|
On May 24 2010 01:49 Necrosjef wrote:Show nested quote +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.
Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you the King of Comedy.
With the facebook function I found out that two people I went to college with have accounts and now I can play with them. Is this really that bad of a thing?
Just because they don't have every feature that you want doesn't mean you have to trash talk every single feature they do add that you don't care about.
|
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:
Exactly, this should be simple enough to implement. I mean they have it in every single blizzard game, even world of warcraft with what thousands of users online per server, you can just create a private channel afaik by typing in the name and joining it.
Actually, I have been thinking. The current "chat" sytem that is in bnet 2.0, the instant messenger style thingy should be all the framework needed to implement this, they actually shouldn't have to build any new framework. In fact, the game already has chat channels. When you message someone and open a chat window that is a new virtual channel that is created somewhere and with party chat and invite functions it is possible to invite multiple people into one of these channels.
The functionality that is missing is to add the ability to create a named chat window and have people be able to join it without being invited and that literally should not require any rework at all.
I think they should, to the bottom of the friendslist interface add a letterbox followed by a "join chat" button, as well as a "create new chat" button.
If you create a new chat you get told to enter a name and then you get an empty instant messenger window exactly like the party chat. They should add a few moderator buttons, just a handful is enough for a start, such as kick player or promote to moderator. Basically the player who created the chat gets moderator status automatically and can give it on to others. You should also have a button for adding a password to the channel.
It seems to me that the chat system from previous battlenet is already in bnet 2.0. It is just that the middleman is missing where we can create and join custom channels.
This is what I think they ought to add though, and they should do it at the same time as they add custom naming for custom games and a browser for said games since the systems are related.
I am still however on the fence about the fact that this seems to be such an intuitive addition that I suspect that it is in fact already possible but just not activated on the beta but I will wait until the next phase of the beta goes up and see. If it is still missing then, then I will get worried. It should be very simple to add.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On May 24 2010 01:55 Kishime wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2010 01:49 Necrosjef wrote: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. Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you the King of Comedy. With the facebook function I found out that two people I went to college with have accounts and now I can play with them. Is this really that bad of a thing? Just because they don't have every feature that you want doesn't mean you have to trash talk every single feature they do add that you don't care about.
The problem is that they basically invented plastic surgery before penicilline.
See, analogies are awesome.
|
On May 24 2010 01:52 Motiva wrote:
It is really really sad to watch Blizzard progressively become worse every passing game. lol. Seriously... They've gone and fucked up possibly their greatest achievement (except for enslaving people onto WoW.) They've gone and fucked up Battle.net. And each game they've released since Starcraft has been progressively worse than the previous. It's almost comical how unorganized and unworthy this attempt is.
This is the case with all company's. C&C: every version is more worse then the previous one. Same for call of duty series, same for cs and css, ...
|
On May 24 2010 01:57 FrozenArbiter wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2010 01:55 Kishime wrote:On May 24 2010 01:49 Necrosjef wrote: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. Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you the King of Comedy. With the facebook function I found out that two people I went to college with have accounts and now I can play with them. Is this really that bad of a thing? Just because they don't have every feature that you want doesn't mean you have to trash talk every single feature they do add that you don't care about. The problem is that they basically invented plastic surgery before penicilline. See, analogies are awesome.
You're assuming that the same people worked on plastic surgery and penicillin and that progress on one delayed progress on the other.
|
Actually it was stated in an interview that Blizzard employees are moved around to different projects all the time.
When it comes to Devs, there is no solid ground, you are moved from warcraft to starcraft to bnet to diablo and back again as Blizzard chooses.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On May 24 2010 02:00 Kishime wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2010 01:57 FrozenArbiter wrote:On May 24 2010 01:55 Kishime wrote:On May 24 2010 01:49 Necrosjef wrote: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. Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you the King of Comedy. With the facebook function I found out that two people I went to college with have accounts and now I can play with them. Is this really that bad of a thing? Just because they don't have every feature that you want doesn't mean you have to trash talk every single feature they do add that you don't care about. The problem is that they basically invented plastic surgery before penicilline. See, analogies are awesome. You're assuming that the same people worked on plastic surgery and penicillin and that progress on one delayed progress on the other.
It's insulting that they would choose to spend ANY time on facebook before having a basic chat feature implemented. Like, really, truly insulting 
|
On May 24 2010 02:05 Powda wrote:
Actually it was stated in an interview that Blizzard employees are moved around to different projects all the time.
