. AMM was already present in bnet 1.0 (wc3) | ||
|
BadBinky
Finland649 Posts
[] no chat [] no overall ranking [x] facebook no thx | ||
|
Axonn
Croatia288 Posts
On May 29 2010 14:58 Ysorigin wrote: Calling it right now! The poll is going to be 90% no and 10% yes! Almost there  NO definitely | ||
|
haterade
7 Posts
But anyway I voted no because they are using the same logic that Infinity Ward used to justify their lack of dedicated servers. "If we make IWnet good, people won't want dedicated servers". "If we make matchmaking good, people won't want chat channels". Don't tell me what I want. | ||
|
o3.power91
Bahrain5288 Posts
| ||
|
TLOBrian
United States453 Posts
Massive. Blizzard's Games and the Service may incorporate technology of Massive Incorporated ("Massive"), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Microsoft Corporation ("Microsoft"), that enables in-game advertising, and the display of other similar in-game objects, which are downloaded temporarily to your personal computer and replaced during online game play. As part of this process, Massive may collect some information about the game and the advertisements delivered to you, as well as standard information that is sent when your personal computer or game console connects to the Internet including your Internet protocol (IP) address. Massive will use this information to transmit and measure in-game advertising, as well as to improve the products and services of Massive and its affiliates. None of the information collected by Massive will be used to identify you. For additional details regarding Massive's in-game advertising practices, please see Massive's In-Game Advertising privacy statement at http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=122085&clcid=0x409. The trademarks and copyrighted material contained in all in-game advertising are the property of the respective owners. Portions of the Service are © 2008 Massive Incorporated. All rights reserved. Goddammit Blizzard. | ||
|
Spinks
South Africa23 Posts
With all the votes, emails and opinons it can easily be seen that the majority of the community do not like the direction that sc2 was taken. Since blizzard is all for the players, why are we still having to deal with these stupid problems? Wc3 was and still is a great game, why cant they just have the lan and bnet settings the same? It worked for wc3 so why the **** change it? You guys agree? | ||
|
Night[7]
Sweden31 Posts
Now I don't think B.net is perfect, far from it. No chat channels and similar issues will inevitable bring down the "B.net experience". Lack of overall ranking This is UNNECESSARY. Let's look at the TSL ladder. That's basically an overall ranking of the participating players. Was it accurate? No. Neither was the iCCup ladder and an overall B.net ladder wouldn't be accurate either. The only reason to have 1 big ladder would be to satisfy your own astoundingly big egos. Tournaments decide who is better. Not ladders. No chat channels This I find one of the most serious issues. But you can indeed connect with anyone you want anyway so I don't consider it to be breaking B.net. No cross server play allowed This made me mad. Inability to change nicknames You actually put this as a problem? Obviously you are running out of issues and just want to hate on Blizzard. No LAN feature This has been done to death and while I personally would prefer a LAN feature I can live with it and overall it won't change that much. Inability to host games by name and password This again I find annoying. This should be available. Online replays Blizzard stated their reasons for these and I mostly agree. The only argument I see is that you can copy someone elses build. But people have proven quite capable of doing that just by watching VODS. So overall yes I like the way B.net is heading. Although some changes are needed. | ||
|
climax
United States1088 Posts
| ||
|
Froadac
United States6733 Posts
On May 29 2010 15:46 Renaissance wrote: People voting no are trolls, or family or friends of Blizzard. I'm family, and I voted no :D | ||
|
Deleted User 61629
1664 Posts
| ||
|
SichuanPanda
Canada1542 Posts
On May 29 2010 15:48 J1.au wrote: I think you're the troll here. Assuming you have confused 'no' with 'yes' on purpose... You both are, now stop talking about it. On a more serious note. BNET 2.0 is taking one step forward two steps back with every single iteration it produces, and every time we hear anyone at Blizzard talk about it one thing is quite clear to me. They have absolutely no idea whatsoever what features fans want, and are taking a completely stubborn approach to developing the Beta as whole. They ask us for feedback, and then disregard all of it in favor of 'we've got a whole lot of data to sift through'. Guess what? Data isn't going to be the saving grace of any video game, it may help fix overall balance in a race vs race situation however the fact of the matter is that without taking an actual look at the hands-on game play (by more than Blizzard handful of in-house Beta testers oh wait I'm talking about a BETA!). If SC2B was like any other Beta I've ever been in the company producing it would actually read and respect the opinions of players, but wait there is more. Rather than using simply a direct-submit form like was used with the WC3 and all Blizzard Betas prior to this they choose to use a 4 different section forum like the did with WoW Beta. And what happened? Threads get buried in second buy noobs and trolls spamming useless banter, a direct-submit system would the only way to make sure Blizzard sees the legitimate testers reports, but that won't happen because they've got their all precious data. The game as a whole is okay, but the presentation we are currently seeing is far and away from what I would have expected. | ||
|
Count9
China10928 Posts
| ||
|
KlaCkoN
Sweden1661 Posts
On May 30 2010 01:14 TLOBrian wrote: I voted No. Battlenet 0.2 is horrible. But on another note, I found THIS in the updated ULA. Massive. Blizzard's Games and the Service may incorporate technology of Massive Incorporated ("Massive"), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Microsoft Corporation ("Microsoft"), that enables in-game advertising, and the display of other similar in-game objects, which are downloaded temporarily to your personal computer and replaced during online game play. As part of this process, Massive may collect some information about the game and the advertisements delivered to you, as well as standard information that is sent when your personal computer or game console connects to the Internet including your Internet protocol (IP) address. Massive will use this information to transmit and measure in-game advertising, as well as to improve the products and services of Massive and its affiliates. None of the information collected by Massive will be used to identify you. For additional details regarding Massive's in-game advertising practices, please see Massive's In-Game Advertising privacy statement at http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=122085&clcid=0x409. The trademarks and copyrighted material contained in all in-game advertising are the property of the respective owners. Portions of the Service are © 2008 Massive Incorporated. All rights reserved. Goddammit Blizzard. Lol what, you are joking right? You have to be? Now they want to reserve the right to install adaware on my computer as well? Seriously? Wtf. | ||
|
D10
Brazil3409 Posts
On May 30 2010 01:34 Night[7] wrote: I voted yes and wouldn't post except people seem to want to know why. Now I don't think B.net is perfect, far from it. No chat channels and similar issues will inevitable bring down the "B.net experience". Lack of overall ranking This is UNNECESSARY. Let's look at the TSL ladder. That's basically an overall ranking of the participating players. Was it accurate? No. Neither was the iCCup ladder and an overall B.net ladder wouldn't be accurate either. The only reason to have 1 big ladder would be to satisfy your own astoundingly big egos. Tournaments decide who is better. Not ladders. No chat channels This I find one of the most serious issues. But you can indeed connect with anyone you want anyway so I don't consider it to be breaking B.net. No cross server play allowed This made me mad. Inability to change nicknames You actually put this as a problem? Obviously you are running out of issues and just want to hate on Blizzard. No LAN feature This has been done to death and while I personally would prefer a LAN feature I can live with it and overall it won't change that much. Inability to host games by name and password This again I find annoying. This should be available. Online replays Blizzard stated their reasons for these and I mostly agree. The only argument I see is that you can copy someone elses build. But people have proven quite capable of doing that just by watching VODS. So overall yes I like the way B.net is heading. Although some changes are needed. Actually no, you didnt like it but you are too much of a wuss to lay a finger against mighty blizzard. youd rather be complacent with their faults since thats how they roll nowdays. | ||
| ||
