Because people were complaining that this post lacks flashy pictures, I jacked this one from some other post here on TL.
EDITUUUUUU: Just to clarify, I'm not criticizing the system because of the recent bugs since patch 13 (buggy UI, crashes, lag), I'm saying that even from a conceptual standpoint the entire system has fallen short of what they promised and of what we expected. I have every expectation that these bugs will be fixed soon enough, surely by release. Please don't put words in my mouth.
A note to the assuredly frustrated mods: I see you put up a nice little green banner since I started writing this. Your request to stop posting about Bnet is, I believe, aimed toward people complaining about lag and disconnects etc. My post isn’t as much a complaint about those recent issues as it is to the overall conceptual shortcoming of the whole system. Crossing my fingers you wont lock this.
START HERE:
Since the launch of patch 13, I have come to realize just how much I hate Battle.net 2.0. I also realize that there have been many dozens of other posts regarding the exact topics that I’m going to bring up again in the next few paragraphs, and that most of you are sick and tired of hearing about it. Unfortunately for you, my distaste for the new Bnet overwhelms my liking for not having the entire first page of this forum covered with complaints about the new system.
I’m not completely sure what all of the rest of you have been experiencing since the patch, but I can effectively no longer play the game. I can’t start a ladder match without the game crashing, now user created custom games are disabled, and all of the Blizzard-made custom games just lag out until one of the players gets dropped. Frustrating to say the least. This has really brought me to question the viability of SC2 as a product by mid-summer, as well as the stability of the entire philosophy of modern day Activision Blizzard.
I was around seven when I first played StarCraft. It was the first game that I think I had ever played on a computer. I was enchanted immediately and played through the campaign using cheats rather liberally (I still remember that I bawled when Tassadar died). Later on in my life I was introduced to WC3, which, again, was an unbelievably high quality game to someone with little other gaming experience. I sucked at both games, as I still can’t beat an easy computer in WC3, but the art, lore, and gameplay grasped me and pulled me in. To my young mind it seemed like Blizzard could do no wrong. Blizzard was the perfect company that constantly produced revolutionary titles that set industry standards in every genre that they ventured into. While this would’ve been a fairly accurate statement at the time, the more recent developments with the new Bnet system would indicate that Blizzard is moving away from their throne from which they once looked down on all of the PC gaming industry.
Gaming has become less and less of a hardcore and competitive hobby as more and more companies sacrifice quality and difficulty to open their game up to a wider audience, thus earning the company more money. I had hoped that Blizzard would shy away from this fast growing trend, but their new Bnet system is pretty clearly driven toward earning their company more money by making it more appealing to the wider audience.
At least the Battle.net UI doesn't look this retarded anymore.
First off, the ELO system. This frustrates me for a few reasons. This system will always favor the people that have played more games, that is, owned the game the longest. There will always be point inflation because you earn usually three or four times as many points for a victory than you lose for a loss. This wouldn’t be as big as a problem if the favored system didn’t have such a massive impact on the dealing out of points. The favored tag is almost never accurate. At least 9 out of 10 times I start a game it says that my opponent is favored over me, but when I ask my opponent in game, surprisingly often (most of the time) they will say that they were shown me as being favored. I wouldn’t care that this system was so buggy and ambiguous if it didn’t make so much of a difference on your climbing of ranks. If you win against a favored opponent, bam, 20 points. Haven’t played for awhile? Bam, another 20. But you’re favored in a game that you won? Alright, here’s 3 points for you. A little too dramatic of a difference for such an inaccurate system.
Then there’s the division and league system. To be honest, I’m not fully opposed to this change. The league system works great for the people who want a competitive experience but are still awful players. Copper through gold (or now bronze through platinum) leagues I think should stay this way. It makes it an interesting experience to try to get to your division’s #1 spot even if there’s no way that you could be in the first 10,000 on a straight up ladder. In the platinum (now diamond) league, however, there is no reason to hide information like an overall rank from the players. They’re good enough to be able to be ranked among the best fifth of all of the players (if the separate league system is doing it’s job correctly; Blizzard has told us nothing about the way leagues are separated as far as I know, so I won’t go into that here.), so why should they not be able to see where exactly they fall in that upper echelon of competitive players. Absurd, to be honest.
As a side note, I fail to understand why Blizzard has insisted on naming all of the different divisions in each league. Since there is no way to browse through the different divisions in your league or in others, why assign them numbers or stupid names? Not a technical fault, but still a pointless frill of the system that just overcomplicates things. Again, unnecessary and absurd.
To make up for the shortcomings of the ranking and matchmaking system, Blizzard stuck in an achievement system. The first time I heard about this I was pissed. My anger has only grown exponentially since I realized that Blizzard hoped that people would be distracted by this and just be satisfied with the new Bnet now that you can earn “Achievement Points”. I think that this quote from a wonderful post from joolz can express my thoughts on Achievements better than I can myself:
On May 23 2010 22:21 joolz wrote: There ARE unlocks and achievements but the overwhelming majority of them are incredibly easy to get. XBOX games actually give you an achievement for finishing the tutorial stage... then beating the first level... then beating the second level... and so on. You actually get achievements for doing things you can't avoid doing. And then these achievements get turned into points, and those points go on public display in your profile, and then you have a pissing contest to see who has the most points among your friends, and then you just keep paying your money to the companies who just keep making achievements easier and easier to get because god damn it you need those points, don't you?
Does that sound familiar? Achievement showcase, anyone? Put your 5 favorite achievements on display! Get a decal for spamming games played! Show off your achievement points because it's on display as a big ass font number next to your name when people look at your profile. TELL YOUR FREAKIN FACEBOOK FRIENDS YOU WON FIVE GAMES AS ZERG!!!
Now, it is not only that the new Battle.net features that they tried to implement are all miserable failures, it is also that all of the things that made their old system successful they have decided to remove. Sounds like a bunch of truly intelligent people are hard at work to make our gaming experience better, doesn’t it? LAN support, clan systems, chat channels, gone. Three of the most important aspects of a successful online gaming service are just missing, and Blizzard has explicitly stated that they have no intention of putting them back in any recognizable format that we’re familiar with.
This just screams clutter. What exactly was so bad about chat channels?
Battle.net has delayed the game some three or four years now. It has done little but hinder the development team which is trying to slog through the mess that is Battle.net 2.0 to try to construct an entertaining, competitive game on top of a disfigured and fractured infrastructure. Dustin Browder has implied in a number of interviews that the development team and the Battle.net team are largely separate, and that he hopes that the quality of the work from one team should not reflect on the other.
I believe that the quality of StarCraft 2 as a game is unimpeachable. I won’t speak to balance right now, as the development team still has a few months before release, but they have created a genuinely interesting set of game mechanics along with widely varied and diverse races that interact in a way that can keep someone interested in the game for years. There are constantly new strategies popping up that can revolutionize the way a certain match-up must be played. The game is fun. The game is interesting. The game has every potential to become just as big a success as its predecessor, if not even more so, unless Battle.net 2.0 keeps dragging it down. Greg Canessa has single handily brought about all of the technical flaws that make people question the potential of the game being a successful product.
This is the enemy.
I’m disenchanted. The Blizzard that I knew in my childhood that was incapable of producing an inferior product no longer exists. Battle.net 2.0 has proven to be unsuccessful at every turn. I would be completely satisfied if they just rolled back the entire system to the technologies of the original Battle.net with an easily accessible global ladder, chat channels, clan systems, and a matchmaking system that certainly had fewer complaints than this new garbage we need to put up with. I’m enraged. I had higher expectations than they delivered for, and I don’t believe that they can fix the service before release. Truly a letdown.
There are two factions in this whole deal, Starcraft development team, and BNet 2 development team.
The Starcraft team themselves have made an amazing game up to date. For a game to be this balanced in beta is absolutely amazing, and you can't exactly wish for something as balanced as Starcraft 1. It will get better though, as more improves strats and tactics come about. BNet 2.0 is what is really putting the game down. Starcraft is basically the beta testing location of bnet 2. Really it just sucks that starcraft had to be the target for bnet 2 launch.
Everyone knows that BNet2.0 has plenty issues right now and they're somewhat all being discussed already. And I guess even you have seen some of the threads. If you think posting a incredible huge block of text which a big bag of bitching is good then this is why I hate you 2.0
SC2 has no future as a compettive game what so ever. Blizzard has gone out of their way to crush and exclude anyone who had any interest in organizing the game other than themselves (no LAN, region lock out, no chat, no simple friend system).
So we are left with Blizzard organizing things.... and what do they give us? A fake ladder, with almost meaningless leagues and fake rankings that are designed not to show a players skill but to dupe them into thinking they are good. The whole ladder and ranking system is a gigantic con.
Unless Blizz decides to radically change directions, SC2 has no future, and it's not even due to the game, but due to bnet 2.0.
On May 24 2010 03:32 Tef wrote: Did you even read the TL staff message?
We get it - Bnet is having some problems. Please stop making threads about it.
TL is getting littered with these low quality (whine/hate/imbalance) posts nowadays. Maybe I am used to the old BW forum standard.
Which I addressed in the first paragraph. Did you not read it?
EDIT: Now given that someone got temp banned off of a comment in this thread and it's still not locked, I'm assuming that the mods decided to leave this one open.
I agree with most of your criticisms, but the good news is that if the community provides good feedback, Blizzard can easily change these things.
I think the ELO system will grow on you once SC2 becomes more established, players hit their "peak" ELO and you can see a really accurate distribution of players' skill levels. We all want to see LAN, chat channels, clan support, league/ladder browsing, an overall ladder, etc. but it won't be long before we see those things - SC2 simply won't survive without them.
We got a "back" button, so bnet 2.0 is already headed in the right direction (I hope). The only thing that worries me is that the Blizzard team seemed oblivious to all of these things absent from bnet 2.0 that the community considers necessities. If they have no idea what we want as the players, how are they going to innovate beyond our expectations?
It's been seriously only one day. Do you really think Blizzard intended to cause these issues? I sure hope you don't. Just let them fix it.
As far as your sour grapes toward all of the new systems (Ladder, facebook integration, ELO, achievements) - Would you prefer a game with no competitive architecture? (Ladder / ELO) And if you don't enjoy achievements or Facebook, just ignore it - you're not forced to participate in either of those.
I will say Battle.net has let me down somewhat compared to how hyped I was at BlizzCon 2009, but it's not anywhere close to how dramatic you're making it.
Please stop with the "there is a beta for stuff like this" crap, it's WRONG. The beta as we know it ends in 7 days, what you're playing right now is the game that you will have in July, minus the drop stuff I hope. It has already been announced that we won't have chat channels, we won't have a good ladder, we won't have a real friends system, etc... this beta is here to make small adjustments be it technical or balance related and it's here ESPECIALLY to market and pre hype the game, like Blizzard does since a few games now. There won't be any revolutions between now and July.
On May 24 2010 03:54 TimeToPractice! wrote: It's been seriously only one day. Do you really think Blizzard intended to cause these issues? I sure hope you don't. Just let them fix it.
As far as your sour grapes toward all of the new systems (Ladder, facebook integration, ELO, achievements) - Would you prefer a game with no competitive architecture? (Ladder / ELO)
I don't know if you missed the boat or something, but this is what everyone is complaining about.
Why is it so hard for people to understand that the game is in a betastage and we get to play it for free? Since its in beta ofcourse there will be crashes/game issues, thats why you have a betastage, to filter out all of these litte annoying buggs.
The beta isnt for whining, if you only whine you wont improve it. Its here so we can suggest what will make the game better. While they hammer out asmany buggs as they can.
On May 24 2010 03:54 TimeToPractice! wrote: It's been seriously only one day. Do you really think Blizzard intended to cause these issues? I sure hope you don't. Just let them fix it.
I'm not complaining about the recent technical issues since patch 13 destroyed the game, I'm saying that even from a conceptual standpoint the system has fallen short.
As far as your sour grapes toward all of the new systems (Ladder, facebook integration, ELO, achievements) - Would you prefer a game with no competitive architecture? (Ladder / ELO)
No, I would prefer WC3 Battle.net.
And if you don't enjoy achievements or Facebook, just ignore it - you're not forced to participate in either of those.
Fair enough, but it feels to me that Blizzard is just giving us these features to keep us from complaining too much about the rest of the system.
I will say Battle.net has let me down somewhat compared to how hyped I was at BlizzCon 2009, but it's not anywhere close to how dramatic you're making it.
I was also super hyped up during the Blizzcon coverage, and I'm really sad that it's not actually as cool as it came off as then.
no, we must fight this urge to think everything is okay because its beta and complain like its the end of the world because if we dont do so, blizzard will never step up to the standards that they once had.
On May 24 2010 04:05 D10 wrote: no, we must fight this urge to think everything is okay because its beta and complain like its the end of the world because if we dont do so, blizzard will never step up to the standards that they once had.
Seriously, when was the last time Blizzard let you down with a product? :-/
On May 24 2010 04:05 D10 wrote: no, we must fight this urge to think everything is okay because its beta and complain like its the end of the world because if we dont do so, blizzard will never step up to the standards that they once had.
Seriously, when was the last time Blizzard let you down with a product? :-/
WC3 with failed balance.
Edited the original post to try to clarify what exactly I meant to say.
On May 24 2010 04:05 D10 wrote: no, we must fight this urge to think everything is okay because its beta and complain like its the end of the world because if we dont do so, blizzard will never step up to the standards that they once had.
Seriously, when was the last time Blizzard let you down with a product? :-/
WC3 with failed balance.
Edited the original post to try to clarify what exactly I meant to say.
You mean the WC3 that's ridiculously popular and still played by professional gamers around the world? :-/
On May 24 2010 04:01 Dawme wrote: Please stop with the "there is a beta for stuff like this" crap, it's WRONG. The beta as we know it ends in 7 days, what you're playing right now is the game that you will have in July, minus the drop stuff I hope. It has already been announced that we won't have chat channels, we won't have a good ladder, we won't have a real friends system, etc... this beta is here to make small adjustments be it technical or balance related and it's here ESPECIALLY to market and pre hype the game, like Blizzard does since a few games now. There won't be any revolutions between now and July.
Yes and after realese there will be all those things you mentionned. Some of u guys look like such assholes on the internet it's incredible. Sc also had a shitty ladder, shitty battlenet, no clansm unbalanced gameplay, cheap abuses and bugs, no replays at its realese guess what happened with it now
On May 24 2010 03:32 Tef wrote: Did you even read the TL staff message?
We get it - Bnet is having some problems. Please stop making threads about it.
TL is getting littered with these low quality (whine/hate/imbalance) posts nowadays. Maybe I am used to the old BW forum standard.
Which I addressed in the first paragraph. Did you not read it?
The content of this thread doesn't deviate from all the other hundreds of threads complaining about bnet 2.0. I honestly though/hoped that "problems" in the staff message meant more than the current freeze issue. I don't see the point of making a thread with the topic "Why I hate Bnet 2.0", its just a blog post/rant.
A summary of this post: (for those that got a wall of text critical error) The content of this post is a complaint about the crashes and unreliability of Bnet 2.0 that is still in beta. It also state the league/rank/matchmaking system is crap because a total rank list is not shown, and achievements were made to make up for those shortcommings. The OP rather have 1.0 back and use the facebook integration as a punch line.
On May 24 2010 04:05 D10 wrote: no, we must fight this urge to think everything is okay because its beta and complain like its the end of the world because if we dont do so, blizzard will never step up to the standards that they once had.
Seriously, when was the last time Blizzard let you down with a product? :-/
WOW
edit: to clarify, letting me down, does not equal letting their shareholders down.
On May 24 2010 04:05 D10 wrote: no, we must fight this urge to think everything is okay because its beta and complain like its the end of the world because if we dont do so, blizzard will never step up to the standards that they once had.
Seriously, when was the last time Blizzard let you down with a product? :-/
WOW
edit: to clarify, letting me down, does not equal letting their shareholders down.
...haha, nor, I guess, does it have anything to do with the millions of subscribers who have made the game the most popular MMORPG in the world by far.
I mean, I hated the Great Gatsby, too. That F Scott Fitzgerald was such a talentless poser. If you ask me.
On May 24 2010 04:17 Tef wrote: The content of this post is a complaint about the crashes and unreliability of Bnet 2.0 that is still in beta.
Alright, you clearly didn't read it. I explicitly stated that I am not discussing any of the current bugs in the system. I am fully confidant that they will all be worked out by release. I think that even without bugs it wouldn't be a good service. You really need to read and understand before posting.
Well there is a plethora of reasons why I hate 2.0 but the #1 and #2 reasons are as follows: 1. No chat channels or any way to talk to people other than via Flist or in-game. 2. No way whatsoever to browse the ladder for well-known players or to see other leagues/divisions - at the BARE MINIMUM a search function should be added so you could at least search for Nony or Idra or Orb and so on.
On May 24 2010 04:01 Dawme wrote: Please stop with the "there is a beta for stuff like this" crap, it's WRONG. The beta as we know it ends in 7 days, what you're playing right now is the game that you will have in July, minus the drop stuff I hope. It has already been announced that we won't have chat channels, we won't have a good ladder, we won't have a real friends system, etc... this beta is here to make small adjustments be it technical or balance related and it's here ESPECIALLY to market and pre hype the game, like Blizzard does since a few games now. There won't be any revolutions between now and July.