When it comes to Devs, there is no solid ground, you are moved from warcraft to starcraft to bnet to diablo and back again as Blizzard chooses.
For all we know the facebook team did the majority of the facebook integration.
Now that I think about it, the BNET 2.0 chat and facebook chat are pretty damn similar. I wouldn't be surprised if by launch you can talk to people on bnet through facebook. If that happens and there still aren't normal chat rooms then I will jump on board the "we want chatrooms" bandwagon.
|
Honestly, if Bnet 2.0 is the reason for SC's delay and this is the crap shovelled, they need to roll some heads and cut some paychecks. Serious blunder.
|
It's all about money and politics. What do you guys think big ol' companies like activision do. They try to do what nets them the most money.
Blizzard's sc2 development team - sure, they care about us. Activision does not give the tiniest shit about us. And they are clearly in control of bnet 2.0. It's all about money!
Every single thing people complain about is a decision to try to get more money. Why do you think they would do it already knowing the SC1 fanbase is going to hate it.
|
I'm going out on a limb here to say that hte facebook integration is a good thing...
and I love the matchmaking compared to ICCup.
but It's missing chat channels, and many other things that would seem to be much easier to implement than chat channels?! If anything just make a pseudo IRC server/client that needed bnet authentication to enter?
|
On May 24 2010 01:49 Necrosjef wrote:Show nested quote +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.
I lol'd!
|
The State of B-Net 2.0 is completely appalling. I really hope blizzard and the guy who designed B-Net 2.0 reads this thread and takes some notes. I hear the guy who did B-Net 2.0 did Xbox live and it is really similar. Well to that I say, we are PC gamers! We are NOT console gamers here, learn to target your market. As PC gamers we need certain things to foster In-game communities, chat rooms and channels a long with clan support are so vital to doing this any talk of building an "online social community" is complete bullshit without basic chatting functions.
One of the best parts of old SC (when I played, very casually mind you) was playing somebody only to have him tell me to join *channel _____* to talk about the game and to give me tips. After a good 2v2 match with somebody I should be able to say in chat "hey good game man, join channel ______* and we'll play again. This is how friends are built on line. Right now we need to get their E-mail and use their terrible Real ID system. It's like whoever designed B-Net 2.0 just went out of his way to make it as hard as possible to meet people and create relationships in the game. As a socialization platform B-net 2.0 fails in every single regard. Newsflash.... PC gamers have keyboards to type with, give us a proper chatting platform.
Instead we get a bunch of flashy useless crap like decals and achievements instead. This stuff would be all fine if the basic functions of B-Net 2.0 wasn't so poorly done. I seriously don't see how the current B-Net 2.0 took so damn long to develop and is such a failure in nearly every regard. Don't people at Blizzard offices realize that battle net 2.0 is inferior to their previous battlenet platforms? Give me WC3 battle net over this over bloated, flashy, inefficient piece of junk any day. Don't get me wrong, SC2 is a great game itself, but with the current state of B-net 2.0 I am seriously considering passing on this one. Saddest part is Facebook actually now has a stake in seeing that we don't get chat channels in SC2, they want facebook to be the medium of communication between SC2 players, such a mega failure here.
|
I just read a bit through the bnet forums and posters there so terrible that it is aggravating. Most of the posters seem to be the 'casual' demographic and seem ok with blizzard destroying everything we know and love so they can get their achievements and happiness.... the whole thing is really, really depressing, especially because the game actually turned out to be really really fun. Also, the thought of no ICCUP for SC2 in the future is really disturbing as I'm sure they would fix everything wrong with the current iteration of bnet 2.0.
|
Cuz they don't want our money??? -_-;; You lost me Travis.
If Bnet 2.0 is seriously what it is, and I can't play people from around the world, Koreans, Germans, Belgian Waffles, or lan but it's instead filled with achievements, bullshit bargraphs, and portraits, I'll seriously say goodbye. I love the game but what good is starcraft if I can't play it with the people I've played it with forever and ever.
Plus, I am so bad at BW now that getting Team Melee games together is mad fun LOLOLOL.
|
On May 24 2010 02:20 Froadac wrote:
I'm going out on a limb here to say that hte facebook integration is a good thing...
and I love the matchmaking compared to ICCup.
but It's missing chat channels, and many other things that would seem to be much easier to implement than chat channels?! If anything just make a pseudo IRC server/client that needed bnet authentication to enter?
