The decline of privacy - Would you boycott? - Page 3

roemy

Germany432 Posts

May 22 2010 21:11 GMT

#41

On May 23 2010 06:08 Catch]22 wrote:
So far, 74 people have lied and claimed they wont buy the game if it stays they way it is, lets see how many it could get up to.

nope sry, we didn't lie. i, for one, will just go back to eve-online and wait a year or two until SC2 and all two expansions cost <50€ in a bundle. that's how bad this is. -.-

Catch]22

Sweden2683 Posts

May 22 2010 21:12 GMT

#42

On May 23 2010 06:11 roemy wrote:

Show nested quote +

nope sry, we didn't lie. i, for one, will just go back to eve-online and wait a year or two until SC2 and all two expansions cost <50€ in a bundle. that's how bad this is. -.-

Actually, you won't. Because it isn't that big of a deal.

Mastermind

Canada7096 Posts

May 22 2010 21:16 GMT

#43

On May 23 2010 06:11 roemy wrote:

Show nested quote +

nope sry, we didn't lie. i, for one, will just go back to eve-online and wait a year or two until SC2 and all two expansions cost <50€ in a bundle. that's how bad this is. -.-

A year or 2? LOL, dont expect the second expansion before 2014.

RumZ

United States956 Posts

May 22 2010 21:19 GMT

#44

There's only a matter of time until there's no privacy left. And when that happens, all the people that posted about how people who are really unhappy and don't care, and etc. will either continue to not care, or become extremely agitated. Some of the posts in this thread that claim people are lying about how they feel or if they would purchase this game in the current condition, should really take a strong close look at what your options are for social networking inside and out of this game, and re-examine their true opinion. Instead of just saying, 'it doesn't matter who cares,'

Luckily there are some measures people can take while giving out friend requests and facebook with the list in the current condition b.net 2.0 is providing as an environment, but there isn't as much as there should be.

Aside from the fact that Facebook really shouldn't be in the prime equation for networking inside of a game from the start.

cartoon]x

United States606 Posts

May 22 2010 21:20 GMT

#45

I am tired of seeing this community acting like spoiled stepchildren. What a manipulative, bratty notion - "boycotting blizz". Retarded. This thread needs to be closed and the mods need to put a ban on incessant bitching.

Coraz

United States252 Posts

May 22 2010 21:21 GMT

#46

Not that excited for release, and I can't get any irl friends to play sc2 with me so I don't want to ladder with nameless strangers on bnet 2.0

voted not buying.. I'll decide after it comes out if I want to buy it but I'm not going to preorder it or anything

s031720

Sweden383 Posts

May 22 2010 21:54 GMT

#47

Alot of socialising going on at the streamers chat; so thats where I get my fill. I will buy (have already) the game either way, but im sure they will have chatlobbys implemented at releast. Anything else would be fail of epic proportions.

FliedLice

Germany7494 Posts

May 22 2010 22:00 GMT

#48

I'd buy it, add my "close" friends and just play the ladder... It wouldn't bother me a bit in the way I'm going to play the game, but I can understand people complaining atm :/

iEchoic

United States1776 Posts

May 22 2010 22:02 GMT

#49

As soon as Activision bought Blizzard I knew this was going to happen. Activision is known for milking every dime out of the consumer that they can and compromising game quality to do so. Take a look at MW2 ($15 map packs, no dedicated servers for PC, etc).

LordOfDabu

United States394 Posts

May 22 2010 22:03 GMT

#50

It's the same thing with no lan. Most people will threaten to not buy because of it, but they will wind up purchasing the game at launch regardless.

Then they will threaten to not buy the expansions and the cycle will continue.

WoKKeLs

Netherlands65 Posts

May 22 2010 22:07 GMT

#51

On May 23 2010 07:02 iEchoic wrote:
As soon as Activision bought Blizzard I knew this was going to happen. Activision is known for milking every dime out of the consumer that they can and compromising game quality to do so. Take a look at MW2 ($15 map packs, no dedicated servers for PC, etc).

also weekly steam lowering the price of that game seen it go for 10e if bought on steam during some special weekend. rly hope SC2 wont end up like that all hyped up and just thrown away money 2months after release

Wolfpox

Canada164 Posts

May 22 2010 22:22 GMT

#52

i hate people, so the social aspect doesn't matter at all to me

single-player for the win

ultilol

Pakistan24 Posts

May 22 2010 22:33 GMT

#53

since activison accquired blizzard , they have been acting like idiots . Trying to milk the games in every possible way.

