EPTDuring the Beta break they will realise that they needed 1 more year to complete the game.
The state of Battle.net 2.0 - Page 8
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
DrakanSilva
Chile932 Posts
During the Beta break they will realise that they needed 1 more year to complete the game. | ||
|
Illison
United States48 Posts
You have to understand Blizzard's player base to understand why they would add in achievements, and facebook integration. The majority of sales aren't going to come from people who read TL, it isn't going to come from people who are the top notch players of the world. It is going to come from regular gamers, past gamers of Starcraft and gamers of any other blizzard game. I think its pretty easy to understand why they would "focus" or at least have their battle.net x2 team focus on facebook integration and achievements. Also for your third point, I would like to point out your analogy is quite wrong. People care a lot more about a car they are buying than whether it can take them to point A or point B. Luxury items like CD players, radios are even nessacary when buying a teenager a beat up crapper. Also I would like to say that achievements are kinda cool, I've seen myself go after an achievement even when frankly I don't care about them. The only thing I would be worried about is this payment system. What is it for? Is battle.net going to be pay to play? Is it going to be used for blizzards ladder? Can you setup your own ladders to run? Though I understand the complaint for a lack of chat-feature, but I also understand that it will be released soon after release. And Blizzard might even release a lack luster chat feature before hand to quell the complaints they I'm sure are recieving through the surveys. | ||
|
zak
Korea (South)1009 Posts
On May 23 2010 08:10 Drakan wrote: Get ready for a delayed release date :D During the Beta break they will realise that they needed 1 more year to complete the game. no that date is set in stone by activision. | ||
|
HalfAmazing
Netherlands402 Posts
- not have my privacy compromised - not have annoying ads shoved in my face - have a lag free experience - accurately determine my ladder ranking - play LAN tournaments without issue - be allowed to create and use multiple accounts - play single player without having to be online StarCraft II is a Ferrari. It's a nicely designed, exciting new car. Battle.net 2.0 is the stipulation that you can only drive this car at speeds of up to 10MPH. It just makes more sense to pirate the game right now. Maybe I'll buy it to support my buddy who works for Blizzard, but maybe I'll just wipe my ass with $60 in a futile act of defiance. | ||
|
Spawkuring
United States755 Posts
On May 23 2010 08:11 Illison wrote: In-reply to OP You have to understand Blizzard's player base to understand why they would add in achievements, and facebook integration. The majority of sales aren't going to come from people who read TL, it isn't going to come from people who are the top notch players of the world. It is going to come from regular gamers, past gamers of Starcraft and gamers of any other blizzard game. I think its pretty easy to understand why they would "focus" or at least have their battle.net x2 team focus on facebook integration and achievements. Also for your third point, I would like to point out your analogy is quite wrong. People care a lot more about a car they are buying than whether it can take them to point A or point B. Luxury items like CD players, radios are even nessacary when buying a teenager a beat up crapper. Also I would like to say that achievements are kinda cool, I've seen myself go after an achievement even when frankly I don't care about them. The only thing I would be worried about is this payment system. What is it for? Is battle.net going to be pay to play? Is it going to be used for blizzards ladder? Can you setup your own ladders to run? Though I understand the complaint for a lack of chat-feature, but I also understand that it will be released soon after release. And Blizzard might even release a lack luster chat feature before hand to quell the complaints they I'm sure are recieving through the surveys. I can't even imagine too many casual gamers using Facebook Integration either simply because Bnet 0.5 is so ridiculously clunky and uninviting. Okay, you can add your Facebook friends, but you can't play with them if they're in another country, you can only create a small party, you can never chat with very many of them at the same time since there's no chat channels, and the custom game interface is also very sloppy and hard to work with. With the way things are now, I simply can't imagine people coming together for a social experience in Bnet. At best, they'll simply organize together outside of Bnet and play that way, which works but totally ruins what Blizzard was going for with Bnet 0.5. The big issue right now is that the SC2 community is surviving DESPITE Bnet, not because of it, and that's easily the most tragic thing since Bnet was hyped up more than any other feature in SC2. Yet right now it's hands down the worst part of the game. | ||
|
vic_gn
Austria50 Posts
Im really curious what this thing is blizzard wants to invent to replace chat channels, but i am almost certain its a letdown. All this looseness in match history and basic chat commands will hopefully be fixed some time later, but that does not change blizzard's approach to the new bnet. It feels like strange on the one hand blizzard wants to create a social experience with real id, broadcasting to friends, facebook(lol), party system (useless) etc and on the other hand they constrain the players: no channels, cant add friends, only real id to share some information, no notifications (they will come for sure), can only invite friends to games, cant host public games with observers, cant view other divisions/leagues, party system (good idea very bad execution), etc. Very many points on the negative side how could you have a social experience when you cant find friends or cant talk to them. I just don't get what blizzard wants to accomplish either they don't know what they want themselfes or they heavily messed up in their attempt to create a "better" bnet. | ||
|
shlomo
258 Posts
On May 23 2010 08:20 vic_gn wrote: I just don't get what blizzard wants to accomplish either they don't know what they want themselfes or they heavily messed up in their attempt to create a "better" bnet. That or they're just trying to incite people to feed all their personal information to facebook because of some big cashola deal. And as any serious user of the interwebs knows, facebook is the go-to site when it comes to respecting their users' privacy. | ||
|
BillyMole
United States118 Posts