Yes and after realese there will be all those things you mentionned.
What makes you think that ? Because in my opinion, when a game does not contain such basic features as chat channels, it's not because the devs didn't have time to implement it, it's because they didn't WANT to do it. Blizzard has made design decisions that wont change now or in 5 years (like no LAN play which is a slap in the face of gamers).
Some of u guys look like such assholes on the internet it's incredible. Sc also had a shitty ladder, shitty battlenet, no clansm unbalanced gameplay, cheap abuses and bugs, no replays at its realese guess what happened with it now
Let me remind you that SC was released more than 10 years ago, it seems to me that we should expect a better product in 2010 than in 1998. Don't you think so ? And by the way, the problem with bnet isn't the quality of the product, it's the decisions that led to it.
On May 24 2010 04:01 Dawme wrote: Please stop with the "there is a beta for stuff like this" crap, it's WRONG. The beta as we know it ends in 7 days, what you're playing right now is the game that you will have in July, minus the drop stuff I hope. It has already been announced that we won't have chat channels, we won't have a good ladder, we won't have a real friends system, etc... this beta is here to make small adjustments be it technical or balance related and it's here ESPECIALLY to market and pre hype the game, like Blizzard does since a few games now. There won't be any revolutions between now and July.
Yes and after realese there will be all those things you mentionned.
What makes you think that ? Because in my opinion, when a game does not contain such basic features as chat channels, it's not because the devs didn't have time to implement it, it's because they didn't WANT to do it. Blizzard has made design decisions that wont change now or in 5 years (like no LAN play which is a slap in the face of gamers).
Some of u guys look like such assholes on the internet it's incredible. Sc also had a shitty ladder, shitty battlenet, no clansm unbalanced gameplay, cheap abuses and bugs, no replays at its realese guess what happened with it now
Let me remind you that SC was released more than 10 years ago, it seems to me that we should expect a better product in 2010 than in 1998. Don't you think so ? And by the way, the problem with bnet isn't the quality of the product, it's the decisions that led to it.
10 years ago, it was actually much easier to make a game. Have you ever thought about how much bigger design teams are these days? How hard it is to prepare for so many different kinds of systems with such a complicated product?
Are you telling me that it's harder to make a product with equal features than one released 10 years ago ? You're insane if you think that, it's actually way easier for multiple reasons (like protocols/APIs standardizations). The design team have grown along the years mainly because art (music / gfx) are way better these days and require much more work. And Starcraft 2 is a very good product on this point. Come on, an IT student could write a server/client irc program which would work for 100k people in a day. It's absolutely not a time issue, it's just a pure design choice. Same for the LAN play, i'm pretty sure SC2 version used internally by blizzard has in fact LAN play. But they won't give it to us. For pure business reasons.
On May 24 2010 04:05 D10 wrote: no, we must fight this urge to think everything is okay because its beta and complain like its the end of the world because if we dont do so, blizzard will never step up to the standards that they once had.
Seriously, when was the last time Blizzard let you down with a product? :-/
WOW
edit: to clarify, letting me down, does not equal letting their shareholders down.
...haha, nor, I guess, does it have anything to do with the millions of subscribers who have made the game the most popular MMORPG in the world by far.
I mean, I hated the Great Gatsby, too. That F Scott Fitzgerald was such a talentless poser. If you ask me.
my biggest beefs with wow are the following.
PvP: game had awesome pvp before they introduced honor and battlegrounds, you had to grind your gear in the pve dungeons and then you were able to roam around the world trying to find pvp and it was soooooo much fun because everyone was doing it, so you were able to find cool fights in all sorts of different places, nowdays world pvp is dead, and people grind boringgrounds to get their honor gear to go into the arena, and honestly is just boring in my eyes, I dont want wow pro pvp, I want wow fun pvp.
PvE: by far the greatest achievement by blizzard was dumbing down its pve so that any scrub can kill arthas and have only purple loot. This greatly displeases me, as im a hardcore gamer, and I really like whatever game I play to have content simply locked away from newbies horizons, greating a huge gab in every possible way between hardcores and noobs is something that greatly pleases me, and blizzard took exacly the oposite way with wow.
Also hated raids, maybe thats why I left wow but, whe I first started, raiding was super challenging, (buggy) and fun, there was this feeling of banding toghether to beat an incredible challenge, now it feels like raiding = working.
Everything is beaten, and you are just there to get the loot, I feel incapable of having fun in a pve enviroment with more than 12 pp
And my last point, the dumbing down of 5 man dungeons, I remember when I had to go into scholomance with 10 people in order to make it smoothly, they felt hard, challenging, and rewarding, now 5 man dungeons are like a walk in the park, and if you cant obliterate the dungeons with 5 people odds are your is retarded.
And everytime blizzard did some major change to the game, it was going further away from what I liked to what I disliked, until it became this 50ton gorilla with a gazillion ppl playing, but in my eyes, no deph, no challenge, just an illusion to collect unprepared players money.
WC3 BNet: - Clans - Chat channels - Excellent ladder system (at release, it got ruined years later unfortunately probably by the same people doing BNet 2.0) - Can save custom games and come back to them later - Can join any regions server with 1 cdkey - Can make and name custom games rather than them just being anonymous - LAN - Can stream ingame (ie you can watch live games in real time in the game client, this feature is possible because of LAN capability)
On May 24 2010 03:06 im a roc wrote: I’m disenchanted. The Blizzard that I knew in my childhood that was incapable of producing an inferior product no longer exists. Battle.net 2.0 has proven to be unsuccessful at every turn. I would be completely satisfied if they just rolled back the entire system to the technologies of the original Battle.net with an easily accessible global ladder, chat channels, clan systems, and a matchmaking system that certainly had fewer complaints than this new garbage we need to put up with. I’m enraged. I had higher expectations than they delivered for, and I don’t believe that they can fix the service before release. Truly a letdown.
Oh, and by the way: Facebook Integration.
Need I say more?
I agree with you. You make some good points in your post.
I would have loved if blizzard had developed wc3 bnet a little further and used that. I can't see any positives with bnet 2 compared to the old one tbh.
Some key concepts have been slaughtered like open chat channels, friends system and global ladder.
On May 24 2010 04:17 Tef wrote: The content of this post is a complaint about the crashes and unreliability of Bnet 2.0 that is still in beta.
Alright, you clearly didn't read it. I explicitly stated that I am not discussing any of the current bugs in the system. I am fully confidant that they will all be worked out by release. I think that even without bugs it wouldn't be a good service. You really need to read and understand before posting.
So why did you write the following?
I’m not completely sure what all of the rest of you have been experiencing since the patch, but I can effectively no longer play the game. I can’t start a ladder match without the game crashing..
Wow, the 21 minute mark and onward in that video absolutely blew my mind. I've never considered achievement points to lead in that direction.
Anyone that hasn't seen the presentation in the OP should definitely do so. Thank you for posting that TC.
You can tell the battle.net 2.0 team has no experience with why the old battle.net was successful and why so many people still continue to play Blizzard's old titles. I am going to go out on a limb and say that without the way the old battle.net was, none of Blizzard's games would have been as successful as they were.
Yea achievements can be addicting, but belonging to a social community is more addicting. I did a lot of chatting on my SC:BW days and because of that I was on battle.net more frequently. On battle.net 2.0 I hop on for a game or two and log off because I have no reason to stay logged on anymore.
Online PC gaming has been around for years. A niche has developed. Since then every single online PC gaming infrastructure has followed the desires of that niche, for good reasons. Things like tracking statistics, chat rooms, etc. Your statistics linked to your specific account WAS your achievement. In-depth statistic tracking was always a cornerstone for online pc gaming. And that was what helped make online pc gaming addicting; the social aspect. And that is what made battle.net so successful; it was a service that helped develop the niche.
Online console gaming was a new concept that would require a new infrastructure (no doubt implemented because of the success of online pc gaming); leading to a brand new online niche. You couldn't use chat rooms because you didn't have a keyboard. So you had to resort to clever party systems and messaging services. Basically the community experience was in the hands of the developer; players would pray developers had half the brain to implement what was necessary (and my experience is from being a huge online console gaming supporter back when xbox live was just a concept for regular xbox). But there was one problem; very little statistic tracking. I mean how can you possibly link statistics from a single player game to an online account? Thus, achievements were born. And achievements helped link together the online console gaming community and give it that staying power that online pc gaming has been enjoying for years.
The reason I discuss online pc gaming and online console gaming is because consoles are marketed for the casual gamer, and pc gaming has always been for the more hardcore gamer. Battle.net 2.0 is blatantly based off of Xbox live, an infrastructure that was designed for the casual gamer; an infrastructure that was years behind online pc gaming. How is a PC gaming niche supposed to survive in a console gaming environment? Its a step backwards for online pc gaming.
Its like the creator now being told what's best for them by the created. Its like taking a bunch of polar bears and making them live in the woods behind your house because a bunch of people that know nothing about ecology just assume its "better for them". It's wrong.
On May 24 2010 04:05 D10 wrote: no, we must fight this urge to think everything is okay because its beta and complain like its the end of the world because if we dont do so, blizzard will never step up to the standards that they once had.
Seriously, when was the last time Blizzard let you down with a product? :-/
WC3 with failed balance.
Edited the original post to try to clarify what exactly I meant to say.
You mean the WC3 that's ridiculously popular and still played by professional gamers around the world? :-/
Because stupid people prefer graphics over gameplay?
(OT) Just because SCII itself is a good game (this is not necessarily my opinion) doesn't mean the online user interface should fall short of standards. Blizzard will make BNET2.0 much better by July 27th, but the beta version could have been much much better.
On May 24 2010 04:17 Tef wrote: The content of this post is a complaint about the crashes and unreliability of Bnet 2.0 that is still in beta.
Alright, you clearly didn't read it. I explicitly stated that I am not discussing any of the current bugs in the system. I am fully confidant that they will all be worked out by release. I think that even without bugs it wouldn't be a good service. You really need to read and understand before posting.
I’m not completely sure what all of the rest of you have been experiencing since the patch, but I can effectively no longer play the game. I can’t start a ladder match without the game crashing..
Finishing the quote, I said:
On May 24 2010 04:21 im a roc wrote:This has really brought me to question the viability of SC2 as a product by mid-summer, as well as the stability of the entire philosophy of modern day Activision Blizzard.
All of the recent technical bugs just made me realize that even without the bugs I wouldn't like the current system. I tried to show what exactly my full thought line of thought, but I can see that that sentence might be a bit strangely worded. What I meant to say was that all of the patch 13 problems made me think about the service overall, which is when I came to all of the conclusions that I go over in the first post. Sorry if that was a bit ambiguous, but I did write it pretty quickly.
On May 24 2010 04:44 Niteo wrote:You can tell the battle.net 2.0 team has no experience with why the old battle.net was successful and why so many people still continue to play Blizzard's old titles. I am going to go out on a limb and say that without the way the old battle.net was, none of Blizzard's games would have been as successful as they were.
Nice post overall, but just addressing this section, I couldn't agree more. I think that Blizzard was one of the first companies to bundle free online multiplayer functionality into their games back with Diablo/WC2/SC, which made their games huge successes. I think that Battle.net is probably what kept the tiny Blizzard Entertainment of 1995-98 afloat.
I didn't really care for achievements until you pointed it out - and it turns out I had the same issue. A while ago, I played WoW - and everyone went out of their way, spent a ridiculous amount of time "finding rare books" for 10 points and wasting an outrageous amount of time doing things that were obviously not even remotely enjoyable in order to "win points". In WoW, there was this achievement for "eating so much candy you puke". You got 10 points for puking.
Honestly, getting 10 points for winning a game is ridiculous, but it's just beta. The issue is that we'll run into yet another achievement system which is completely meaningless and serves as a time sink. People who like grinding in games like runescape will have a blast with that. They'll be horrible but they'll have a lot of points.
"Oh, this player has completed the campaign on easy mode! 10 points!" "10 wins in a row above 1000 ELO! Congratulations! You got lucky and didn't run into an awesome player. 10 points!"
Instead of taking a few things and doing them well, they're doing a lot of things and doing them poorly, and they leave out some VERY important things.
The good: -Ability to rewind in replays and all the good statistics tools -A semi-decent friend-chat and party chat system -Cool infos after the game is over (Graphs, BO's, etc.)
The bad: -*Inability to watch replays with other people (And blizz said they had no plans to change that) -*Inability to make public games with names -*No lobby or chatrooms -The achievement system is a complete waste of human ressources that does NOTHING good for the game -They're making it impossible to properly navigate in the terrible ladder system that's probably amongst the "top 3 worst ladder systems ever invented by men who are supposedly capable of critical thinking"
*: All of these issues should be taken care of already. At the very least, they shouldve taken priority over this ridiculous joke that is Facebook integration.
One thing that worries me although this may be completely unfounded is that, currently battle.net 1.0's servers basically never go down or very rarely... I'm thinking it's because of how simple it is, it's probably run on a handful of Pentium II's or whatever =P...
I just hope we won't get day-long maintenances on a weekly basis because of the server stress since the servers need to handle a massive load and there are memory leaks caused by whatever crazy useless functionality they're going to add in order to get more 12-year-olds to buy the game.
Anyway, I'm just worried in general. Nothing wrong with a simple and stable UI without all that blingbling imo.
I read your post, and excuse me for being succinct. I think the system is flexible, considering how easy it is to create chat rooms and clan functionality I doubt we'll be without them for very long. Sure, it might be upsetting that they're not ready for launch day, but creative companies want to try different ideas. They're creating a piece of art that we all get to play,and while we don't agree with the direction Blizzard wanted to try some things that are popular in the market place today. I think most of the classic functionality will return, and we're not exactly sure what the final ladder system is going to be like with the addition of the pro league.
One thing that bothers is how Blizzard views their customers from a psychological aspect. They're essentially pandering to our egos trying to bolster our confidence by removing the copper league. Frankly, I think it's stupid, and I would hope that most people don't lose confidence in life over a video game. The Diamond league is such a stupid invention, and was as I predicted. They just renamed the leagues, made each one worse, and diamond the new high end league. I think with the introduction of the pro league that might mitigate some of the issues, then again, we'll have to see how it functions.
I do agree the favoritism in matches is broken, I've been 15th in platinum and after I played someone that was favored found out they were 4th in the gold league, I don't understand that what so ever. Either way, I don't agree with you that Battle.net 2.0 is ruining the experience for me, yes I can't chat with people very easily and I have to basically use mIRC. But over all, the game is still fun and highly addictive. To close, if anything the recent balancing issues have made me question Blizzard, not their interface and web system.
Can someone honestly and accurately explain to me - why blizzard has no plans to let friends watch replays together? As well as why they want to make all games / leagues random and anonymous. For example, WHY you HAVE to play random maps in their map pool, WHY you HAVE to play random opponents. I thought blizzard wanted to REMOVE random elements.
If two players agree to play a certain map for points - I say let them. If two players want to play for ladder points - I say let them. Impose a limit of bo1, bo3 bo5 between two players for ladder points once a week. I'm sure blizzard can monitor the ladder enough to see people abuse this. Or are they too lazy / can't think of a solution other than making everything random?
Oh and the problem with the ladder isn't that there are too many leagues / too few leagues or that the leagues are too similar. It's that there can be AS MANY PEOPLE AS YOU WNAT in any league. Impose a limit of ppl that can be admitted into diamond or platinum league, like 1000 / 2000 players each. To get in, you have to usurp an opponent in that league. THIS will ensure the best players are platinum / diamond and not just anybody. Of course, lower leagues will not have a limit.
Also, make divisions more competitive. Make them win-loss ratio based. So someone who has 1800 ELO gold with a 50-12 record will be in division 3 and someone with 1850 ELO gold with a 50-40 record will be in division 15th or something.
Because it shows that Blizzard is condescending, thinks that the majority of its customers are not only noobs, but emotionally disturbed noobs who will cut themselves if they find out how bad they truly are.
Does Blizzard really think that it knows progaming better than the progamers? Look how the whole KESPA ordeal turned out.. They just gave away the best kind of publicity you can get (free, self-propagating publicity that requires no maintenance whatsoever) because they wanted to show they had the balls to take on KESPA? Does Blizzard truly think it can be successful without the fans, the gamers?
My name is federal agent Jack Bauer, and I hate battle.net 2.(4).
Additionally:
On May 24 2010 05:38 Xyik wrote: Can someone honestly and accurately explain to me - why blizzard has no plans to let friends watch replays together? As well as why they want to make all games / leagues random and anonymous. For example, WHY you HAVE to play random maps in their map pool, WHY you HAVE to play random opponents. I thought blizzard wanted to REMOVE random elements.
If two players agree to play a certain map for points - I say let them. If two players want to play for ladder points - I say let them. Impose a limit of bo1, bo3 bo5 between two players for ladder points once a week. I'm sure blizzard can monitor the ladder enough to see people abuse this. Or are they too lazy / can't think of a solution other than making everything random?
Oh and the problem with the ladder isn't that there are too many leagues / too few leagues or that the leagues are too similar. It's that there can be AS MANY PEOPLE AS YOU WNAT in any league. Impose a limit of ppl that can be admitted into diamond or platinum league, like 1000 / 2000 players each. To get in, you have to usurp an opponent in that league. THIS will ensure the best players are platinum / diamond and not just anybody. Of course, lower leagues will not have a limit.
