EPTThe state of Battle.net 2.0 - Page 18
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
m4nd0r
Bulgaria23 Posts
| ||
|
Innovation
United States284 Posts
Blizzard received MILLIONS of dollars from Facebook for selling out their fans with this "integration". It wasn't a "decision" by Blizzard developers. It was a direct order from the financial department at Blizzard, to the developers. They take orders from money-grabbing leeches now. You're all missing the point here. When you refer to Blizzard, you're talking about people who've probably played two hours of video games their entire lives. They have NO IDEA what people want, or what they're doing wrong. It's all about the big $. There are legitimate concerns and then there is this...no actual knowledge, just some assumption based upon ignorance of blizzard, facebook, game development, or business in general. I'm quite happy that you won't buy the game...just one less BM person to worry about on B.Net. BTW Facebook does not pay to have its service integrated into games, Blizzard isn't earning a Penny from facebook. What is it they say about people who ASSuME? | ||
|
Sky.Technique
United States271 Posts
On May 23 2010 06:10 lew wrote: link to this thread, i wanna see how they respond ^_^I wrote this on the beta forum (bad written, I know): Dear blizzard, I am sure you heard about ICCUP before. It's a starcraft 1 server with great and simple futures. People from Korea, Europe and Asia are all playing on the same server and everything is working perfectly. One thing is not that good about it: it's not noobfriendly. Blizzard fixed the not-noob friendliness with leagues, which is the only thing that battlenet 2 does better then ICCUP. Battlenet 2 is lacking a lot of very simple features which ICCUP has and which are NEEDED for starcraft 2 to become an ESPORTS game. The feautures: - channels - decent friend adding system (now it is ridicilous, the system pre-patch 13 was better) - a global ranking (remove the divisions please) - lan What you are doing now is: - dividing people between different servers - making tournaments almost impossible with the current friend system and with no-lan - making it impossible for people to check how well / bad they are doing compared to the rest of the world (ranking) - making it impossible to play with people from other continents - making battlenet a lonely place Why is ICCUP - capable to add people to 1 global server? - capable to add chat channels without a single problem? - capable to make a global ranking? Almost everyone at the teamliquid forums is asking for these futures and you keep on being stubborn. These features are so simple and still they are missing from battlenet. I know that you think that some of these features have disadvantages, but that doesn't take away that they are NEEDED if you want sc2 to be an ESPORTS game. I understand that making 1 global server is hard, but things like chatchannels, a decent friend-adding system and a global ranking are not that hard to implement. I also understand that this is BETA, but aren't these things so simple that they should be in the BETA already? | ||
|
ymirheim
Sweden300 Posts
The facebook horse has been dead for a long time and it won't get any deader if you keep beating it. Whether you believe me or not the addition of the facebook interconnectivity has had NO impact on any other production. It may seem that way intuitively but it is wrong. Adding facebook connection can not possibly have come at the expense of any other major functionality mainly because of how ridiculously easy it is to implement. All the work lies at facebooks side. They have the infrastructure set up already, all the random blizzard interm that they put to work on this for a few hours had to do was add the ui and the connectivity for battlenet to receive information from facebook. All the functionality for searching for friends and receiving who got the beta etc is all on facebook's side. Beyond that, as someone myself who is unlikely to use this feature, I still don't feel the need to deny it to others. I don't need the facebook functionality even though I actually did surprisingly enough end up finding three more people I know who had the beta and ended up playing games with them, if adding this feature did not affect anything else why would I want it gone just because others don't want it. If you don't want to add sc2 buddies through facebook, just don't. If you don't want to play FFA, just don't. There is surely people who will use this feature and why would I care? Enough with the facebook argument. There are actual issues with bnet 2.0 that should be addressed and talked about such as the lack of chat, clan creation and a sensible ladder system. Repeating the facebook whine is just dumbing the debate down. | ||
|
iloahz
United States964 Posts
| ||
|
Dragonsven
United States145 Posts
On May 24 2010 00:32 heishe wrote: Blizzard tried to reinvent the wheel and came up with a square. That pretty much sums it up. | ||
