EPT[D] Server Segregation - Page 5
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
richard_keats
United States54 Posts
| ||
|
PanzerDragoon
United States822 Posts
On April 24 2010 14:05 Brad wrote: How will it hurt WhiteRa and TLO? I'm pretty sure the EU & US guys will get enough practice from there respected regions. You don't have to play guys from the US to get better, and vice versa. They will train online and then play eachother at WCG, ESWC, ESL, MLG, Dreamhack, etc, etc or whatever companies pick up SC2 (Which i'm guessing will be all of them.). It would be a barrier to players who want to get into the competitive scene. Blizzard doesn't give a shit about this being a long-lasting "sport". They want to make their money off it, then move to the next game to sell you. There's no profit in it for them for this to last a long time, unlike WoW. | ||
Waxangel
United States33471 Posts
 | ||
|
IronWolf
South Africa315 Posts
Where is the alternative to LAN that they spoke of. After reading the networking post by R1CH, I still don't see the alternative. Or did I miss it somewhere? Blizz enlighten me! | ||
|
StayFrosty
Canada743 Posts
| ||
|
mynameisbean
Australia82 Posts
Everyone in this forum is still going to go out and buy the game. So Blizzard have lost nothing of the income that comes from the mass majority of their customers. And they've doubled/tripled what they'll get from the top 1% competitive players who want to compete on international levels. (Or quadrupled/quintipled what they'll get from these players, based on expansion packs, as someone else posted above me). Oh, and think about what happens if Battle.net becomes a non-free service. (I think they have the mechanics for this down, with the Russian payment-situation thing). So might this decision to segregate servers also again increase the monetary gain they get from the 1% hardcore customer base, if battle.net becomes a pay-for service? | ||
|
PhiliBiRD
United States2643 Posts
there are some good posts here that explain the reasoning behind this, if you cant understand that reasoning then Im sorry i dont kno what to tell you. | ||
|
StayFrosty
Canada743 Posts
On April 24 2010 14:15 mynameisbean wrote: You know the funniest thing. Everyone in this forum is still going to go out and buy the game. So Blizzard have lost nothing of the income that comes from the mass majority of their customers. And they've doubled/tripled what they'll get from the top 1% competitive players who want to compete on international levels. (Or quadrupled/quintipled what they'll get from these players, based on expansion packs, as someone else posted above me). Oh, and think about what happens if Battle.net becomes a non-free service. (I think they have the mechanics for this down, with the Russian payment-situation thing). So might this decision to segregate servers also again increase the monetary gain they get from the 1% hardcore customer base, if battle.net becomes a pay-for service? If blizzard does implement a p2p service, I would not be surprised if iccup clones etc get implemented in sc2 to cater to the competitive community. As of a monthly fee. Fuck that. | ||
|
Frozz
Canada61 Posts
But Blizzard is making it lame No more Euro pals And hot Asian gals So now it won't be quite the same T_T | ||
|
prOxi.swAMi
Australia3091 Posts
On April 24 2010 13:18 enzym wrote: you make clans with people that you can actually play with and get together instead of covering a dozen timezones. that type of clan structure wasnt very effective to begin with. Erm, blatantly untrue. I speak from 6 years of experience. | ||
|
ilnp
Iceland1330 Posts
On April 24 2010 14:23 Frozz wrote: I just want to play the darn game But Blizzard is making it lame No more Euro pals And hot Asian gals So now it won't be quite the same T_T I thought your post was awesome I was about to hit reply Then i noticed your signature You are a wonderful guy | ||
|
Windblade
United States161 Posts
to give them the benefit of the doubt - we do not know anything about how they setup/created/programmed B.Net 2.0. Considering all factors, the things they mentioned may in fact be current problems with its structure - something they plan on fixing but something that will probably take time. Time will tell how this plays out, maybe the Pro-League will be able to play cross-server | ||
|
ilnp
Iceland1330 Posts
On April 24 2010 14:15 mynameisbean wrote: You know the funniest thing. Everyone in this forum is still going to go out and buy the game. So Blizzard have lost nothing of the income that comes from the mass majority of their customers. And they've doubled/tripled what they'll get from the top 1% competitive players who want to compete on international levels. (Or quadrupled/quintipled what they'll get from these players, based on expansion packs, as someone else posted above me). Oh, and think about what happens if Battle.net becomes a non-free service. (I think they have the mechanics for this down, with the Russian payment-situation thing). So might this decision to segregate servers also again increase the monetary gain they get from the 1% hardcore customer base, if battle.net becomes a pay-for service? I complained like 8 years ago battle.net should become a pay for service. I would have gladly paid $10 a month for a well taken care of battle.net for BW, let alone what the market would dictate something like that should cost -- maybe $1?2$? Automated matchmaking which they designed for War3, anti-hack, a ladder system that supported the esports community... these things could have been awesome and would have definitely been worth shelling out a little money. Practically speaking, it's a lot to expect permanent, consistent expense on their part to support a one time payment for the game. It's a lot more reasonable to pay something to expect that level of service. If not, it isn't surprising to get what D2 and BW had -- functional but old useless technology | ||
|
GreggSauce
United States566 Posts
the lag is tremendous right now going between regions, blizzard doesn't have the resources necessary to refresh their servers and build infrastructure to handle all of this and keep it relatively lag free and competitive ESPECIALLY for a damn pay once game get over it people | ||
|
Irrelevant
United States2364 Posts
| ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15723 Posts
On April 24 2010 14:38 GreggSauce wrote: seriously? 99% of the people here don't understand why this isn't possible? the lag is tremendous right now going between regions, blizzard doesn't have the resources necessary to refresh their servers and build infrastructure to handle all of this and keep it relatively lag free and competitive ESPECIALLY for a damn pay once game get over it people What about just making it the same way they made Warcraft 3? I'm not asking them to upkeep more servers, simply to allow people the option of connecting to one or the other. I don't see how its not possible if it were done in the past. | ||
|
GoDannY
Germany442 Posts
However at the guys who visited: didn't they said in a previous interview around march that they will not implent a gateway service in the release version but in a later patch? That would make sense to me since the serverload will be insane and needs to be verified before upping a working structure (which should obviously have some backup as well lol). Anyone knows more? | ||
|
Jayson X
Switzerland2431 Posts
On April 24 2010 14:38 GreggSauce wrote: seriously? 99% of the people here don't understand why this isn't possible? the lag is tremendous right now going between regions, blizzard doesn't have the resources necessary to refresh their servers and build infrastructure to handle all of this and keep it relatively lag free and competitive ESPECIALLY for a damn pay once game get over it people What? This isn't World of Warcraft. I play with friends from asia (japan, korea) every day 2v2 and 1v1. Lagg has never been an issue... | ||
|
Leoj
United States396 Posts
| ||
|
Yukidasu
Australia125 Posts
| ||
| ||