Also, make divisions more competitive. Make them win-loss ratio based. So someone who has 1800 ELO gold with a 50-12 record will be in division 3 and someone with 1850 ELO gold with a 50-40 record will be in division 15th or something.
Every single point in this post makes absolute sense. Seriously,..
On May 24 2010 03:09 ReachTheSky wrote: mods please relocate this to blogs as this really has no relevance in being in this section ;/
Also very few good arguments were made at all.
I'd love any criticism or feedback that you can give me to help me refine my own views and opinions, but it is much easier to get your points across in some other format than a single line saying that you disagree.
On May 24 2010 04:01 Dawme wrote: Please stop with the "there is a beta for stuff like this" crap, it's WRONG. The beta as we know it ends in 7 days, what you're playing right now is the game that you will have in July, minus the drop stuff I hope. It has already been announced that we won't have chat channels, we won't have a good ladder, we won't have a real friends system, etc... this beta is here to make small adjustments be it technical or balance related and it's here ESPECIALLY to market and pre hype the game, like Blizzard does since a few games now. There won't be any revolutions between now and July.
Yes and after realese there will be all those things you mentionned. Some of u guys look like such assholes on the internet it's incredible. Sc also had a shitty ladder, shitty battlenet, no clansm unbalanced gameplay, cheap abuses and bugs, no replays at its realese guess what happened with it now
Yet it was still better than what we have now. Hence the problem.
On May 24 2010 06:47 InfiniteIce wrote: I plainly disagree and so would many of the people in this thread, I think it's fair to say.
Want to back your statement up with counter-claims, or just spray 'n' pray, making claims and hoping one of 'em hits somewhere vital? Comeon...
Alrighty. Here's what I think in total, sorry for not explaining it all right off the bat:
First off, the ELO system. This frustrates me for a few reasons.
ELO has been used for a long time, at least since the 60s. I don't see how you can blame BNet 2.0 for using it. Also saying that you are favored or not could when you aren't could be a bug, but in the end you win or you don't. On that note their aren't enough players to even give a good analysis of their laddering and ELO system. So far it seems to work fine, the only set backs of course is the player pool and that cannot be blamed on Blizzard or BNet or ELO.
Yes it will obviously favor you playing more games. No way a system can place you on the top of a ladder after playing 5-20 games. No system can.
In the platinum (now diamond) league, however, there is no reason to hide information like an overall rank from the players.
Yes perhaps one valid point here, but if they lauch as is, to me it's a super minor. It's an annoyance, not game breaking. There are sites that aggregate everyone already so you can see all of Platinum. They also probably named the divisions so no one would believe that Diamond #1 is higher up than Diamond #25.
To make up for the shortcomings of the ranking and matchmaking system, Blizzard stuck in an achievement system.
There are achievements in every game nowadays and I don't see why you would expect there not to be in this one. Also all the of achievements don't require anything other than playing multiplayer and the single player. It has zero effect on your gameplay. It doesn't require you to "Win in under 4 minutes" or anything like that.
LAN support, clan systems, chat channels, gone. Three of the most important aspects of a successful online gaming service are just missing, and Blizzard has explicitly stated that they have no intention of putting them back in any recognizable format that we’re familiar with.
It's been ten years since the first game and for small get togethers, too bad no LAN. I really haven't been to a LAN in the past few years that didn't have so sort of internet for everyone there anyway. For me LAN is a non issue, but that's just FOR ME.
Blizzard isn't so stupid that in very large live tournaments there will be no LAN option specifically for that purpose (It obviously would die in Korea within a week). As for chat channels, well I'd love to have those too, but right now forums and ventrilo work fine...for now.
Besides the Patch 13 mishaps, the game is pretty amazing for the giant mountain of anticipation they had to climb. Also you have to remember that Blizzard is not just catering to the TeamLiquid hardcore, but also every casuals who last played SC when they were 10. The HDH finals just gathered 23k viewers! I can't see BNet 2.0 as such an epic failure.
P.S Facebook integration sucks. On Weapon of Choice they said if FB email is the same as your BNet email it automatically logs you in no choice which is fucked up. I deleted my Facebook a couple months ago, but that's the biggest issue I would have with BNet is Facebook.
On May 24 2010 07:11 Afterhours wrote: How long did it take for Starcraft to get where it is now? I suggest keeping the same patience in mind for SC2 and Bnet 2.0. Just my 2 cents.
On May 24 2010 04:38 Cade)Flayer wrote: WC3 BNet: - Clans - Chat channels - Excellent ladder system (at release, it got ruined years later unfortunately probably by the same people doing BNet 2.0) - Can save custom games and come back to them later - Can join any regions server with 1 cdkey - Can make and name custom games rather than them just being anonymous - LAN - Can stream ingame (ie you can watch live games in real time in the game client, this feature is possible because of LAN capability)
On May 24 2010 07:10 Sent wrote: P.S Facebook integration sucks. On Weapon of Choice they said if FB email is the same as your BNet email it automatically logs you in no choice which is fucked up. I deleted my face book a couple months ago, but that's the biggest issue I would have with BNet is Facebook.
Yes, this really bothers me. I had someone add me via facebook without giving out my permission for bnet to even touch my facebook account. I feel like my privacy has just been completely violated.
On May 24 2010 07:11 Afterhours wrote: How long did it take for Starcraft to get where it is now? I suggest keeping the same patience in mind for SC2 and Bnet 2.0. Just my 2 cents.
starcraft had chatrooms!
Why is there such a huge fuss over chatrooms? We have so many other spectrums of communication, that we didnt have back when SC first came up, that I really dont see them as a requirement for this project to be successful.
While I can understand that chat rooms were always great to have, they're not a necessity to make this community or game great.
First off, the ELO system. This frustrates me for a few reasons.
ELO has been used for a long time, at least since the 60s. I don't see how you can blame BNet 2.0 for using it. Also saying that you are favored or not could when you aren't could be a bug, but in the end you win or you don't. On that note their aren't enough players to even give a good analysis of their laddering and ELO system. So far it seems to work fine, the only set backs of course is the player pool and that cannot be blamed on Blizzard or BNet or ELO.
I'm certainly not going to question the mathematical accuracy of the ELO system. As you said it has been used for a long time and can be very accurate. You seem to just skim over the favored system, while I think this is one of the most important issues right now. Wether or not you are favored could be a difference of 20 points. A lot of 20 point games can add up to a huge difference over time. This would be great if the system was accurate, but as I explained there are often scenarios in which both players are favored over each other. Not very cleanly implemented.
I don't really know what kind of an affect increased number of players would have on the system would have, so I can't speak to that.
In the platinum (now diamond) league, however, there is no reason to hide information like an overall rank from the players.
Yes perhaps one valid point here, but if they lauch as is, to me it's a super minor. It's an annoyance, not game breaking. There are sites that aggregate everyone already so you can see all of Platinum. They also probably named the divisions so no one would believe that Diamond #1 is higher up than Diamond #25.
I have no idea what rank you fall under, but I know that almost everyone in the top league is mad about this. If you're one of the best of the best but you can't find out just how exactly you're ranked, it is extremely frustrating.
To make up for the shortcomings of the ranking and matchmaking system, Blizzard stuck in an achievement system.
There are achievements in every game nowadays and I don't see why you would expect there not to be in this one. Also all the of achievements don't require anything other than playing multiplayer and the single player. It has zero effect on your gameplay. It doesn't require you to "Win in under 4 minutes" or anything like that.
Achievements are too often used as a cover up for lack of quality. If there's no competitive motivation in a game, they can just throw in achievements and all casual gamers will be happy. I am not a casual gamer, however, so I find this unacceptable that Blizzard is following in the tracks of so many other game developers now catering to the casual masses.
LAN support, clan systems, chat channels, gone. Three of the most important aspects of a successful online gaming service are just missing, and Blizzard has explicitly stated that they have no intention of putting them back in any recognizable format that we’re familiar with.
It's been ten years since the first game and for small get togethers, too bad no LAN. I really haven't been to a LAN in the past few years that didn't have so sort of internet for everyone there anyway. For me LAN is a non issue, but that's just FOR ME.
Blizzard isn't so stupid that in very large live tournaments there will be no LAN option specifically for that purpose (It obviously would die in Korea within a week). As for chat channels, well I'd love to have those too, but right now forums and ventrilo work fine...for now.
I'm not as confidant that there will be tournament LAN support. Given the entire fiasco with KeSPA, it's pretty clear that Blizzard wants to have complete control over the tournament scene in SC2.
they should just implement wc3 profile system with clear cut %, ladder rankings, profile icons. Clean chat channels, active clan system and friend lists. That would be awseome. Bnet 2.0 is just utter crap
On May 24 2010 04:01 Dawme wrote: Yes and after realese there will be all those things you mentionned. Some of u guys look like such assholes on the internet it's incredible. Sc also had a shitty ladder, shitty battlenet, no clansm unbalanced gameplay, cheap abuses and bugs, no replays at its realese guess what happened with it now
The problem with this being in SC1 is minimal. What major online gaming experience does Blizzard have when they release SC1? None.
The problem with this being in SC2 is major. You're supposed to learn from these things so that they don't happen again...It's not as if this is the first game Blizzard's ever made.
We're +12 years after SC1 was released, yet SC2 is still plagued with the same shit? I KNOW you can see the flaw with this.
Similarly:
On May 24 2010 07:11 Afterhours wrote: How long did it take for Starcraft to get where it is now? I suggest keeping the same patience in mind for SC2 and Bnet 2.0. Just my 2 cents.
Yes, how long did it take for SC to get where it is now? Did the time just disappear when they started SC2? Technology is great because it INCLUDES ALL THE OLD USEFUL THINGS, AND DOES AWAY WITH USELESS ONES...technology is supposed to build on itself...it's always supposed to be a compendium of previous knowledge and uses, improved.
With that in mind, this shouldn't be called Battle.Net 2.0, it should be called BNet 0.25 Alpha, at best... But to be a bit snarky, I think BattleBook or FaceBattle 0.1 would be more appropriate.
Achievements are too often used as a cover up for lack of quality. If there's no competitive motivation in a game, they can just throw in achievements and all casual gamers will be happy. I am not a casual gamer, however, so I find this unacceptable that Blizzard is following in the tracks of so many other game developers now catering to the casual masses.
I fail to see how you're upset that Blizzard is supporting players of all play skill, be it with achievements or not.
I understand that hardcore dont give a crap about achievements. I dont. I think they're a waste of space, but im not going find it "unacceptable" that blizzard would do this. This game is made for more than the hardcore in mind.
They're a company. A company with a very LARGE customer base, even though the majority is the casual WoW drones.
Before I even touched SC2 beta, I wanted to play it at a very serious, and competitive level, and I havnt lost that focus as we continue through the beta. Even with the Facebook crap.
Blizzard can, and will add features to 2.0 over the next couple years. I wouldnt be surprised if they added chat rooms, Clan support, etc. No LAN is still bullcrap IMO, but w/e.
On May 24 2010 07:30 Afterhours wrote: Blizzard can, and will add features to 2.0 over the next couple years. I wouldnt be surprised if they added chat rooms, Clan support, etc. No LAN is still bullcrap IMO, but w/e.
We've got a long way to go. Sit tight.
If we've got such a long way to go in adding things that already existed in "Battle.net 1.0"... Why the hell is it being labeled as a new revision, an improved version, "BATTLE.NET 2.0"? When they finally catch back up to adding the things that were in regular old bnet, then it'll just be BNet 1.0. When they surpass and improve upon the existing model, we can call it bnet 2.0.
Contrary to what Blizzard and a lot of people seem to think, version numbers have a huge significance in coding and development.
This isn't BNet 2.0 by any form, and that's my problem with it all. They're calling it this OMG BNET 2.0, AWESOME, when it doesn't even approach the utility people got out of Bnet in the first place.
It's not an improvement. It's a downgrade from ye olde BNet of lore. It's not Bnet 2.0. And that's just not how technology progresses, and not how upgrades work, by their very nature..
They already have the code for battle.net, channels, clans, LAN mode, etc. The game changed, how a LAN works, though, has not. They already have the code, they don't even have to write it. All they need to do is just make small adaptations to it. Ignoring the outcries of the beta testers whose opinions they assured were most critical and would be taken into serious thought and consideration, by removing features we all know and love, and BEG blizzard to keep around... ...it's not just laziness ("hey let's just delete this code instead of changing it a bit to work in this game")...it's certainly not ignorance (Blizzard owns the code. End of story, they have it, and know how it would work and could be implemented)...it's just stupidity. Blizzard's lost touch with its market base, and were it any other company without the recent astronomical success of WoW, that's exactly how a company ends up failing right after it gets big, gets a little fame and recognition.
The tl;dr version (of my own post!) : Blizzard: "People absolutely loved LAN play, chat channels, clans, watching replays with friends, etc. Let's scrap that shit. We know better than them".
i agree about the freind system but all the other stuff i dont really care bout cause if you dont like them dont use the feature or dont buy the game at all i dont know what your crying about but if you dont like the leagues system well get over it or dont buy the game sheesh
On May 24 2010 07:04 Sent wrote: Besides the Patch 13 mishaps, the game is pretty amazing for the giant mountain of anticipation they had to climb. Also you have to remember that Blizzard is not just catering to the TeamLiquid hardcore, but also every casuals who last played SC when they were 10. The HDH finals just gathered 23k viewers! I can't see BNet 2.0 as such an epic failure.
It's not a failure. It's a massive let down of a UI with a great game.
On May 24 2010 07:44 Colts-500 wrote: i agree about the freind system but all the other stuff i dont really care bout cause if you dont like them dont use the feature or dont buy the game at all i dont know what your crying about but if you dont like the leagues system well get over it or dont buy the game sheesh
Don't care about the features I don't like and I won't use em. I just feel that they're wasting their time programming them and having to fix all the little problems that'll come along with them. They should spend that time making it possible to watch replays with a friend for instance.
If you don't see the value of that, then your opinion isn't very important in general.
The "don't buy the game" squad is getting quite annoying here. I think it's quite legitimate to complain about bnet2.0. I really like THE GAME but it's lacking on some key functionalities due to battlenet 2.0 being so lackluster. If you have an ounce of judgement, stop telling people not to buy the game just because they don't like parts of the UI.
On May 24 2010 07:44 Colts-500 wrote: i dont know what your crying about but if you dont like the leagues system well get over it or dont buy the game sheesh
Yea and play the other superbly balanced RTS with a global gaming impact instead. People are crying because between the SC2 and BNET joint team effort, the sc2 game is close to flawless (for a beta) but the BNET team has shit all over it. We've been bitching since patch 1.. but now at patch 13 its come to a head because they are ignoring standard key features we clearly shouldn't have to demand.
The tl;dr version (of my own post!) : Blizzard: "People absolutely loved LAN play, chat channels, clans, watching replays with friends, etc. Let's scrap that shit. We know better than them".
Maybe the do. -shrugs- Time will tell. Complaining about it on TL isnt gonna do much.
On May 24 2010 07:50 Destro wrote: this is going to sound really sappy... but without chat channels you really can't MAKE friends. just play with existing ones...
what do you mean pufftrees? i play it for the fun of it and to play with my freinds. now u could call me a causual gamer but i dont really care if theres face book or any of that other stuff. if you dont like the new b net dont buy the game strike it or get a petition its not called right to free speech for nothing!
On May 24 2010 07:10 Sent wrote: P.S Facebook integration sucks. On Weapon of Choice they said if FB email is the same as your BNet email it automatically logs you in no choice which is fucked up. I deleted my Facebook a couple months ago, but that's the biggest issue I would have with BNet is Facebook.
Oh and yes chat channels as second biggest
Are you serious? This is really really fucked up. I will delete my Facebook account soon anyway, but this is serious bullshit by blizzard.
On May 24 2010 07:55 Colts-500 wrote: what do you mean pufftrees? i play it for the fun of it and to play with my freinds. now u could call me a causual gamer but i dont really care if theres face book or any of that other stuff. if you dont like the new b net dont buy the game strike it or get a petition its not called right to free speech for nothing!
OK this is getting bothersome. We play for the fun of it with our friends. I don't really care if there's facebook either but it cuts down on the time they could use to do ACTUAL THINGS.
The fact that we don't like Battle.net 2.0 isn't even close to being enough for fans to not buy the game. Get that in your head. We will buy the game anyway. As fans, however, it is our duty to speak out when we don't like something. WE THINK that B.net2.0 is trash. We wish for the bnet2.0 team to pick up the slack. It's supposed to be better than the first version and currently it definitely isn't better.
We don't need to make a petition, this is what it takes. It'll probably get in Blizz's head that we don't actually like it because it's flat out inferior to its predecessor.
STOP SAYING "DON'T BUY THE GAME IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE INTERFACE" It's beta. It exists so people can say those things.
On May 24 2010 07:44 Colts-500 wrote: i agree about the freind system but all the other stuff i dont really care bout cause if you dont like them dont use the feature or dont buy the game at all i dont know what your crying about but if you dont like the leagues system well get over it or dont buy the game sheesh
That's not* how beta tests work.
They're designed to get insight on what likely end-users (generally more advanced end-users, at that) think is neat, or needs work, or is simply just severely lacking.
I'm so fucking sick of people saying "stop crying dont give you feedback if you dont like it", blah fucking blah.