How can facebook integration benefit the game? I just don't see how it helps the existing player do anything that a better multiplayer client would do. I can however see it as a way to market activision/blizzard products to people on your facebook page
|
On May 24 2010 02:20 ahwala wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2010 01:49 Necrosjef wrote: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. I lol'd!
hahaha yeah man, thats great
|
On May 24 2010 02:15 travis wrote:
It's all about money and politics. What do you guys think big ol' companies like activision do. They try to do what nets them the most money.
Blizzard's sc2 development team - sure, they care about us. Activision does not give the tiniest shit about us. And they are clearly in control of bnet 2.0. It's all about money!
Every single thing people complain about is a decision to try to get more money. Why do you think they would do it already knowing the SC1 fanbase is going to hate it.
I agree with most of this, except for the paranoia about Activision part. Could be true, unfair to assume that this is the case though.
People need to realize that TL is a very small part of what the overall community will be and very biased in a particular fashion (towards competitive play). It's a big possibility that taking in all the numbers that chat just isn't worth it for Blizzard to add to Bnet 2 (even with a very low cost) because in the end not enough people will care that it's not present.
Everyone here gives nice warm fuzzy anecdotes about joining random channels and talking with people, organizing events, and finding friends etc. But I don't think I could extrapolate that out to a wider user base.
As far as I know Street Fighter arcades, and Smash Bros don't have chat rooms and they have competitive scenes. Did Counter Strike have chatrooms before steam came around? I'm not sure on that one but I think they didn't and their competitive scene has turned out alright.
I can agree that having chat rooms would be better for us, but there's more to consider (with money as travis said) and it definitely isn't the end of the world or the end of competitive Starcraft as a lot of people here like to scream.
|
On May 24 2010 02:23 Regulate140 wrote:
The State of B-Net 2.0 is completely appalling. I really hope blizzard and the guy who designed B-Net 2.0 reads this thread and takes some notes. I hear the guy who did B-Net 2.0 did Xbox live and it is really similar. Well to that I say, we are PC gamers! We are NOT console gamers here, learn to target your market. As PC gamers we need certain things to foster In-game communities, chat rooms and channels a long with clan support are so vital to doing this any talk of building an "online social community" is complete bullshit without basic chatting functions.
One of the best parts of old SC (when I played, very casually mind you) was playing somebody only to have him tell me to join *channel _____* to talk about the game and to give me tips. After a good 2v2 match with somebody I should be able to say in chat "hey good game man, join channel ______* and we'll play again. This is how friends are built on line. Right now we need to get their E-mail and use their terrible Real ID system. It's like whoever designed B-Net 2.0 just went out of his way to make it as hard as possible to meet people and create relationships in the game. As a socialization platform B-net 2.0 fails in every single regard. Newsflash.... PC gamers have keyboards to type with, give us a proper chatting platform.
Instead we get a bunch of flashy useless crap like decals and achievements instead. This stuff would be all fine if the basic functions of B-Net 2.0 wasn't so poorly done. I seriously don't see how the current B-Net 2.0 took so damn long to develop and is such a failure in nearly every regard. Don't people at Blizzard offices realize that battle net 2.0 is inferior to their previous battlenet platforms? Give me WC3 battle net over this over bloated, flashy, inefficient piece of junk any day. Don't get me wrong, SC2 is a great game itself, but with the current state of B-net 2.0 I am seriously considering passing on this one. Saddest part is Facebook actually now has a stake in seeing that we don't get chat channels in SC2, they want facebook to be the medium of communication between SC2 players, such a mega failure here.
agree. none of the extraneous stuff would be bad if they had gotten the fundamentals right. i mean, i can't even whisper friends in-game without opening a mini chat box or tabbing through like 6 people, what the hell?
gateway limitations just plain suck. they haven't even tried to explain that one and it is by far the worst.
|
On May 24 2010 02:23 SuperJongMan wrote:
Cuz they don't want our money??? -_-;; You lost me Travis.
If Bnet 2.0 is seriously what it is, and I can't play people from around the world, Koreans, Germans, Belgian Waffles, or lan but it's instead filled with achievements, bullshit bargraphs, and portraits, I'll seriously say goodbye. I love the game but what good is starcraft if I can't play it with the people I've played it with forever and ever.
Plus, I am so bad at BW now that getting Team Melee games together is mad fun LOLOLOL.
eh they already have our money we are all going to buy it
and it probably will sell more copies now that they've introduced stupid shit like facebook integration
and they certainly will make more money selling maps and other features/addons
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