|
Powda
United States116 Posts
On May 24 2010 00:49 ymirheim wrote: Guys, I feel like I am playing the devils advocate all the time but can we not focus on the actual issues with bnet 2.0 which is the lack of functionality and the bad ladder design? The facebook horse has been dead for a long time and it won't get any deader if you keep beating it. Whether you believe me or not the addition of the facebook interconnectivity has had NO impact on any other production. It may seem that way intuitively but it is wrong. Adding facebook connection can not possibly have come at the expense of any other major functionality mainly because of how ridiculously easy it is to implement. All the work lies at facebooks side. They have the infrastructure set up already, all the random blizzard interm that they put to work on this for a few hours had to do was add the ui and the connectivity for battlenet to receive information from facebook. All the functionality for searching for friends and receiving who got the beta etc is all on facebook's side. Beyond that, as someone myself who is unlikely to use this feature, I still don't feel the need to deny it to others. I don't need the facebook functionality even though I actually did surprisingly enough end up finding three more people I know who had the beta and ended up playing games with them, if adding this feature did not affect anything else why would I want it gone just because others don't want it. If you don't want to add sc2 buddies through facebook, just don't. If you don't want to play FFA, just don't. There is surely people who will use this feature and why would I care? Enough with the facebook argument. There are actual issues with bnet 2.0 that should be addressed and talked about such as the lack of chat, clan creation and a sensible ladder system. Repeating the facebook whine is just dumbing the debate down. Blizzcon 2009, Blizzard talked about how they came about realizing they had to have Facebook integrated with Bnet 2.0 . I also remember them saying this in response as to why the Beta was being delayed another year. It was my complete understanding that Facebook is why we had to wait so long. | ||
|
ymirheim
Sweden300 Posts
On May 24 2010 01:21 Powda wrote: Blizzcon 2009, Blizzard talked about how they came about realizing they had to have Facebook integrated with Bnet 2.0 . I also remember them saying this in response as to why the Beta was being delayed another year. It was my complete understanding that Facebook is why we had to wait so long. I really can't see how that is even theoretically possible. Not even if my dead grandma was doing the coding. Either that is simply not the case or it was something else they had to wait for, something on facebook's side. From what I understand the long delay was related to significant infrastructure work on battlenet, it is possible that facebook was one thing that required the groundwork that was done during this time but if anything the work was necessary for a lot of other things too, and would have had to be done regardless of facebook integration. | ||
|
Powda
United States116 Posts
Browder was asked why Starcraft was delayed when it was stated a year before the game would be ready for release that summer. Browder goes on to describe the religious experience he had with Facebook and how he realized it had to be part of bnet 2.0 before release. He told this story in response to the anger over the delay of starcraft 2 due to bnet 2.0. Anyways, to all their own, I'm not a fan of Facebook, I see no reason why it should be part of battle.net...but if people like it keep it. | ||
|
Necrosjef
United Kingdom530 Posts
On May 24 2010 01:21 Powda wrote: Blizzcon 2009, Blizzard talked about how they came about realizing they had to have Facebook integrated with Bnet 2.0 . I also remember them saying this in response as to why the Beta was being delayed another year. It was my complete understanding that Facebook is why we had to wait so long. I remember alot of features I actually liked about battle.net 2.0 such as being able to communicate with friends who are playing other games. For example asking someone who was playing Diablo 3 if they wanted to play Starcraft 2 for a bit etc. That would have been good. Just seems things like that went in favour of a facebook integration no one wanted. Things like lack of chat, no clan creation and lack of a sensible ladder system don't appear to be things Blizzard just didn't have time to do as they are pretty simple to add. These are things Blizzard actually thought "we don't want this in our game", and just never implemented it. Lack of chat is really a big WTF for me because its so simple to implement, they obviously could have added it. Instead they thought it wasn't important to have it and just never bothered. Thats the disturbing part of the story and just shows how little Blizzard listen to or care about the fans. | ||