POINT: BLIZZARD asked beta testers for feedback, as they should have, but are now acting petty,childish, foolish, and just plain ignorant when that feedback is provided to them.
What kind of message does that send to you? Do you think that's a good business model? Do think that if you applied for a job with that attitude, blizzard, or any other game developer, would ever even give an inkling of a consideration of a THOUGHT of hiring you?
Most of the people "whining", as you so lamely put it, are doing exactly what blizzard asked them to do and what being a beta tester means. Most of us, all the beta testers who are, again "whining", which really means "giving feedback as requested", desperately want SC2 to be massively awesome. I'd love for it to be, and I truly wish nothing more than for this game to be "THE BOMB BABY!"
Gamers have been here a while, you give them little credit for their views. And similarly to how I can tell your post fails in epic fashion, gamers who have actually been around a while and watched the scene grow from its roots of NOTHING to a worldwide phenomenon, well, they can see failure coming. And that's what we want to avoid. We want to buy the game. We want to like it, hell, we want to love it and be obsessed and plain addicted to the title. But for any of that to happen, for gamers to be happy, for Blizz to make (b?)illions, it's got to be damn good.
And it ain't.
That is my response on how asinine and typically narrow-minded your response, and many similar responses from e-tards really can be.
On May 24 2010 07:53 aka_star wrote: sack the man that invented bnet 2.0 and hire the HON boys, they'll put it right for you and probably at a far cheaper cost too
This, tbh. HoN has a nearly perfect online system in my eyes, and it at least covers every major feature you would want.
On May 24 2010 07:53 aka_star wrote: sack the man that invented bnet 2.0 and hire the HON boys, they'll put it right for you and probably at a far cheaper cost too
This, tbh. HoN has a nearly perfect online system in my eyes, and it at least covers every major feature you would want.
I am not disagreeing with you at all. I agree!
But to draw a parallel and bring that comment in the scope of this thread and its contents... so does Battle.Net "1.0". It was pretty damn good.
Somebody needs to bash Blizzard in the skull until their brains bleed the old adage...
On May 24 2010 07:55 Colts-500 wrote: what do you mean pufftrees? i play it for the fun of it and to play with my freinds. now u could call me a causual gamer but i dont really care if theres face book or any of that other stuff. if you dont like the new b net dont buy the game strike it or get a petition its not called right to free speech for nothing!
OK this is getting bothersome. We play for the fun of it with our friends. I don't really care if there's facebook either but it cuts down on the time they could use to do ACTUAL THINGS.
The fact that we don't like Battle.net 2.0 isn't even close to being enough for fans to not buy the game. Get that in your head. We will buy the game anyway. As fans, however, it is our duty to speak out when we don't like something. WE THINK that B.net2.0 is trash. We wish for the bnet2.0 team to pick up the slack. It's supposed to be better than the first version and currently it definitely isn't better.
We don't need to make a petition, this is what it takes. It'll probably get in Blizz's head that we don't actually like it because it's flat out inferior to its predecessor.
STOP SAYING "DON'T BUY THE GAME IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE INTERFACE" It's beta. It exists so people can say those things.
Speak for yourself. I'm as big of an SC fan as anybody, but unless blizzard changes gears pretty quickly with Bnet 2.0, I will NOT buy the game. They really should just get S2 games to do their bnet 2.0, the HoN bnet is currently 100x better then BNet 2.0 and they did it with 1/100th of the staff.
First off, the ELO system. This frustrates me for a few reasons.
ELO has been used for a long time, at least since the 60s. I don't see how you can blame BNet 2.0 for using it. Also saying that you are favored or not could when you aren't could be a bug, but in the end you win or you don't. On that note their aren't enough players to even give a good analysis of their laddering and ELO system. So far it seems to work fine, the only set backs of course is the player pool and that cannot be blamed on Blizzard or BNet or ELO.
Yes it will obviously favor you playing more games. No way a system can place you on the top of a ladder after playing 5-20 games. No system can.
In the platinum (now diamond) league, however, there is no reason to hide information like an overall rank from the players.
Yes perhaps one valid point here, but if they lauch as is, to me it's a super minor. It's an annoyance, not game breaking. There are sites that aggregate everyone already so you can see all of Platinum. They also probably named the divisions so no one would believe that Diamond #1 is higher up than Diamond #25.
To make up for the shortcomings of the ranking and matchmaking system, Blizzard stuck in an achievement system.
There are achievements in every game nowadays and I don't see why you would expect there not to be in this one. Also all the of achievements don't require anything other than playing multiplayer and the single player. It has zero effect on your gameplay. It doesn't require you to "Win in under 4 minutes" or anything like that.
LAN support, clan systems, chat channels, gone. Three of the most important aspects of a successful online gaming service are just missing, and Blizzard has explicitly stated that they have no intention of putting them back in any recognizable format that we’re familiar with.
It's been ten years since the first game and for small get togethers, too bad no LAN. I really haven't been to a LAN in the past few years that didn't have so sort of internet for everyone there anyway. For me LAN is a non issue, but that's just FOR ME.
Blizzard isn't so stupid that in very large live tournaments there will be no LAN option specifically for that purpose (It obviously would die in Korea within a week). As for chat channels, well I'd love to have those too, but right now forums and ventrilo work fine...for now.
Besides the Patch 13 mishaps, the game is pretty amazing for the giant mountain of anticipation they had to climb. Also you have to remember that Blizzard is not just catering to the TeamLiquid hardcore, but also every casuals who last played SC when they were 10. The HDH finals just gathered 23k viewers! I can't see BNet 2.0 as such an epic failure.
I once said the Mothership was the single biggest dissapointment in Starcraft 2. I was wrong. BNET 2.0 is far and away the worst thing about Starcraft 2.
How or Why u guys keep making these kind of comments? I mean for real, do u guys think non sense whining would help in some way? is this really making things better? Common, is it really hard to believe that SC2 is still in its BETA PROCESS, every time Blizzard do something all u guys do is complaining, I would Understand mature conscious feedback, but not plain whining. Just Be Patient, try to understand its a lot of work that has to be done, be thankful you've already tried the game for free, things will get better and better. In the meantime GO do something productive PLZ, thx in advance.
On May 24 2010 07:55 Colts-500 wrote: what do you mean pufftrees? i play it for the fun of it and to play with my freinds. now u could call me a causual gamer but i dont really care if theres face book or any of that other stuff. if you dont like the new b net dont buy the game strike it or get a petition its not called right to free speech for nothing!
OK this is getting bothersome. We play for the fun of it with our friends. I don't really care if there's facebook either but it cuts down on the time they could use to do ACTUAL THINGS.
The fact that we don't like Battle.net 2.0 isn't even close to being enough for fans to not buy the game. Get that in your head. We will buy the game anyway. As fans, however, it is our duty to speak out when we don't like something. WE THINK that B.net2.0 is trash. We wish for the bnet2.0 team to pick up the slack. It's supposed to be better than the first version and currently it definitely isn't better.
We don't need to make a petition, this is what it takes. It'll probably get in Blizz's head that we don't actually like it because it's flat out inferior to its predecessor.
STOP SAYING "DON'T BUY THE GAME IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE INTERFACE" It's beta. It exists so people can say those things.
Speak for yourself. I'm as big of an SC fan as anybody, but unless blizzard changes gears pretty quickly with Bnet 2.0, I will NOT buy the game. They really should just get S2 games to do their bnet 2.0, the HoN bnet is currently 100x better then BNet 2.0 and they did it with 1/100th of the staff.
This. I'll have no problem playing SC2 on a private server, either. Yes, they already do and will continue to exist and evolve, much to Blizzard's contrary, as well as to their chagrin.
I didn't pre-order, and I'm not going to buy it if it's still as shitty at release as it is now. Or, to put it in a more specific way, if it's not worth $120-180 (yup, 3 parts to the same battle.net system to play it all...), then I'm sure as hell not going to spend it.
Currently it's not worth it. Needs work, severely. or there will be TERRIBLE TERRIBLE DAMAGE.
Doesn't Greg Canessa's background focuses on casual players (ie history at XBox Live/Pop Cap)? It's no wonder so much focus is on these things like achievements and facebook . I dont want to sling shit at an easy target, but i really feel the designers of this system are completely out of touch with what users NEED
Wait, hold on. Im not sure I understand. Can people explain to me why the dislike the facebook addition so much? Is it because its taking resources from doing something else? Are you strictly against FB?
Im noticing so much energy going into how much people hate the FB addition to 2.0, yet im not sure what exactly the negative impacts are.
I agree mostly with OP. I honestly hope they're just removing certain features so they can make us test the "new" features, but are planning to add them back later.
World of Warcraft turned out to be a cash cow beyond anyone's expectations. I think it's absolutely insulting to the customers how Michael Morhaime and the other tribesmen at Blizzard have run their company the past few years. What bothers me is that the lack of communication in Battle.net 2.0 is deliberate. They are actively shutting down peoples ability to go to chat channels and communicate with other users of their product, and preventing people from saying "white", "lust" and "black" to their friends.
..and they've made the option of adding friends extremely difficult, unless you're using Facebook, a website that completely infringes on your privacy. The facebook integrations is advertisement in a game which we paid for. That's a degrading slap in the face from a company I used to respect.
On May 24 2010 08:26 Kennigit wrote: Doesn't Greg Canessa's background focuses on casual players (ie history at XBox Live/Pop Cap)? It's no wonder so much focus is on these things like achievements and facebook . I dont want to sling shit at an easy target, but i really feel the designers of this system are completely out of touch with what users NEED
not only NEED but what is actually USEFUL for gamers to fully enjoy the game, feels like they kind of set this one on autopilot because they know so many people loved the original and will come back for more regardless. sad.
How or Why u guys keep making these kind of comments? I mean for real, do u guys think non sense whining would help in some way? is this really making things better? Common, is it really hard to believe that SC2 is still in its BETA PROCESS, every time Blizzard do something all u guys do is complaining, I would Understand mature conscious feedback, but not plain whining. Just Be Patient, try to understand its a lot of work that has to be done, be thankful you've already tried the game for free, things will get better and better. In the meantime GO do something productive PLZ, thx in advance.
Is it nonsense? Just because you do not agree with a particular point of view doesn't make it nonsense. At all. Is it whining? I feel as if I am rationally discussing this without any intent of "whining". Seems like a term you pulled out of your ass, or heard bandied around the interwebs, and latched onto for the sole purpose of these types of arguments.
In reality, it is not nonsense, it is feedback. It is not whining, but, surprise, feedback.
Do I think it would help in some way? Yes, if Blizzard was willing to listen. Blizzard evidently thought the same at some point, since they have a beta test and asked for our feedback, and include a link to the feedback forums directly in the game menu. So yea, it is supposed to help the game improve by giving feedback. Do you have a better reason as to why they're a beta phase? It's certainly not to give you free time to play it. Blizzard is not a charity company.
Stop saying "its beta". That's not a legitimate reason for it to be this bad. SC2 beta should not be this terrible, this close to the OFFICIALAWL release date.
Most of this thread is mature, conscious feedback. It's evident that you said that without actually reading the thread.
Why should I be thankful I tried the game for free? Blizzard needs beta testers more than beta testers need Blizzard. That's how software dev works. They should be thanking the testers, if anything, for their time, effort, and patience. It's not like Blizz is coding this out of the goodness of their heart. They want us to give them money, in the end.
So, along with "it's beta", "be thankful to blizzard" is now added to the list of utterly useless remarks that validate no facts, and serve no purpose than to make the user of those phrases look like an idiot. Stop. PLZ. thx in advance.
How or Why u guys keep making these kind of comments? I mean for real, do u guys think non sense whining would help in some way? is this really making things better? Common, is it really hard to believe that SC2 is still in its BETA PROCESS, every time Blizzard do something all u guys do is complaining, I would Understand mature conscious feedback, but not plain whining. Just Be Patient, try to understand its a lot of work that has to be done, be thankful you've already tried the game for free, things will get better and better. In the meantime GO do something productive PLZ, thx in advance.
I have mostly held my piece until this last patch that completely destroyed bnet. The problem is that blizzard had been doing a decent job of getting the game playable, and then they went and took about 400000000 steps back with 13. They nerfed the ultra in an attempt to get it to be played more, and they destroyed their servers.
I know its a beta and meant to fix things, but for god sakes, shouldnt things get better over the course of a beta and not worse?
i like the last paragraph, "the blizzard from my youth..." that is what it boils down to. game companies start off innocent and bold and end up rich and shitty (but with phacebuk).
On May 24 2010 08:26 Kennigit wrote: Doesn't Greg Canessa's background focuses on casual players (ie history at XBox Live/Pop Cap)? It's no wonder so much focus is on these things like achievements and facebook . I dont want to sling shit at an easy target, but i really feel the designers of this system are completely out of touch with what users NEED
Yes. XBL I know for sure you are correct on, and your post is spot on.
On May 24 2010 08:26 Afterhours wrote: Wait, hold on. Im not sure I understand. Can people explain to me why the dislike the facebook addition so much? Is it because its taking resources from doing something else? Are you strictly against FB?
Im noticing so much energy going into how much people hate the FB addition to 2.0, yet im not sure what exactly the negative impacts are.
Negative impacts: #1 Privacy. I don't need to explain this AT ALL. If you don't get that part, then you probably never will understand the legitimacy of privacy. Blizzard is, after all, a business. Do you give out your facebook to telemarketers?
#2 Similarly with the same dispassionate energy that the FB module is hated, it seems that Blizzard invested a disproportionate and completely unnecessary amount of energy into something that will, in the long run, probably chalk up to be a marketing gimmick between Blizz and Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook. There are hundreds of thousands of threads around the intertubes that suggest(ed) what would improve BNet, and before it was announced, I can guarantee you with the utmost confidence that not one of them ever suggested that it needed FaceBook. We don't want it. Why are they wasting time on it, instead of BALANCE? Or server load tests, network configurations and infrastructure? They're just getting to that now, that's why the beta is closing soon for a period of time. There's still so many ESSENTIAL THINGS that need to be added, fixed, improved, etc., and rather than take the time to do what it should prioritize, Blizzard comes out with something that nobody ever asked for, and that most people don't even like, then try to pawn it off as the awesome new feature, so ground-breaking that it will replace a perfectly logical way of connecting with other people over Bnet (.../f a UserName) with something that not all people even use, and REALLY is a breach of privacy.
#3 Facebook integration: It's a gimmick. It should be put in last, as an optional feature, if ever, at all. They made it the BIG THING of the "revolution of BNet". It's not. In reality, either FB or BNet saw an opportunity with the release of SC2 to get more publicity and a larger userbase, and either one paid the other (i.e. FB: "Plz put us in SC2" or Blizz: "Hey can we put you in sc2?"), or it was one of those "you scratch my back, I scratch yours...Have I got a business proposition to you!" sort of deals.
For more on why we hate facebook so much, see the post below mine as well.
To be honest I never really used chat channels except between friends, which parties cover anyways. Quite frankly they were cesspools for the most part and I won't miss them.
HOWEVER.
I agree that Bnet automatically logging you into Facebook is REALLY fucked up though. That's just absurd, and Blizzard should remove that feature immediately. They have no right to do that.
On May 24 2010 08:40 TheTuna wrote: I agree that Bnet automatically logging you into Facebook is REALLY fucked up though. That's just absurd, and Blizzard should remove that feature immediately. They have no right to do that.
Wait what? I havnt used the facebook thing but it logs you onto facebook automatically?!?!?
Basically B.Net 2.0 isn't what we were promised. It has some very basic features and feels like it is at a very early beta phase, not 4 days from ending beta. (I'm talking about features)
However I LIKE the Facebook feature, at least from what I've seen. I typed in my FB email and a list of FB friends that play SC2 popped up. That was it. I've seen no other intrusive B.net/FB stuff other than that.
Negative impacts: #1 Privacy. I don't need to explain this AT ALL. If you don't get that part, then you probably never will understand the legitimacy of privacy. Blizzard is, after all, a business. Do you give out your facebook to telemarketers?
I understand. But you also have the options to change the privacy of your profile so that it isnt open to whomever. -shrugs-
Similarly with the same dispassionate energy that the FB module is hated, it seems that Blizzard invested a disproportionate and completely unnecessary amount of energy into something that will, in the long run, probably chalk up to be a marketing gimmick between Blizz and Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook. There are hundreds of thousands of threads around the intertubes that suggest(ed) what would improve BNet, and before it was announced, I can guarantee you with the utmost confidence that not one of them ever suggested that it needed FaceBook. We don't want it. Why are they wasting time on it, instead of BALANCE? Or server load tests, network configurations and infrastructure? They're just getting to that now, that's why the beta is closing soon for a period of time. There's still so many ESSENTIAL THINGS that need to be added, fixed, improved, etc., and rather than take the time to do what it should prioritize, Blizzard comes out with something that nobody ever asked for, and that most people don't even like.
While I agree that the Facebook addition is crap, and nobody really wanted it, it hasnt proven to be terrible. Im definitely not trying to defend the addition, but I have a feeling, that with time, it will transform into something we may appreciate. Or utterly hate for the rest of 2.0's existence. Perhaps Im a little too optimistic for this thread. O.o
On May 24 2010 08:40 TheTuna wrote: I agree that Bnet automatically logging you into Facebook is REALLY fucked up though. That's just absurd, and Blizzard should remove that feature immediately. They have no right to do that.