If you play world of warcraft you can see some awesome casual changes for the next expansion and selling things like mount in-game,wont be long before they start to sell gear and now the remote AH for 2-3$ a month.

I wont be surprised if blizzard removes the identifier and just add the email/facebook feature so this way people would make use of it hence they earn more and more but ignoring the most important aspect of the game.

I will buy the game regardless of this but i am still against this

DarkFenix

217 Posts

May 22 2010 22:42 GMT

#54

I don't like the whole social integration deal, but again, I want to enjoy sc2 and will probably never use the feature so I'm buying the game. I do consider they are focusing on less important things or at least, things that I expected to see way before facebook are still missing.

brocoli

Brazil264 Posts

May 22 2010 23:09 GMT

#55

Whatever the case, 27% people considering boycotting and another 45% complaining is A LOT. Even if nobody ends up boycotting (as I do believe only about 1/10 of those who voted it will, at max), this is the kind of thing that makes the company gradatively lose its points amongst fans.

If channels have been announced I'm good with it, though.

Garrl

Scotland1975 Posts

May 22 2010 23:20 GMT

#56

Indeed.

Kotick responded not by addressing any of the games by name, but by talking about Activision’s publishing philosophy. The games Activision Blizzard didn't pick up, he said, "don't have the potential to be exploited every year on every platform with clear sequel potential and have the potential to become $100 million franchises. … I think, generally, our strategy has been to focus… on the products that have those attributes and characteristics, the products that we know [that] if we release them today, we'll be working on them 10 years from now."

Auronz

Brazil119 Posts

May 23 2010 02:12 GMT

#57

Nobody answered me yet, the fuck can somebody do with your name that's so perverse? We know most of the well known players' names anyway, did we put a spell on them or something?
Greg Fields
Nick Plott
Sean Plott
Dan Stemkoski

There you have it, we know their names OHNOEZ!!!! What's wrong with people knowing yours? What they can do anyway? Spread bad publicity on their internet blogs? -_-'
This Privacy complaint is ridiculous it's like knowing your name allows people to see your cc number...

Now sure, the system's sucking at the moment and we need lots of fixes but seriously, I don't get the whole "Privacy" thing.

Pufftrees

2449 Posts

May 23 2010 02:16 GMT

#58

On May 23 2010 11:12 Auronz wrote:
Nobody answered me yet, the fuck can somebody do with your name that's so perverse? We know most of the well known players' names anyway, did we put a spell on them or something?
Greg Fields
Nick Plott
Sean Plott
Dan Stemkoski

There you have it, we know their names OHNOEZ!!!! What's wrong with people knowing yours? What they can do anyway? Spread bad publicity on their internet blogs? -_-'
This Privacy complaint is ridiculous it's like knowing your name allows people to see your cc number...

Now sure, the system's sucking at the moment and we need lots of fixes but seriously, I don't get the whole "Privacy" thing.

Not everyone who plays sc1 is a college or high school kid. A lot of professionals play too and don't want to reveal information. And yes even when I was in college I wouldn't want every single person on my friends list to know my real name... because they also in passing know about your job where you live usually etc. Spiteful people can do very bad things when they know your info.

Djzapz

Canada10681 Posts

May 23 2010 02:17 GMT

#59

I'd like to say that people who say they'd boycott most likely wouldn't in practice. =)

dhe95

United States1213 Posts

May 23 2010 02:17 GMT

#60

On May 23 2010 03:02 Limenade wrote:

Show nested quote +

well I mean basically now if u ever want to apply for at tournament you'll never be known as your name, everyone will have access to your email address and real name if the sign ups are made public, I.E. in gosucoaching you gotta list your name on the website to be signed up, now which will seem to be your email address which some troll who may have beef with you can now go ahead and spam your email non stop if they really want to lol

If spammers really wanted your email they'd probably have via other methods rather than a starcraft 2 tourny.

Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next All

Please or register to reply.

The decline of privacy - Would you boycott? - Page 3

Completed

Ongoing

Upcoming