|
Toxi78
966 Posts
WTF IS THIS ? IM NOT FUCKING 5YO ANYMORE I DONT GIVE A FUCK HOW U CALL MY FUCKING LEAGUE I JUST WANNA SEE THE COMPETITIVE EDGE OF THIS MOTHERFUCKING GAME | ||
|
pheus
Australia161 Posts
Think about wow's global chat channels (because that type of gamer will make up the vast majority of people playing sc2). They are a shit storm of spam. Constant, useless, shit. There was like a hundred plus wow servers for the US region. There's going to be what? 4 battle net servers? Asia, SE Asia, US and EU? Ingame chat channels could be useful but really communication in most game communities is done by and large via irc, forums or vent and most time spent ingame is actually playing. It's inconvenient to have to use these applications rather than have them integrated into the game, it is a step backwards, but it isn't the end of the world. | ||
|
Therapist
United States97 Posts
| ||
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
Like, you'd connect to bnet and be put into Brood War Swe-1, then you'd be able to CREATE YOUR OWN by simply typing in name of it. /join op cG Now I've created a brand new channel, and the account cG has OP powers in it. Seriously, not having chat channels is a gigantic step backwards, especially when they shove facebook stuff down our throat. I'm gonna use an analogy I used earlier today just because I liked it so much: I think what Blizzard are forgetting is that while yes, mountain dew is great, people still drink water. Facebook = Mountain Dew. Chat channels = water. We can take the analogy even further and talk about how real life communities tend to be created near sources of water but I'll just leave it at that :D | ||
|
Iwbhs
United States195 Posts
POST HERE... Blizzard takes THEIR forum much more seriously than this one. | ||
|
Deadlift
United States358 Posts
On May 24 2010 01:44 FrozenArbiter wrote: I think what Blizzard are forgetting is that while yes, mountain dew is great, people still drink water. Facebook = Mountain Dew. Chat channels = water. We can take the analogy even further and talk about how real life communities tend to be created near sources of water but I'll just leave it at that :D While I agree that chat channels definitely need to be in the game, saying that water is more important than Mountain Dew on a video game forum is probably not the best way to go. In fact, half of the people reading this post are probably drinking Mountain Dew right now. | ||
|
Necrosjef
United Kingdom530 Posts
On May 24 2010 01:44 FrozenArbiter wrote: Pheus, you realize that in SC and WC3, there were dozens of public chat channels for each country? Like, you'd connect to bnet and be put into Brood War Swe-1, then you'd be able to CREATE YOUR OWN by simply typing in name of it. /join op cG Now I've created a brand new channel, and the account cG has OP powers in it. Seriously, not having chat channels is a gigantic step backwards, especially when they shove facebook stuff down our throat. I'm gonna use an analogy I used earlier today just because I liked it so much: I think what Blizzard are forgetting is that while yes, mountain dew is great, people still drink water. Facebook = Mountain Dew. Chat channels = water. We can take the analogy even further and talk about how real life communities tend to be created near sources of water but I'll just leave it at that :D I've got a better analogy for you Jinro. I think what Blizzard are forgetting is that while yes, a piece of shit is great (wait...wut), people still drink water. Facebook = Shit. Chat channels = Water. We can take that analogy further and talk about how real life communities tend to be created near sources of water whilst people tend not to want to live around big steaming piles of faeces. | ||
|
km123
United States13 Posts
| ||
|
Motiva
United States1774 Posts
I feel the same way about Bnet2 as I do the US economy. lol. If people had any sense we'd be making demands and threats. Because this is just stupid. You call this a ladder? This isn't a fucking ladder. a Ladder has steps. This is a fucking GRIND. I have a choice of either placing in diamond and playing X or Y amount and just hanging out 1-30 depending on X or Y. That's not a ladder. Fuck you. I'm not a god damned fucking kid and I could wipe my ass with 100 person "personal ladders" GTFO. If people had any sense we'd be rioting in the streets. | ||
|
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
On May 24 2010 01:49 Necrosjef wrote: I've got a better analogy for you Jinro. I think what Blizzard are forgetting is that while yes, a piece of shit is great (wait...wut), people still drink water. Facebook = Shit. Chat channels = Water. We can take that analogy further and talk about how real life communities tend to be created near sources of water whilst people tend not to want to live around big steaming piles of faeces. Well I was trying to be diplomatic!!!  | ||
| ||