Wait what? I havnt used the facebook thing but it logs you onto facebook automatically?!?!?
Really?
Neither have I, but someone posted earlier that if your FB and Battle.net emails are identical you are logged into Facebook when logged into Battle.net. And, I would assume, adding a Real ID friend in Battle.net probably adds them on Facebook too.
Thank god I made a trash email for my facebook to avoid this kinda crap.
On May 24 2010 08:40 TheTuna wrote: To be honest I never really used chat channels except between friends, which parties cover anyways. Quite frankly they were cesspools for the most part and I won't miss them.
HOWEVER.
I agree that Bnet automatically logging you into Facebook is REALLY fucked up though. That's just absurd, and Blizzard should remove that feature immediately. They have no right to do that.
I just have to ask you the same thing I ask everybody else who says "I never used channels anyway", and that is...So what? By adding chat channels, you lose nothing. You can go /join IMALONELYNERD and sit by yourself if you want, right? You don't have to sit in the "cesspool", as you so lovingly (^^) put it...right? Right.
Conversely, however, by removing chat channels, many people do lose something. You might not like/use them much, but the majority of people do like them, and do use them.
In short - Channels have no reason to not be there, their existence does not impede with ANYBODY'S flow or gameplay, you can just, hey, join your own lonely private channel and be alone with your thoughts.
Negative impacts: #1 Privacy. I don't need to explain this AT ALL. If you don't get that part, then you probably never will understand the legitimacy of privacy. Blizzard is, after all, a business. Do you give out your facebook to telemarketers?
I understand. But you also have the options to change the privacy of your profile so that it isnt open to whomever. -shrugs-
Clearly you haven't been keeping up with the news concerning the POS that is facebook.
I understand. But you also have the options to change the privacy of your profile so that it isnt open to whomever. -shrugs-
Not the same thing. I have the option to change privacy settings of my profile to people who go to facebook.com. There is not an option to block Blizzard from seeing my info. Blizzard, firstly, does not have the same view, say, your ex- has on your facebook, where you can block that bitch from seeing your pictures. BNet is integrated at a much, much deeper structural data level. They can, and probably already have, set up a system in which all of your information on the FB servers is automatically harvested ("datamining") and stored on their own servers. You do not get to block this.
Furthermore, Blizzard is run by people, people I don't know. People with a very fundamental access to my very personal information. They're not angels. Blizzard is run by the same people you decide to block on facebook, I would bet. Do you really want some random Blizzard employee knowing your full first, middle and last name, email address for confirmation (which you signed up with), phone number, address, all your friends names and info, your family members, what you look like from pictures? Your interests, what you look at, what you spend your time doing off Battle.Net? That's none of their business. That's why it is BAD.
While I agree that the Facebook addition is crap, and nobody really wanted it, it hasnt proven to be terrible. Im definitely not trying to defend the addition, but I have a feeling, that with time, it will transform into something we may appreciate. Or utterly hate for the rest of 2.0's existence. Perhaps Im a little too optimistic for this thread. O.o
I see it going the way of the KBK ladder functions in SC1. Utterly useless to 99.999% of the users. Remember how cool myspace was a few years ago? Then it got pwned by facebook? Do you really expect facebook to be king forever? I don't. Nobody really expected anybody to be able to take hold of the market from MySpace either. Facebook will eventually lose its popularity. Therefore, this isn't even a good thing to put into Bnet from a marketing and business perspective for sustainable growth and utility; and indeed isan even worse idea from an ethical and privacy perspective.
Not the same thing. I have the option to change privacy settings of my profile to people who go to facebook.com. There is not an option to block Blizzard from seeing my info. Blizzard, firstly, does not have the same view, say, your ex- has on your facebook, where you can block that bitch from seeing your pictures. BNet is integrated at a much, much deeper structural data level. They can, and probably already have, set up a system in which all of your information on the FB servers is automatically harvested ("datamining") and stored on their own servers. You do not get to block this.
Furthermore, Blizzard is run by people, people I don't know. People with a very fundamental access to my very personal information. They're not angels. Blizzard is run by the same people you decide to block on facebook, I would bet. Do you really want some random Blizzard employee knowing your full first, middle and last name, email address for confirmation (which you signed up with), phone number, address, all your friends names and info, your family members, what you look like from pictures? Your interests, what you look at, what you spend your time doing off Battle.Net? That's none of their business. That's why it is BAD.
Do you honestly thing Blizzard would do something malicious to you based on this information? Do you think it wouldnt be illegal? Do you think Blizzard Entertainment doesnt have an HR department that would specifically look out for this kind of malicious activity?
And secondly, who in their right mind would even post that sort of information ON THE INTERNET? (phone number, address, etc.)
I see it going the way of the KBK ladder functions in SC1. Utterly useless to 99.999% of the users. Remember how cool myspace was a few years ago? Then it got pwned by facebook? Do you really expect facebook to be king forever? This isn't even a good thing to put into Bnet from a marketing and business perspective for sustainable growth and utility; and indeed isan even worse idea from an ethical and privacy perspective.
On May 24 2010 08:54 kajeus wrote: I wonder how much it costs to maintain chat servers for potentially millions of peoples.
A chat service for millions of people is not very different in technicality and specs/cost than one for 200 people. It's the bandwidth that costs, and adding bundles of lines of text (conversatons in a chat) into a stream of data full of full 3d HDTV quality graphics, surround sound audio, etc etc is not even an increase worth discussing...
On May 24 2010 08:54 kajeus wrote: I wonder how much it costs to maintain chat servers for potentially millions of peoples.
A chat service for millions of people is not very different in technicality and specs/cost than one for 200 people. It's the bandwidth that costs, and adding bundles of lines of text (conversatons in a chat) into a stream of data full of full 3d HDTV quality graphics, surround sound audio, etc etc is not even an increase worth discussing...
They aren't transmitting the 3D HDTV quality graphics, surround sound audio, etc...
Do you really want some random Blizzard employee knowing your full first, middle and last name, email address for confirmation (which you signed up with), phone number, address, all your friends names and info, your family members, what you look like from pictures? Your interests, what you look at, what you spend your time doing off Battle.Net? That's none of their business. That's why it is BAD.
Exactly. Maybe it doesn't matter to the younger kids on here, but privacy is important. Companies' ability to peek into your private life should matter to you, on a larger scale than just Battle.net. They'll be able to bombard you with advertisement, make tons of money off of you. SELL your potential consumer worth to some other company.
In the end, you'll just be be "consumer #3817020", with "potential product investment 9.4", a commodity for companies to barter with. In essence, that's what has already happened with the facebook integration. You should be outraged, you should be insulted that Blizzard requests and uses your private information, but most of you are not. That has me worried.
On May 24 2010 09:00 Afterhours wrote: ]Do you honestly thing Blizzard would do something malicious to you based on this information? Do you think it wouldnt be illegal? Do you think Blizzard Entertainment doesnt have an HR department that would specifically look out for this kind of malicious activity?
You have to realize that Blizzard is a corporate entity. It's not a person. So no, I don't think "Blizzard" would do something malicious with my information.
Thing is, Blizzard is comprised of individual people. Do I think that a disgruntled employee, maybe just got fired/replaced might sell the data to telemarketers, or data farmers, spamlisters? Hell yea I do. It happens all the time.
FaceBook, the webpage. I would have never expected it to breach anybody's privacy, because as you said, it's clearly illegal. They have already invaded their users' privacy. It's already happened, with one of the companies directly involved. So don't think for one second you are immune because you are dealing with a business entity. If they mess up, they have to pay a paltry fine; they will easily afford this without even missing one cent of it, look at their WoW $ub$cription$. So they just pay a fine, but you lose all sense of privacy, your whole life could be ruined through identity fraud/theft, if the worst thing happened. And it has, with other similar situations.
Again, the HR dep't is just nomenclature. Underneath, it is run by people. People make mistakes. That is fact. They cannot catch everything. I do not want to rely on HOPING that somebody ELSE doesn't fuck up in keeping my private info safe, I'd rather just keep it to myself...Why should you have to rely on somebody else to do that for you? That's why it's called PERSONAL info. It's MINE.
And secondly, who in their right mind would even post that sort of information ON THE INTERNET? (phone number, address, etc.)
Every person who has a facebook page. That's the problem, isn't it?
You have to realize that Blizzard is a corporate entity. It's not a person. So no, I don't think "Blizzard" would do something malicious with my information.
Thing is, Blizzard is comprised of individual people. Do I think that a disgruntled employee, maybe just got fired/replaced might sell the data to telemarketers, or data farmers, spamlisters? Hell yea I do. It happens all the time.
FaceBook, the webpage. I would have never expected it to breach anybody's privacy, because as you said, it's clearly illegal. They have already invaded their users' privacy. It's already happened, with one of the companies directly involved. So don't think for one second you are immune because you are dealing with a business entity. If they mess up, they have to pay a paltry fine; they will easily afford this without even missing one cent of it, look at their WoW $ub$cription$. So they just pay a fine, but you lose all sense of privacy, your whole life could be ruined through identity fraud/theft, if the worst thing happened. And it has, with other similar situations.
Again, the HR dep't is just nomenclature. Underneath, it is run by people. People make mistakes. That is fact. They cannot catch everything. I do not want to rely on HOPING that somebody ELSE doesn't fuck up in keeping my private info safe, I'd rather just keep it to myself...Why should you have to rely on somebody else to do that for you? That's why it's called PERSONAL info. It's MINE.
On May 24 2010 09:11 Afterhours wrote: The theories about Blizzard invading your Privacy, and then selling that information are absolutely mind-blowing. Mind-blowingly stupid.
See my post that appeared just above yours on this page.
I can't speak for anybody else, but I'm not worried about some corporate shiftiness.
All it takes is one guy who gets greedy to fuck it up for everybody. One guy who gets fired, or needs extra money, or is just generally an asshole.
I just found this thread on the official forums ( I hope it hasn't been posted yet) and it pretty much strengthens the points you take and also gives some possible answers, notably that chatchannels will probably be available but for a fee. Shouldn't be left out of this discusion imo
Seeing as I bought, played and liked almost every single game Blizzard has ever released (even the more obscure stuff like Lost Vikings I+II and Blackthorne) and even have several copies of some games like StarCraft or WarCraft 2+3 and I might’ve been classified as an outright “Blizzard fanboy” right up to the moment where World of Warcraft got released (which I was awaiting for years by the way and had such high expectations for) and a few years later this is particularly hard to do, but I think I will skip their games from now on, let me try to explain why.
# More spyware (Blizzard has the right to store, read and pass on every message (chat or voice) you transmit over B.Net 2.0, for security reasons of course)
Q u o t e: Content Screening and Disclosure. We do not, and cannot, pre-screen or monitor all User Content. However, our representatives may monitor and/or record your communications (including without limitation chat text) when you are using the Service or playing a Game, and you hereby provide your irrevocable consent to such monitoring and recording[. You acknowledge and agree that you have no expectation of privacy concerning the transmission of any User Content, including without limitation chat text or voice communications. We do not assume any responsibility or liability for User Content that is generated by users. We have the right, but not the obligation, in our sole discretion to edit, refuse to post, or remove any User Content. WE ALSO RESERVE THE RIGHT, AT ALL TIMES AND IN OUR SOLE DISCRETION, TO DISCLOSE ANY USER CONTENT AND OTHER INFORMATION (INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION CHAT TEXT, VOICE COMMUNICATIONS, IP ADDRESSES, AND YOUR PERSONAL INFORMATION) FOR ANY REASON
# More control (Blizzard has the right to any content (redistribute, modify and sell) you transmit or post on the Battle.Net including pictures, sounds and most certainly maps)
Q u o t e: User Content. "User Content" means any communications, images, sounds, and all the material and information that you upload or transmit through a Game client or the Service, or that other users upload or transmit, including without limitation any chat text. You hereby grant Blizzard a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, paid-up, non-exclusive, license, including the right to sublicense to third parties, and right to reproduce, fix, adapt, modify, translate, reformat, create derivative works from, manufacture, introduce into circulation, publish, distribute, sell, license, sublicense, transfer, rent, lease, transmit, publicly display, publicly perform, or provide access to electronically, broadcast, communicate to the public by telecommunication, display, perform, enter into computer memory, and use and practice such User Content as well as all modified and derivative works thereof. To the extent permitted by applicable laws, you hereby waive any moral rights you may have in any User Content.
Basically, once you’ve uploaded something onto the B.Net and if it’s popular they can take your idea, modify it a bit and put it up for money on their own map marketplace.
# Map "Marketplace" (no more "free maps", by everyone for everyone like in the first StarCraft or WarCraft 3, they got IG shops you can pay money for 3rd party maps in, and the authors even get A PORTION of the earnings, how generous of you Blizzard)
Remember all of those free Blizzard maps for WarCraft 3, Blizzard made out of customer friendliness and to build up even more of a loyal fanbase? http://classic.battle.net/war3/maps/ Well… not anymore…
# They’re going to nickle-and-dime people for „features“ like creating Custom Tournaments/Leagues. Wonder why there’s still no chat even though it seems like a simple feature? It’s probably because it might cost something to keep a “Clan” chat-channel or similar open:
Q u o t e: So what's Battle.net all about and how is it different?
The new Battle.net will completely revolutionise the current version, but Blizzard is still looking to making this experience free for anyone buying StarCraft II or future games that use Battle.net. One idea which has been discussed in different iterations is microtransactions, meaning the service is free, but added value services like starting a custom tournament, league, or the like would cost a small amount of money.
# Facebook like "ID-page" so you can "distinguish" yourself, includes your Real Name and mail address if you put it in for Payment Details, which is awesome for Phishers, Hackers and Spammers alike...
# Actual Facebook integration, personally I don’t want a “platform” to be bundled with the games I want to play, that I’m being forced to use and I don’t need Stats about how often and how long I’ve been to the toilet, I just want separate chat channels with a simple friends list and simple /invite /ignore /add /remove features like back in the day to be able to play the game and that’s about it… In general, be wary of marketing people using the word “platform” to describe something… almost nothing good came of it, X-Box Live, Steam, Facebook Platform etc. are described as “platforms” and they always come with additional DRM, microtransactions and often even subscription fees.
Q u o t e: "There is no better opportunity to launch this strategic initiative than through the launch of StarCraft II," said Kotick on the call. "The Battle.net platform is an investment in the future of gaming, and an opportunity that we are uniquely positioned to capitalize on."
Q u o t e: Through an agreement with Blizzard Entertainment, Massive is the exclusive advertising service provider for the World of Warcraft community web sites as well as the Battle.net online gaming service. A newly redesigned Battle.net platform will launch with StarCraft II in 2010, for which Massive will also be the exclusive advertising service provider.
# No LAN or playing with friends anymore, everyone HAS to be logged in to the great Overlord hivemind B.Net 2.0 and every person HAS to have a key of the game (and every following Add-On) to be able to play with friends or family. Remember those times when a friend came over and you played a few rounds of StarCraft over LAN or you tried to introduce someone, that wasn’t really interested/hadn’t played the game before to it the same way and Blizzard didn’t say or do anything to prevent that? Well not anymore… cause to be able to do that you’ll have to have bought all the products and gone through a lengthy process of creating a B.Net 2.0 Account and Register the keys to it…
# Selling one game as a 3-parter (if the first part costs 60$/60€... what do you think the so-called "Expansions" will cost? If you think they’re below 40$/€ you're out of your mind xD) To play the full multiplayer (with all units and buildings etc.) and play competitively you will have to buy all 3 and register all 3 CD-Keys.
Q u o t e: If I buy StarCraft II but don't buy any of the expansion sets, will I still be able to play online? Yes. This will work similarly to Warcraft III and the original StarCraft, which maintained separate online gaming lobbies and ladders for expansion set players and players with the base Warcraft III or StarCraft. How will the expansion sets impact multiplayer gameplay? The expansion sets will add new content to each race for use in multiplayer matches. This could include additions such as new units, abilities, and structures, along with new maps and Battle.net updates.
# Achievements (yay, thanks for keeping track of how awesome I am Blizzard... everyone's been eagerly awaiting those on the PC)
As much as I might actually like the actual game and want to pay for it, this is just too much (marketing) crap to sift through, to be able to enjoy the good parts. Thanks for all the good gaming experiences you’ve delivered in the past Blizzard and good luck.
On May 24 2010 09:14 cartoon]x wrote: phone number and name are not going to get your identity stolen FFS..
I mentioned a lot more than a phone number and a name, but since you seem to have only taken from context the parts that suit your side of the argument, I'll reiterate.
How about telephone number, IP address, home address, employee information, your interests, likes, dislikes, who your friends and family are and where they live, along with pictures of you so they can model themselves after you, if they really wanted to do some impossible doppelganger shit? I'm sure it wouldn't be hard to find the answers to every single security question on websites from facebook. Mother's maiden name? Easy. First elementary school? Done. Pet's name? Birthday? Place you were born? Check, check, and check.
It's not as hard as you think, if you know what you're looking for.
I'm glad I'm also not the only one who dislikes the privacy aspect. Hell, I don't even like that people on my friend's list can see my actual name. If I wanted to give somebody my actual name, I would.
I wont be concerned about adding people to my flist because they'll see my name, but it's not exactly something I'm glad they have either.
One of my biggest little complaints about the game is a lack of keyboard scrolling ability. My replay list is large, it sure would be nice being able to hit the down arrow to look at each individual game to find the one I want instead of having to click each one individually. Seriously, isn't that standard with every game in the history of time that the simple arrow keys work?