On May 23 2010 08:19 Spawkuring wrote: ... The big issue right now is that the SC2 community is surviving DESPITE Bnet, not because of it, and that's easily the most tragic thing since Bnet was hyped up more than any other feature in SC2. Yet right now it's hands down the worst part of the game. Never a truer word spoken. And at some point, people will just give up. If they have to fight the system too hard in order to keep the community going, they'll just say screw it, and move to another game. | ||
|
DrakanSilva
Chile932 Posts
On May 23 2010 08:11 Illison wrote: In-reply to OP You have to understand Blizzard's player base to understand why they would add in achievements, and facebook integration. The majority of sales aren't going to come from people who read TL, it isn't going to come from people who are the top notch players of the world. It is going to come from regular gamers, past gamers of Starcraft and gamers of any other blizzard game. I think its pretty easy to understand why they would "focus" or at least have their battle.net x2 team focus on facebook integration and achievements. Also for your third point, I would like to point out your analogy is quite wrong. People care a lot more about a car they are buying than whether it can take them to point A or point B. Luxury items like CD players, radios are even nessacary when buying a teenager a beat up crapper. Also I would like to say that achievements are kinda cool, I've seen myself go after an achievement even when frankly I don't care about them. The only thing I would be worried about is this payment system. What is it for? Is battle.net going to be pay to play? Is it going to be used for blizzards ladder? Can you setup your own ladders to run? Though I understand the complaint for a lack of chat-feature, but I also understand that it will be released soon after release. And Blizzard might even release a lack luster chat feature before hand to quell the complaints they I'm sure are recieving through the surveys. You have to understand the key of success that any game that lives on more than 6 years have. A Solid Multiplayer Base. WoW succeeded why ? because it's multiplayer and is competitive enviroment, and it works perfectly for THAT game SCBW succeeded why ? because of the same thing. Countrstrike, Warcraft3, DOTA (jesus they even made a new game because the market was huge and it was affordable to invest in that market)Call of duty, Medal of Honor, etc. we are talking about a RTS game, its a totally different spectrum of market development. People now are getting bored with Sims for example, but not with Cstrike or SCBW, and the answer es very easy, A solid multiplayer base. Blizz might create a lot of income but in the end their reputation/consumer perception will go downhill if they don't fix what they are doing and that's what make a company successful nowadays. | ||
|
Mania[K]al
United States359 Posts
| ||
|
k!llua
Australia895 Posts
You have to understand the key of success that any game that lives on more than 6 years have. A Solid Multiplayer Base. No, releasing regular expansions to a successful game is what keeps it fresh and alive. At least that's the current corporate dogma that Blizzard (a partner with Activision, home of the IW debacle) subscribe to. | ||
|
shlomo
258 Posts
On May 23 2010 08:15 HalfAmazing wrote: I can't wait to not pay for the game and: - not have my privacy compromised - not have annoying ads shoved in my face - have a lag free experience - accurately determine my ladder ranking - play LAN tournaments without issue - be allowed to create and use multiple accounts - play single player without having to be online StarCraft II is a Ferrari. It's a nicely designed, exciting new car. Battle.net 2.0 is the stipulation that you can only drive this car at speeds of up to 10MPH. Amen brother. | ||
|
LiquidDeth
United States18 Posts
| ||
|
eXNewB
Canada291 Posts
I've been saying it from the start, and it sucks cause the game is actually fun, it's Blizzard who's ruining it by not including what the people who kept BW alive want in the game. | ||
|
Kurr
Canada2338 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + On May 23 2010 08:08 Two_DoWn wrote: Has anyone actually felt connected to a larger community when they logged into battle.net? Sure, I can chat privately with friends, but only one at a time. Or I could, if i could actually make a friend, which I cant cuz I cant get to know anyone because I cant talk to them in the first place. A poll, cuz polls are fun. This is my main thing as well. SC2 feels deader than a single player game to me even if there are thousands playing it at any given time. With a single player game, you get what you expect; it's single player. With BNet 2.0, I feel like I've been banned or something when I log on (which is coincidentally THE SOLE REASON I haven't played many games; the game feeling dead). I don't hate playing it but like I've said before I'm not huge on ladder games. Still, I would probably have 5X or 10X the amount of games played though if I could spend time on BNet 2.0 doing other things on it as well. It would just pump me up for the game more. | ||
|
Mania[K]al
United States359 Posts
On May 23 2010 08:35 LiquidDeth wrote: What did they do to WoW? They got involved and thats why it turned into the steaming pile it is today. SC1 was left alone for ~8 years, its the most successful RTS game alive. Blizzard is now very involved in SC2 trying to make it how they think it should be and look at the outcome. We got Bnet 2.0. | ||
|
chraej.
51 Posts
On May 23 2010 08:11 Illison wrote: The only thing I would be worried about is this payment system. What is it for? Is battle.net going to be pay to play? Is it going to be used for blizzards ladder? Can you setup your own ladders to run? i was wondering this too, is the play time counter simply for beta or does it mean something more? and if that were the case is that why chat would be futile? because you wouldnt want to sit around talking when you're paying to be playing. seems a bit far fetched though. | ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
On May 23 2010 08:39 Mania[K]al wrote: They got involved and thats why it turned into the steaming pile it is today. lots of people love WoW he's asking what makes it a steaming pile | ||
|
Nytefish
United Kingdom4282 Posts
But from the developer's point of view, you just need to buy the game once then you can fuck off because the more you play it online the more of their bandwidth you use. | ||
|
DrakanSilva
Chile932 Posts
On May 23 2010 08:29 k!llua wrote: No, releasing regular expansions to a successful game is what keeps it fresh and alive. At least that's the current corporate dogma that Blizzard (a partner with Activision, home of the IW debacle) subscribe to. Sims release regular expansions and since SIMS 3 people have forgotten them. And as far as i know ppl are still playing BW and Cstrike 1.6 worldwide with a TON of sponsors around them and tons of marketing. | ||
| ||