I agree with the overwhelming majority of the things posted. I will reserve my rage for after the beta is brought back up or release, as I'm sure Blizzard at least knows they fucked up some things which they can correct in time.
On May 24 2010 09:17 coma wrote: I just found this thread on the official forums ( I hope it hasn't been posted yet) and it pretty much strengthens the points you take and also gives some possible answers, notably that chatchannels will probably be available but for a fee. Shouldn't be left out of this discusion imo
Here's the part that is really the crux of what I am saying.
"You acknowledge and agree that you have no expectation of privacy concerning the transmission of any User Content, including without limitation chat text or voice communications. We do not assume any responsibility or liability for User Content that is generated by users. We have the right, but not the obligation, in our sole discretion to edit, refuse to post, or remove any User Content. WE ALSO RESERVE THE RIGHT, AT ALL TIMES AND IN OUR SOLE DISCRETION, TO DISCLOSE ANY USER CONTENT AND OTHER INFORMATION (INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION CHAT TEXT, VOICE COMMUNICATIONS, IP ADDRESSES, AND YOUR PERSONAL INFORMATION) FOR ANY REASON"
Read that carefully. Twice. Does that even seem legal to you? Would you agree to that? That is absolutely fucking LUDICROUS.
Essentially, they are saying that they can do, whatever the fuck they want with your personal info, and even your voice chat recording? Not only do they have a "right" to do this, but have NO OBLIGATION to do as you request if it is contrary to what they want to do with it. Does THAT sound legal? Do you really want somebody going through all your voice chats, chat logs, and personal info? Maybe we have nothing to hide, but that's fucking creepy.
Click the page Coma linked to be even more apalled at how much of a breach of privacy and ethics Blizzard is getting into here. It's seriously disturbing.
Thank you Coma for posting that. That really seals the deal on how bad this is getting. I hadn't seen this posted before, but I had read snippets of that TOS. Now that I see more of it condensed onto one page, I'm really hesitant to do anything but buy starcraft with fucking cash, in store, and make a fake facebook profile. Seriously. This is DISTURBING.
[Take Savi0r out of jail and throw Blizzard in, shit! That's bad.]
I'm totally on board with this. Ultimately, if you want to sell something, you need to make it the way your customers want it. Gameplay isn't perfect but they're working on it and it's hard to come to any consensus on how we want the game to be played. However, BNET 2.0 is almost universally unpopular and nobody wanted wow achievements or facebook crap. We want a solid, stable, fair ladder system, chat channels, a clan system, and LAN. These things are all being forgone in favor of things NOBODY ACTUALLY WANTS. From a business standpoint, blizzard are shooting themselves in the foot by being unresponsive to the demands of the people who will be buying the game. Personally, I'd be willing to wait a lot longer for the game to be released if they would just add back in all of the important bnet 1.0 features to 2.0.
My only argument to that is for Death Threats, Suicide claims, etc made online in chat. Agreeing to this gives Blizzard permission to share your information with local authorities so that they may physically check up on you.
make tons of money off of you. SELL your potential consumer worth to some other company.
Wait whaT? bnet wouldnt try to do that would they?
So I have played since i got the beta.
With its inherent issues of balance and cesspool of idiots that flock to this game from wow, wc3, Supreme commander, Dawn of war 2, Modern warfare, sc source, Halo.
Well regardless, ALOT of people will get this game,
I mean even with bnet staying as it is, could you resist not buying it? say i get top 1 diamond divison 555. Wont i still be challenged to play further?
Say you dont buy sc2. Its like wow release all over again, you either buy into the fad waste 90 dollars or watch what is so special about it on youtube.
Considering that sc2 is the ONLY title worth getting for years to come. Should I just quit because of shitty interface? Rather than playing into this whole 1on1 fad go do something constructive? I hit lower plat, reset came buggy patch and now that i cant play there is this whole. Should i waste my time with this issue popping up.
Because seriously, no channels? no guilds? This game went from OMFG to meeh within the course of 24 hours. ;/
I know TL has an irc, i know i can request a practice partner from the thread but still. No guild? ;( I dont know man i could do soo much else with my life than waste it away at a game that dosnt even have what i would want as standard in any game.
On May 24 2010 09:25 Afterhours wrote: My only argument to that is for Death Threats, Suicide claims, etc made online in chat. Agreeing to this gives Blizzard permission to share your information with local authorities so that they may physically check up on you.
But still, crazy shit...
The thing about that is that companies are already required by law to cooperate with a police investigation or face obstruction of justice charges, child endangerment if the person is under 18 (or minor age, in whatever country). They do not need your permission for this.
That is a constant for which needs be made no exception. Just by the fact of the existence of that in the Blizz ToS means that they intend something quite more than complying with the law.
I agree with you, completely, on those exceptions. I just want to point out that they are already LAW, and so standard that anything more than that (i.e. what you see posted in that link) is a clear breach of privacy and intent to do something more, perhaps MUCH more than protect the innocent from serious harm.
I'm seriously annoyed with many aspects of the new b.net, most of all the crashes. Obviously these kinds of technical bugs happen in beta however, and its something we have to put up with. im 99% sure all this crap will not be around by the next phase of beta, let alone live. As for the direction of B.net 2.0 in general? Yea there are a lot disgustingly corporate decisions being thrown at us. This is an attempt to make SC as socially cohesive as World of Warcraft, which is inherently unlikely given the nature of RTS vs MMORPG. Blizzard is thinking that if they can make the game more of a social experience where players have long friends lists and play together frequently, it will provide opportunities to cash in on all this single player expansion bs, and perhaps even provide some way of charging a monthly fee way down the road. That is what leads Bliz to attempt to put faces on the player accounts, make them real people rather than some guy you don't know on the internet. I find this somewhat disturbing for reasons I'm not entirely able to articulate. But this leads to the question: Does any of this actually matter? A lot of these long complaining posts seem to be claiming chat rooms, clan systems, and better friends lists are really important. In the same breathe, the poster goes on a long rant about how stupid facebook and easy to attain achievements are. well, is social cohesion important for sc2 or not? I think the answer is person to person. Myself, I play a LOT of SC2, and could care less about chat channels or clans (unless they have a purpose, such as sponsored teams, which are organized outside of b.net anyway). I never made any friends playing war3, and i don't expect to in sc2 for the most part. I play solo ladder, that's why I play B.net. But I've had a enough friends start playing sc2 beta, war3, sc1, ect. to know that most of them don't tend to stick around. RTS can be frustrating and forces you to be brutally honest with your own abilities at the game. It simply does not offer what most gamers are looking for in a game long term. Too competitive for those not drawn to competition, and too competitive for those with fragile egos and "just want to log in and rape" (a direct quote from my friend that epitomizes most competitive gamers imo). Bliz is simply working on a way to make players stick around, even after buying a copy of the game. There is only so much money you can get from selling a game copy once, while it is becoming apparent through WoW and esports ect. that there is a growing market for continued consumerism and popularity of a given game. All these complaints about the match making system are evidence of players that wont make it a year. No the match making isn't perfect, but has most to do with the the lack of players within the beta. That being said, many posters are acting is if they were 2300 plat before the patch, sick of being matched against noobs. I hate to be the guy to break it to you, but if your still rank 1 copper/silver/gold...its because your not playing good enough to be promoted, otherwise you would win 6 games in a row and walla..platinum (now diamond). Its that simple, there really isnt any voodoo going on here. As someone who's account got reset on multiple occasions a few patches ago, I got stuck in gold a few times by getting dropped (once I got cheesed pretty hard on desert oasis). It took 3-4 games of winning usally to be promoted back into plat, and before i knew it i would be around 1700-1800 plat, just like i was before the reset. In short the match making system is not that broken, and the rating of someone is a good indication as to how they match up overall. (the top rated players before the ladder reset consisted of players like Idra and Gretorp). As for an overall ranking system? well that would essentially be rating, and it would be nice if it were more accessible to look up, but I really don't see why most players would take this to heart, given that it starts to become a less reliable mesurment of skill toward the top. It tends to have more to do with those who bother playing. Top players tend to do a lot of customs against other top players between tournaments. Rank 1 ladder is sure to be a good player...but not necessarily even close to the best sc2 currently. As for those under the top, as I said, rating gives a good general idea how you size up vs the overall player pool. To recap, yes I agree that 2.0 is a bit silly all around. But I disagree that it damages the game in any substantive way. All around bitching about B.net 2.0 is like effectively the same thing as bitching about the internet age, or raging against facebook. Really? who cares. It doesn't ultimately effect anyone's ability to play the game.
I love how in the bnet forums someone said only quality maps would cost money. Which is fine, cuz you know how much i love playing shitty unpopular maps.
I'm seriously annoyed with many aspects of the new b.net, most of all the crashes. Obviously these kinds of technical bugs happen in beta however, and its something we have to put up with. im 99% sure all this crap will not be around by the next phase of beta, let alone live. As for the direction of B.net 2.0 in general? Yea there are a lot disgustingly corporate decisions being thrown at us. This is an attempt to make SC as socially cohesive as World of Warcraft, which is inherently unlikely given the nature of RTS vs MMORPG. Blizzard is thinking that if they can make the game more of a social experience where players have long friends lists and play together frequently, it will provide opportunities to cash in on all this single player expansion bs, and perhaps even provide some way of charging a monthly fee way down the road. That is what leads Bliz to attempt to put faces on the player accounts, make them real people rather than some guy you don't know on the internet. I find this somewhat disturbing for reasons I'm not entirely able to articulate. But this leads to the question: Does any of this actually matter? A lot of these long complaining posts seem to be claiming chat rooms, clan systems, and better friends lists are really important. In the same breathe, the poster goes on a long rant about how stupid facebook and easy to attain achievements are. well, is social cohesion important for sc2 or not? I think the answer is person to person. Myself, I play a LOT of SC2, and could care less about chat channels or clans (unless they have a purpose, such as sponsored teams, which are organized outside of b.net anyway). I never made any friends playing war3, and i don't expect to in sc2 for the most part. I play solo ladder, that's why I play B.net. But I've had a enough friends start playing sc2 beta, war3, sc1, ect. to know that most of them don't tend to stick around. RTS can be frustrating and forces you to be brutally honest with your own abilities at the game. It simply does not offer what most gamers are looking for in a game long term. Too competitive for those not drawn to competition, and too competitive for those with fragile egos and "just want to log in and rape" (a direct quote from my friend that epitomizes most competitive gamers imo). Bliz is simply working on a way to make players stick around, even after buying a copy of the game. There is only so much money you can get from selling a game copy once, while it is becoming apparent through WoW and esports ect. that there is a growing market for continued consumerism and popularity of a given game. All these complaints about the match making system are evidence of players that wont make it a year. No the match making isn't perfect, but has most to do with the the lack of players within the beta. That being said, many posters are acting is if they were 2300 plat before the patch, sick of being matched against noobs. I hate to be the guy to break it to you, but if your still rank 1 copper/silver/gold...its because your not playing good enough to be promoted, otherwise you would win 6 games in a row and walla..platinum (now diamond). Its that simple, there really isnt any voodoo going on here. As someone who's account got reset on multiple occasions a few patches ago, I got stuck in gold a few times by getting dropped (once I got cheesed pretty hard on desert oasis). It took 3-4 games of winning usally to be promoted back into plat, and before i knew it i would be around 1700-1800 plat, just like i was before the reset. In short the match making system is not that broken, and the rating of someone is a good indication as to how they match up overall. (the top rated players before the ladder reset consisted of players like Idra and Gretorp). As for an overall ranking system? well that would essentially be rating, and it would be nice if it were more accessible to look up, but I really don't see why most players would take this to heart, given that it starts to become a less reliable mesurment of skill toward the top. It tends to have more to do with those who bother playing. Top players tend to do a lot of customs against other top players between tournaments. Rank 1 ladder is sure to be a good player...but not necessarily even close to the best sc2 currently. As for those under the top, as I said, rating gives a good general idea how you size up vs the overall player pool. To recap, yes I agree that 2.0 is a bit silly all around. But I disagree that it damages the game in any substantive way. All around bitching about B.net 2.0 is like effectively the same thing as bitching about the internet age, or raging against facebook. Really? who cares. It doesn't ultimately effect anyone's ability to play the game.
I recognize that this is a very long post and probably took a while to type out. So you probably haven't been following the most recent posts in this thread? I think you are right, most of that is not really enough to "break" the game for people. But I strongly urge you to check out the last 2-3 pages of this thread. There are severe privacy issues linked with facebook integration, and the Bnet terms of service in general...and THAT is enough to make me, somebody who has played Blizzard games for the last two and a half DECADES, seriously reconsider doing business with them. I think EVERYBODY should read the link that Coma posted.
On May 24 2010 09:35 Two_DoWn wrote: I love how in the bnet forums someone said only quality maps would cost money. Which is fine, cuz you know how much i love playing shitty unpopular maps.
This made me laugh way too hard.
It will be interesting to see what type of quality maps that individuals make get made premium, and what % of sales go to the authors. I don't imagine it will be much, which is fairly absurd.
Blizzard End User Agreement: WE ALSO RESERVE THE RIGHT, AT ALL TIMES AND IN OUR SOLE DISCRETION, TO DISCLOSE ANY USER CONTENT AND OTHER INFORMATION (INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION CHAT TEXT, VOICE COMMUNICATIONS, IP ADDRESSES, AND YOUR PERSONAL INFORMATION) FOR ANY REASON"
Read it carefully. This is BAD, people. This is shockingly, disgustingly bad. Does anyone actually agree with this, after reading it? They can sell your private information, phone number, email, anything they want to anyone they want.
I think this is an interesting test, t o see if people are willing to dig their own grave for cheap entertainment and temporary safety. I can't believe some of the content in this contract. Never read anything like it! I'm in shock..
On May 24 2010 09:17 coma wrote: I just found this thread on the official forums ( I hope it hasn't been posted yet) and it pretty much strengthens the points you take and also gives some possible answers, notably that chatchannels will probably be available but for a fee. Shouldn't be left out of this discusion imo
Seeing as I bought, played and liked almost every single game Blizzard has ever released (even the more obscure stuff like Lost Vikings I+II and Blackthorne) and even have several copies of some games like StarCraft or WarCraft 2+3 and I might’ve been classified as an outright “Blizzard fanboy” right up to the moment where World of Warcraft got released (which I was awaiting for years by the way and had such high expectations for) and a few years later this is particularly hard to do, but I think I will skip their games from now on, let me try to explain why.
# More spyware (Blizzard has the right to store, read and pass on every message (chat or voice) you transmit over B.Net 2.0, for security reasons of course)
Q u o t e: Content Screening and Disclosure. We do not, and cannot, pre-screen or monitor all User Content. However, our representatives may monitor and/or record your communications (including without limitation chat text) when you are using the Service or playing a Game, and you hereby provide your irrevocable consent to such monitoring and recording[. You acknowledge and agree that you have no expectation of privacy concerning the transmission of any User Content, including without limitation chat text or voice communications. We do not assume any responsibility or liability for User Content that is generated by users. We have the right, but not the obligation, in our sole discretion to edit, refuse to post, or remove any User Content. WE ALSO RESERVE THE RIGHT, AT ALL TIMES AND IN OUR SOLE DISCRETION, TO DISCLOSE ANY USER CONTENT AND OTHER INFORMATION (INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION CHAT TEXT, VOICE COMMUNICATIONS, IP ADDRESSES, AND YOUR PERSONAL INFORMATION) FOR ANY REASON
# More control (Blizzard has the right to any content (redistribute, modify and sell) you transmit or post on the Battle.Net including pictures, sounds and most certainly maps)
Q u o t e: User Content. "User Content" means any communications, images, sounds, and all the material and information that you upload or transmit through a Game client or the Service, or that other users upload or transmit, including without limitation any chat text. You hereby grant Blizzard a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, paid-up, non-exclusive, license, including the right to sublicense to third parties, and right to reproduce, fix, adapt, modify, translate, reformat, create derivative works from, manufacture, introduce into circulation, publish, distribute, sell, license, sublicense, transfer, rent, lease, transmit, publicly display, publicly perform, or provide access to electronically, broadcast, communicate to the public by telecommunication, display, perform, enter into computer memory, and use and practice such User Content as well as all modified and derivative works thereof. To the extent permitted by applicable laws, you hereby waive any moral rights you may have in any User Content.
Basically, once you’ve uploaded something onto the B.Net and if it’s popular they can take your idea, modify it a bit and put it up for money on their own map marketplace.
# Map "Marketplace" (no more "free maps", by everyone for everyone like in the first StarCraft or WarCraft 3, they got IG shops you can pay money for 3rd party maps in, and the authors even get A PORTION of the earnings, how generous of you Blizzard)
Remember all of those free Blizzard maps for WarCraft 3, Blizzard made out of customer friendliness and to build up even more of a loyal fanbase? http://classic.battle.net/war3/maps/ Well… not anymore…
# They’re going to nickle-and-dime people for „features“ like creating Custom Tournaments/Leagues. Wonder why there’s still no chat even though it seems like a simple feature? It’s probably because it might cost something to keep a “Clan” chat-channel or similar open:
Q u o t e: So what's Battle.net all about and how is it different?
The new Battle.net will completely revolutionise the current version, but Blizzard is still looking to making this experience free for anyone buying StarCraft II or future games that use Battle.net. One idea which has been discussed in different iterations is microtransactions, meaning the service is free, but added value services like starting a custom tournament, league, or the like would cost a small amount of money.
# Facebook like "ID-page" so you can "distinguish" yourself, includes your Real Name and mail address if you put it in for Payment Details, which is awesome for Phishers, Hackers and Spammers alike...
# Actual Facebook integration, personally I don’t want a “platform” to be bundled with the games I want to play, that I’m being forced to use and I don’t need Stats about how often and how long I’ve been to the toilet, I just want separate chat channels with a simple friends list and simple /invite /ignore /add /remove features like back in the day to be able to play the game and that’s about it… In general, be wary of marketing people using the word “platform” to describe something… almost nothing good came of it, X-Box Live, Steam, Facebook Platform etc. are described as “platforms” and they always come with additional DRM, microtransactions and often even subscription fees.
Q u o t e: "There is no better opportunity to launch this strategic initiative than through the launch of StarCraft II," said Kotick on the call. "The Battle.net platform is an investment in the future of gaming, and an opportunity that we are uniquely positioned to capitalize on."
Q u o t e: Through an agreement with Blizzard Entertainment, Massive is the exclusive advertising service provider for the World of Warcraft community web sites as well as the Battle.net online gaming service. A newly redesigned Battle.net platform will launch with StarCraft II in 2010, for which Massive will also be the exclusive advertising service provider.
# No LAN or playing with friends anymore, everyone HAS to be logged in to the great Overlord hivemind B.Net 2.0 and every person HAS to have a key of the game (and every following Add-On) to be able to play with friends or family. Remember those times when a friend came over and you played a few rounds of StarCraft over LAN or you tried to introduce someone, that wasn’t really interested/hadn’t played the game before to it the same way and Blizzard didn’t say or do anything to prevent that? Well not anymore… cause to be able to do that you’ll have to have bought all the products and gone through a lengthy process of creating a B.Net 2.0 Account and Register the keys to it…
# Selling one game as a 3-parter (if the first part costs 60$/60€... what do you think the so-called "Expansions" will cost? If you think they’re below 40$/€ you're out of your mind xD) To play the full multiplayer (with all units and buildings etc.) and play competitively you will have to buy all 3 and register all 3 CD-Keys.
Q u o t e: If I buy StarCraft II but don't buy any of the expansion sets, will I still be able to play online? Yes. This will work similarly to Warcraft III and the original StarCraft, which maintained separate online gaming lobbies and ladders for expansion set players and players with the base Warcraft III or StarCraft. How will the expansion sets impact multiplayer gameplay? The expansion sets will add new content to each race for use in multiplayer matches. This could include additions such as new units, abilities, and structures, along with new maps and Battle.net updates.
# Achievements (yay, thanks for keeping track of how awesome I am Blizzard... everyone's been eagerly awaiting those on the PC)
As much as I might actually like the actual game and want to pay for it, this is just too much (marketing) crap to sift through, to be able to enjoy the good parts. Thanks for all the good gaming experiences you’ve delivered in the past Blizzard and good luck.
I strongly urge everybody to read the text at the link that Coma posted. I reposted it here in the above quote so it would be more visible, as I really don't think many people know about this, but absolutely everybody should know about it. Whether or not you want to go along with it is up to you, but you should definitely have knowledge, because I feel the same as Perfect Balance: Some of this "contract" is fucking DISGUSTING. There's just no other word for it.
Do you really know what you're getting into...or what you might agree to when you login to BNet? Especially since you are more or less required to be on BNet at all times (This might be changed, indicated by the recent "play offline" button in the new patch, but...essentially there is no way to play the game without given "implicit consent" that they can spy on you, record you, monitor, edit, sell, or claim as their own work, your personal info, creations, maps, voice, thoughts...)
I honestly don't even know that that has legal standing in a court of law. (i.e., it sounds pretty illegal gaizzz) Implied consent is a very loose term...
That link will probably give you an "oh shit, what the FUCK?????" moment when you read. : /
On a lighter note...Blizzard lives near me so I'll punch that fucker in the face! if they wanna throw down about mah personal infoz.
Blizzard End User Agreement: WE ALSO RESERVE THE RIGHT, AT ALL TIMES AND IN OUR SOLE DISCRETION, TO DISCLOSE ANY USER CONTENT AND OTHER INFORMATION (INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION CHAT TEXT, VOICE COMMUNICATIONS, IP ADDRESSES, AND YOUR PERSONAL INFORMATION) FOR ANY REASON"
Read it carefully. This is BAD, people. This is shockingly, disgustingly bad. Does anyone actually agree with this, after reading it? They can sell your private information, phone number, email, anything they want to anyone they want.
I think this is an interesting test, t o see if people are willing to dig their own grave for cheap entertainment and temporary safety. I can't believe some of the content in this contract. Never read anything like it! I'm in shock..
Blizzard End User Agreement: WE ALSO RESERVE THE RIGHT, AT ALL TIMES AND IN OUR SOLE DISCRETION, TO DISCLOSE ANY USER CONTENT AND OTHER INFORMATION (INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION CHAT TEXT, VOICE COMMUNICATIONS, IP ADDRESSES, AND YOUR PERSONAL INFORMATION) FOR ANY REASON"
Read it carefully. This is BAD, people. This is shockingly, disgustingly bad. Does anyone actually agree with this, after reading it? They can sell your private information, phone number, email, anything they want to anyone they want.
I think this is an interesting test, t o see if people are willing to dig their own grave for cheap entertainment and temporary safety. I can't believe some of the content in this contract. Never read anything like it! I'm in shock..
They can sell your credit card to the aliens!!!
That's lulzy, but even from that aspect, they could give your info to a zerg changeling and kill you while you sleep, as your dna is replicated.
I just feel like the new battle.net is a rip from the wow achivement with added function of finding games. The following places I find it lacking. 1. Victory/defeat info tab lacks a lot of info like units lost / produced, building razed / constructed and all that good stuff we had in BW. also the way minerals are counted in scores rahter than how much mineral / gas you have harvested. 2. Lack of easy to get ratingsystem. 3. Complete void of chat rooms. 4. Current lack of options for adding friends without giving them your Bnet acc name. 5. Localized.
There's probably more that I'll think of once I go ingame but these are the basics.
I don't mind the facebook crap, not that I'll ever use it but they can throw it in there for all I care, however I really would have liked for them to implement chatrooms before such a feature. I find the facebook link feature a little bit of an overkill, your gonna add the people you are friends and wanna play SC with even without the facebook feature. I see chatrooms building the community more than linking your profile to your facebook account and that's why I would have liked to see a chatroom function in the game before facebook linking.
Im a little torn that people may be throwing things way out of proportion though. For Blizzard to actually do something with the information, whether it being selling it, etc., I still feel that they would have defensive measures in place to keep their employees from accessing it willy-nilly. As stated earlier, Blizzard Entertainment personnel are people as well. People who understand that private information regarding their players is very very important to them. Not only that, but should anything malicious ever happen due to this, the company would lose its reputation and I wouldnt forsee the company lasting.
All things in mind, its still good practice to read all the license agreements, etc.
I just had a funny thought I'd like to share after going to the TL FL meetup yesterday and it was a complete fiasco, Ender did a great job and everything from the players side and the event organizing side was done well.
I had fun (despite spending 6+ hours driving) and I met some really cool people including Nero (who I met because I let him borrow my mouse, he is lefty and I was done with my games, he was sitting next to me, really nice guy.) But there were a flood of problems with the game and bnet2.0
First, there is some kind of limit on how many people can be on Bnet 2.0 from the same IP, how blizzard expects lans or tourneys to take place with this and no lan support is beyond my comprehension. We overcame this by having all 100 people there, proxy server. It worked, kinda. So then we started playing and all the games were laggin ass. I remember hearing things like "who lags at a lan?" and "wtf is this" shouted out quite a bit. It's really sad that it is impossible to have lan latency in SC2, even at a lan. How can there ever be a pro league without lan? It would be plagued by disconnects and pauses. That's pretty much how the tourney went. Disconnects and lag throughout. We played a few games of BW (RACE WARS!!) and they ran perfect, ironically those games were the funnest part of the whole day for me.
I walked around and most people were playing other games as well, after only about 2 hours of SC2 frustration. A few playing BW, some playing Team Fortress, a few WOW and other various games, all without issue. After the round of 16 had to be stopped for the 3rd time, due to BNet problems I decided to leave. Worst part is, I actually spent more time driving than playing yesterday. I feel bad for the people at lan knights and ender who worked so hard to make this event happen, got such a nice location and support for this event. Sadly, I found out today that the tourney was unable to get past the Ro8 due to all the issues. No prizes have yet been awarded. I have not played a game of SC2 since the last 2 patches that most would consider playable. Nothing but constant lag and drops. I haven't played Sc2 since my last game in the tourney yesterday. Just lost interest in it. This from a guy who fought his way from the bottom of bronze to top 5 in gold.
The funny thought I had after reading all the TL nerd rage about all the issues people are having, is this, maybe this 1 month beta break is gonna be a breaking point for the SC2 release. I think so many people are going to be playing BW for the next month and having more fun doing it rather than Sc2, that it will have a hugely negative effect on sc2 opinions. When people are getting frustrated and turned off by all the sc2 bugs and Bnet2.0 issues and then they go back and tear it up on iccup they will be asking themselves "What was so great about SC2 again?"
The balance, the lag, the chatrooms, the fun you have playing. Over the next month all of these things are going to be on a lot of minds and under a microscope as people go back to BW after 2 months of Sc2. I'm wondering how Sc2 is going to stack up. Furthermore, if Sc2 and Bnet2.0 are released and huge improvements haven't been made is it possible Sc2 will be merely a shadow of what BW was? Time will tell, but whatever the case this beta break will be a time of serious comparison.
Remember the Power outage? A glimpse of Starcrafts future perhaps. I wonder how many sponsors want to be embarrassed by hosting sc2 events that are overshadowed by controversy.
Here's a picture someone made at the event yesterday, it made us all lol!
Edit: Blizzard End User Agreement: WE ALSO RESERVE THE RIGHT, AT ALL TIMES AND IN OUR SOLE DISCRETION, TO DISCLOSE ANY USER CONTENT AND OTHER INFORMATION (INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION CHAT TEXT, VOICE COMMUNICATIONS, IP ADDRESSES, AND YOUR PERSONAL INFORMATION) FOR ANY REASON"
I think it is every avid fan's duty to let blizzard know our current distaste for battle.net 2.0. During the month or so of down time, we can only pray they make considerable changes to battle.net 2.0.
Such as the complicated process of adding chat channels.
i feel so sad bcz threads like this keep appearing but no blizzard team will ever listen...
Good read thought, i totally agree.
that "feedback, Tell us what you think about the game" tab is just ridiculous. I've never been more disappointed to be in a beta than at SC2 Beta and i've been in other betas but this is just ridiculous.
On May 24 2010 10:40 Drakan wrote: i feel so sad bcz threads like this keep appearing but no blizzard team will ever listen...
Good read thought, i totally agree.
that "feedback, Tell us what you think about the game" tab is just ridiculous. I've never been more disappointed to be in a beta than at SC2 Beta and i've been in other betas but this is just ridiculous.
20 people should go and post links to all of these different threads on TL in multiple different threads on the Beta forums. Spam 'em till they finally open their eyes.
I had no idea that the battle.net team was seperate from the balance and game design team. Because, the game design team is amazing, I have nothing but praise for them. Say what you want about some iffy stuff they did, but they have been absolutely great about listening to the community and doing things to the best of their ability. The battle.net team on the other hand....well you know how it is.
On May 24 2010 11:03 lolaloc wrote: I find it amusing that we were barking at the wrong tree (D. Browder) a few weeks ago. Now we have found our true enemy (G. Canessa).
This right here should be talking fathoms to a majority of forum posters. Most of them dont even have a clue on wtf is going on. So they just jump on the bandwagon. Yeah, the one thats heading for a cliff...
Blizzard End User Agreement: WE ALSO RESERVE THE RIGHT, AT ALL TIMES AND IN OUR SOLE DISCRETION, TO DISCLOSE ANY USER CONTENT AND OTHER INFORMATION (INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION CHAT TEXT, VOICE COMMUNICATIONS, IP ADDRESSES, AND YOUR PERSONAL INFORMATION) FOR ANY REASON"
Read it carefully. This is BAD, people. This is shockingly, disgustingly bad. Does anyone actually agree with this, after reading it? They can sell your private information, phone number, email, anything they want to anyone they want.
I think this is an interesting test, t o see if people are willing to dig their own grave for cheap entertainment and temporary safety. I can't believe some of the content in this contract. Never read anything like it! I'm in shock..
Blizzard End User Agreement: WE ALSO RESERVE THE RIGHT, AT ALL TIMES AND IN OUR SOLE DISCRETION, TO DISCLOSE ANY USER CONTENT AND OTHER INFORMATION (INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION CHAT TEXT, VOICE COMMUNICATIONS, IP ADDRESSES, AND YOUR PERSONAL INFORMATION) FOR ANY REASON"
Raging Nerd Agreement: WE ALSO RESERVE THE RIGHT, AT ALL TIMES AND IN OUR SOLE DISCRETION, TO SEARCH OUT AND DISCLOSE BLIZZARD EMPLOYEE INFORMATION (INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION CHAT TEXT, VOICE COMMUNICATIONS, IP ADDRESSES, AND YOUR PERSONAL INFORMATION) FOR ANY REASON"
On May 24 2010 11:03 lolaloc wrote: I find it amusing that we were barking at the wrong tree (D. Browder) a few weeks ago. Now we have found our true enemy (G. Canessa).
This right here should be talking fathoms to a majority of forum posters. Most of them dont even have a clue on wtf is going on. So they just jump on the bandwagon. Yeah, the one thats heading for a cliff...
I have decent understanding of what's going on. The man in-charge of creating Battle.net 2.0 is a marketing expert. It perfectly explains the divisions, achievements, and facebook integration. It all caters to a casual audience.
I bet Mr. Canessa never watched a single SC1 game being played by professionals and he thinks the SC franchise is just another RTS.
Wow, Canessa was the GM of Xlive arcade 2000-09 as well! I can remember the endless people raging over the price of new maps for games. Even when the creators of MW said in an interview that they would like to make the maps free but the decision is up to Xlive. The complete lack of anti cheat concerns me as well. In Halo2 people were standby cheating the day the game came out. Until day they discontinued Xlive support for halo2 standby was still possible. Anyone familiar with the HaloCE evolution to present day halo 3/odst/reach beta is cringing at the fact that this guy was brought into blizzard for the Bnet2.0/SC2 release. If you don't know Halo3 was out for 3 years before ODST came out. It was advertised as a whole new game. Well the campaign was trash, and it really was just a way to get you to spend 60$ for 3 new Halo3 maps.(ODST's multiplayer is Halo3!)
Now, with the Halo Reach beta beginning you need to have ODST to play it. I have it and it sucks. I'm done with microsoft, done with Xbox and now that I see that shameless marketing skumbags like Canessa have migrated to Blizzard, I might just give up gaming all together. The entire industry has become shit. It's like when Hollywood takes great movies and makes shitty sequels for $$$. Ever seen tremors 1 vs tremors 2?
A lot of gaming companies have been taking this route. Making shit sequels merely to profit further from the name the original created. Original games have to be good, because they have to carry their own weight and have good consumer satisfaction before the masses will come off 60$ It seems the industry has found a way around this.... Sequels!
Blizzard has always stood out in this respect, with series like Warcraft and Diablo where the sequels almost always delivered on their promises of being better than the original. I guess it was just a matter of time before they became corrupted as well.
its too bad blizzard went from being a company that wants to make a good game, to a money hog company. how far are they willing to go to ruin bnet 2.0 to make some extra money. isnt having 2 expansions, and each costing 10 extra dollars(plus regular game) enough? its obvious they have 0 plans for fixing bnet 2.0, they listen to all the ideas about balance posted, but 0 feedback for bnet itself.
On May 24 2010 11:44 CrunCher wrote: its too bad blizzard went from being a company that wants to make a good game, to a money hog company. how far are they willing to go to ruin bnet 2.0 to make some extra money. isnt having 2 expansions, and each costing 10 extra dollars(plus regular game) enough? its obvious they have 0 plans for fixing bnet 2.0, they listen to all the ideas about balance posted, but 0 feedback for bnet itself.
lol, $10 extra dollars?
You're delusional if you think they'll only be 10 dollars. (unless i misunderstood you)
On May 24 2010 11:44 CrunCher wrote: its too bad blizzard went from being a company that wants to make a good game, to a money hog company. how far are they willing to go to ruin bnet 2.0 to make some extra money. isnt having 2 expansions, and each costing 10 extra dollars(plus regular game) enough? its obvious they have 0 plans for fixing bnet 2.0, they listen to all the ideas about balance posted, but 0 feedback for bnet itself.
lol, $10 extra dollars?
You're delusional if you think they'll only be 10 dollars. (unless i misunderstood you)
i believe every blizzard game costed 50 dollars for the regular game, and 30 for the expansions? its now 60 for the regular game, and i'm sure its going to be more for the expansions than their other games expansions
It's such a shame that the people responsible for creating the game content did such a stellar job, and the people responsible for b.net 2.0 had their heads in their asses.
On May 24 2010 11:44 CrunCher wrote: its too bad blizzard went from being a company that wants to make a good game, to a money hog company. how far are they willing to go to ruin bnet 2.0 to make some extra money. isnt having 2 expansions, and each costing 10 extra dollars(plus regular game) enough? its obvious they have 0 plans for fixing bnet 2.0, they listen to all the ideas about balance posted, but 0 feedback for bnet itself.
lol, $10 extra dollars?
You're delusional if you think they'll only be 10 dollars. (unless i misunderstood you)
i believe every blizzard game costed 50 dollars for the regular game, and 30 for the expansions? its now 60 for the regular game, and i'm sure its going to be more for the expansions than their other games expansions
I did misunderstand, I thought you meant the expansions would cost a total of $10 each. Apologies, you are not deluded <3
Here is a copy of a msg i just sent to Canessa on face book. I hope it cheers you up!
I was an Xlive junky for several years. From Mechwarrior to halo3. I always hated how the service nickel and dimed me for maps, features, avatars and how cheaters were allowed to destroy my gaming experience without any fear of repercussion. After I pay 300$ for a gaming system that Microsoft knew was defective before it was released (I've had 2 red ring boxes that were beyond warranty!) Xbox live never took punishing cheaters seriously, and so called ban hammers were a complete joke and you know it! When you do buy their headsets and controllers they fall apart in mere weeks. In an interview top halo pro gamer T2 said he goes through about 2 Xbox 360 controllers per month. I have always loved how blizzard makes great sequels, puts their collective hearts into games and doesn't release junk. But now that I know you were the Xlive GM for the last decade and your at Blizzard in charge of Bnet 2.0 I'm done. Done with Xlive, done with getting ripped off, done with Blizzard. I realize you got away with these antics at Microsoft ripping of naive children and adults alike. You got me! But you have underestimated the pc gamers. There not as stupid and gullible as you obviously think they all are. If you release Bnet2.0 and try this crap NEWSFLASH here is what is going to happen. The game will be completely hacked/cracked within a month of release and no one will even bother using or buying official SC2 versions because of people like you and their antics. They will download free versions and play on free servers without big brother. They will share content and lol in chat rooms about how people like you ever thought you could rip them off and control them. You sir, and your corporate lackeys are all pieces of shit in my eyes and in the eyes of millions around the world. I'm reminded of an episode of south park where they have a "biggest douche in the universe contest" We'll you would clearly have beaten Jon Edwards. Congrats!
On May 24 2010 11:44 CrunCher wrote: its too bad blizzard went from being a company that wants to make a good game, to a money hog company. how far are they willing to go to ruin bnet 2.0 to make some extra money. isnt having 2 expansions, and each costing 10 extra dollars(plus regular game) enough? its obvious they have 0 plans for fixing bnet 2.0, they listen to all the ideas about balance posted, but 0 feedback for bnet itself.
lol, $10 extra dollars?
You're delusional if you think they'll only be 10 dollars. (unless i misunderstood you)
i believe every blizzard game costed 50 dollars for the regular game, and 30 for the expansions? its now 60 for the regular game, and i'm sure its going to be more for the expansions than their other games expansions
I do believe this is called inflation. But regardless, it's obvious Blizzard isn't listening to our demands of a better bnet. It's almost as if they got it in their heads that 2.0 must be completely streamlined towards the "in" crowd. Chat rooms? Psh, that is soooo last year. Let's make Facebook our premiere social aspect, because everyone uses that, especially to game together! Give me a break. If one of our own can make chat rooms in ~2 hours, there's obviously "reasoning" behind why Blizzard hasn't implemented them yet.
I also hear that new goodies will be available via battle.net's web shop for the upcoming launch. Terran Jonas brothers, exclusive Justin Bieber-protoss hats, and for all of those miley cyrus fans, limited edition queen of the swarm's Hannah Montana.
On May 24 2010 12:02 Reborn8u wrote: Here is a copy of a msg i just sent to Canessa on face book. I hope it cheers you up!
I was an Xlive junky for several years. From Mechwarrior to halo3. I always hated how the service nickel and dimed me for maps, features, avatars and how cheaters were allowed to destroy my gaming experience without any fear of repercussion. After I pay 300$ for a gaming system that Microsoft knew was defective before it was released (I've had 2 red ring boxes that were beyond warranty!) Xbox live never took punishing cheaters seriously, and so called ban hammers were a complete joke and you know it! When you do buy their headsets and controllers they fall apart in mere weeks. In an interview top halo pro gamer T2 said he goes through about 2 Xbox 360 controllers per month. I have always loved how blizzard makes great sequels, puts their collective hearts into games and doesn't release junk. But now that I know you were the Xlive GM for the last decade and your at Blizzard in charge of Bnet 2.0 I'm done. Done with Xlive, done with getting ripped off, done with Blizzard. I realize you got away with these antics at Microsoft ripping of naive children and adults alike. You got me! But you have underestimated the pc gamers. There not as stupid and gullible as you obviously think they all are. If you release Bnet2.0 and try this crap NEWSFLASH here is what is going to happen. The game will be completely hacked/cracked within a month of release and no one will even bother using or buying official SC2 versions because of people like you and their antics. They will download free versions and play on free servers without big brother. They will share content and lol in chat rooms about how people like you ever thought you could rip them off and control them. You sir, and your corporate lackeys are all pieces of shit in my eyes and in the eyes of millions around the world. I'm reminded of an episode of south park where they have a "biggest douche in the universe contest" We'll you would clearly have beaten Jon Edwards. Congrats!
On May 24 2010 12:02 Reborn8u wrote: Here is a copy of a msg i just sent to Canessa on face book. I hope it cheers you up!
I was an Xlive junky for several years. From Mechwarrior to halo3. I always hated how the service nickel and dimed me for maps, features, avatars and how cheaters were allowed to destroy my gaming experience without any fear of repercussion. After I pay 300$ for a gaming system that Microsoft knew was defective before it was released (I've had 2 red ring boxes that were beyond warranty!) Xbox live never took punishing cheaters seriously, and so called ban hammers were a complete joke and you know it! When you do buy their headsets and controllers they fall apart in mere weeks. In an interview top halo pro gamer T2 said he goes through about 2 Xbox 360 controllers per month. I have always loved how blizzard makes great sequels, puts their collective hearts into games and doesn't release junk. But now that I know you were the Xlive GM for the last decade and your at Blizzard in charge of Bnet 2.0 I'm done. Done with Xlive, done with getting ripped off, done with Blizzard. I realize you got away with these antics at Microsoft ripping of naive children and adults alike. You got me! But you have underestimated the pc gamers. There not as stupid and gullible as you obviously think they all are. If you release Bnet2.0 and try this crap NEWSFLASH here is what is going to happen. The game will be completely hacked/cracked within a month of release and no one will even bother using or buying official SC2 versions because of people like you and their antics. They will download free versions and play on free servers without big brother. They will share content and lol in chat rooms about how people like you ever thought you could rip them off and control them. You sir, and your corporate lackeys are all pieces of shit in my eyes and in the eyes of millions around the world. I'm reminded of an episode of south park where they have a "biggest douche in the universe contest" We'll you would clearly have beaten Jon Edwards. Congrats!
On May 24 2010 11:44 CrunCher wrote: its too bad blizzard went from being a company that wants to make a good game, to a money hog company. how far are they willing to go to ruin bnet 2.0 to make some extra money. isnt having 2 expansions, and each costing 10 extra dollars(plus regular game) enough? its obvious they have 0 plans for fixing bnet 2.0, they listen to all the ideas about balance posted, but 0 feedback for bnet itself.
lol, $10 extra dollars?
You're delusional if you think they'll only be 10 dollars. (unless i misunderstood you)
i believe every blizzard game costed 50 dollars for the regular game, and 30 for the expansions? its now 60 for the regular game, and i'm sure its going to be more for the expansions than their other games expansions
Warcraft 3 was 60 bucks, and I'm fairly certain Diablo 2 was as well.
On May 24 2010 12:02 Reborn8u wrote: Here is a copy of a msg i just sent to Canessa on face book. I hope it cheers you up!
I was an Xlive junky for several years. From Mechwarrior to halo3. I always hated how the service nickel and dimed me for maps, features, avatars and how cheaters were allowed to destroy my gaming experience without any fear of repercussion. After I pay 300$ for a gaming system that Microsoft knew was defective before it was released (I've had 2 red ring boxes that were beyond warranty!) Xbox live never took punishing cheaters seriously, and so called ban hammers were a complete joke and you know it! When you do buy their headsets and controllers they fall apart in mere weeks. In an interview top halo pro gamer T2 said he goes through about 2 Xbox 360 controllers per month. I have always loved how blizzard makes great sequels, puts their collective hearts into games and doesn't release junk. But now that I know you were the Xlive GM for the last decade and your at Blizzard in charge of Bnet 2.0 I'm done. Done with Xlive, done with getting ripped off, done with Blizzard. I realize you got away with these antics at Microsoft ripping of naive children and adults alike. You got me! But you have underestimated the pc gamers. There not as stupid and gullible as you obviously think they all are. If you release Bnet2.0 and try this crap NEWSFLASH here is what is going to happen. The game will be completely hacked/cracked within a month of release and no one will even bother using or buying official SC2 versions because of people like you and their antics. They will download free versions and play on free servers without big brother. They will share content and lol in chat rooms about how people like you ever thought you could rip them off and control them. You sir, and your corporate lackeys are all pieces of shit in my eyes and in the eyes of millions around the world. I'm reminded of an episode of south park where they have a "biggest douche in the universe contest" We'll you would clearly have beaten Jon Edwards. Congrats!
Amusing, but I doubt he read more than the first paragraph.
On May 24 2010 11:44 CrunCher wrote: its too bad blizzard went from being a company that wants to make a good game, to a money hog company. how far are they willing to go to ruin bnet 2.0 to make some extra money. isnt having 2 expansions, and each costing 10 extra dollars(plus regular game) enough? its obvious they have 0 plans for fixing bnet 2.0, they listen to all the ideas about balance posted, but 0 feedback for bnet itself.
lol, $10 extra dollars?
You're delusional if you think they'll only be 10 dollars. (unless i misunderstood you)
i believe every blizzard game costed 50 dollars for the regular game, and 30 for the expansions? its now 60 for the regular game, and i'm sure its going to be more for the expansions than their other games expansions
Warcraft 3 was 60 bucks, and I'm fairly certain Diablo 2 was as well.
On May 24 2010 11:44 CrunCher wrote: its too bad blizzard went from being a company that wants to make a good game, to a money hog company. how far are they willing to go to ruin bnet 2.0 to make some extra money. isnt having 2 expansions, and each costing 10 extra dollars(plus regular game) enough? its obvious they have 0 plans for fixing bnet 2.0, they listen to all the ideas about balance posted, but 0 feedback for bnet itself.
lol, $10 extra dollars?
You're delusional if you think they'll only be 10 dollars. (unless i misunderstood you)
i believe every blizzard game costed 50 dollars for the regular game, and 30 for the expansions? its now 60 for the regular game, and i'm sure its going to be more for the expansions than their other games expansions
Warcraft 3 was 60 bucks, and I'm fairly certain Diablo 2 was as well.
No hes right Wc3 was 50 bucks, i remember buying it the week it came out.
I'm glad you were able to find Canessa's FB account so that we can harass him into deleting it so that he can't integrate it with his "Battle.net" 0.2 account.
On May 24 2010 11:44 CrunCher wrote: its too bad blizzard went from being a company that wants to make a good game, to a money hog company. how far are they willing to go to ruin bnet 2.0 to make some extra money. isnt having 2 expansions, and each costing 10 extra dollars(plus regular game) enough? its obvious they have 0 plans for fixing bnet 2.0, they listen to all the ideas about balance posted, but 0 feedback for bnet itself.
lol, $10 extra dollars?
You're delusional if you think they'll only be 10 dollars. (unless i misunderstood you)
i believe every blizzard game costed 50 dollars for the regular game, and 30 for the expansions? its now 60 for the regular game, and i'm sure its going to be more for the expansions than their other games expansions
Warcraft 3 was 60 bucks, and I'm fairly certain Diablo 2 was as well.
No hes right Wc3 was 50 bucks, i remember buying it the week it came out.
Huh. Maybe I should go burn down that gamestop for ripping everybody off then!!!
At least they gave me a battletoads 2 free pre-order
On May 24 2010 12:16 oBlade wrote: I'm glad you were able to find Canessa's FB account so that we can harass him into deleting it so that he can't integrate it with his "Battle.net" 0.2 account.
can we also, in addition to this awesome idea by oblade.. since the identifiers are gone, just limit ourselves to making two account names?
Actually some retail stores sold WC3 for $60. Every Blizzard game since D2 has retailed for $60 in most stores, although there were some exceptions.
Diablo II is available immediately at most computer and software retail chains for approximately $60. The game is also offered directly from Blizzard at (800) 953-SNOW and www.blizzard.com. The game has received a Mature rating from the ESRB.
Warcraft III: Reign of Chaos is available at retail chains worldwide for Windows® 98/ME/2000/XP and Macintosh® formats, at a price of approximately $55-$60. The game is also available directly from Blizzard at (800) 953-SNOW and www.blizzard.com. Warcraft III: Reign of Chaos has received a Teen rating from the ESRB.
On May 24 2010 12:14 Renaissance wrote: Hey CowGoMoo, as a person who worked (or is still) working with Blizzard, what is your opinion on Battle.net 2.0?
I haven't been actively playing the beta so I don't have enough information or experience regarding Bnet to give a fair and accurate assessment. /dodged like a pro!
On May 24 2010 12:14 Renaissance wrote: Hey CowGoMoo, as a person who worked (or is still) working with Blizzard, what is your opinion on Battle.net 2.0?
I haven't been actively playing the beta so I don't have enough information or experience regarding Bnet to give a fair and accurate assessment. /dodged like a pro!
There are essentially no "casual" gamers on TL IMO so many of us are hating BNET 2.0 as it does not specifically cater for hardcore gamers. We see stuff like achievements, divisions, and other carebear elements within BNET 2.0 as diverting attention away from what we, hardcore gamers, believe to be what truly makes a favourable gaming platform. Since hardcore players are sticking around for the long-term and are what breathes life into games like SC:BW, many of the lessons learned from WoW are not applicable to a game such as SC.
I can understand why Blizzard is taking BNET 2.0 in the direction it is going right now. The distintegration of chat channels and the recent collaboration with Facebook suggests to me that Blizzard aims to leverage Facebook's massive social networking capabilities into its own customer pool. If FB-BNET takes off, we will be seeing BNET posts/advertisements everywhere on FB. This exposure equals more customers which results in more potential customer revenue.
I think what's happening here is fundamentally: greed/commercialism > essence of what makes RTS such as SC great.
This is not only true for BNET 2.0 as we see it now but also the overall game mechanics of SC2.
For people who are wondering why I am raging about cannessa being the GM of Xlive for the last decade now being in charge of bnet 2.0 here is a perfect example -
You buy halo 3 for 60$ you play a lot and you like it.You also pay 60$ a year for Xlive subscription. Well then ODST comes out 2 years later for 60$ and it's campaign is trash and the multiplayer for it is halo3's multiplayer. ( If you have odst and I have halo3 we will be playing in the same matches/matchmaking!) But wait here's the fun part. ODST comes with 3 new halo3 mutliplayer maps. No biggie right? WRONG, then Xlive puts these maps into the matchmaking map pool. Without the new maps you can't play in that gametype's matchmaking anymore. So if you still have halo3 you can no longer enjoy playing in the same gametypes you have been playing for 2 years unless you fork over 60$ for odst or 10$ to download the maps.
MARK MY WORDS: This will be bnet2.0's future legacy. "Nickel and Diming" Imagine you buy Sc2, after a year a bazillion awesome user created maps have come out. Then blizzard decides to put 20 of them into the official map pool and charge you to buy the mapacks. If you don't want to fine but you can't play matchmaking without them so have fun playing customs only.
This is what Cannessa did with Xbox live and this is why he was hired at Blizzard. To make money. If you didn't deal with all the horrible BS I've experienced on Xlive for the last decade you have no idea what your in for. Seriously, the fact that Cannessa is in charge of Bnet2.0 is enough for me to abandon it! I'm not some console gamer guy who just started playing SC. I played pole position, dig dug, Dune, Civilization (the original), masters of orion, Warcraft, warcraft 2, diablo 1 + 2, on pc before some of people playing SC2 were born. Blizzard has been my favorite gaming company for a long time, a last bastion of gaming experience pureness. Those days are over my friends and it is making me RAGE!
I'm curious and will probably go and look into this myself, but do the current WoW ToS have any clauses like the one Ice is horribly disgusted with? Because if so, that means Blizzard could have already been selling our personal information away for almost 6 years already....yet I haven't heard of any similar complaints.
Edit: Yup, it's in there.
C. Blizzard may, with or without notice to you, disclose your Internet Protocol (IP) address(es), personal information, Chat logs, and other information about you and your activities: (a) in response to a request by law enforcement, a court order or other legal process; or (b) if Blizzard believes that doing so may protect your safety or the safety of others.
D. BLIZZARD MAY MONITOR, RECORD, REVIEW, MODIFY AND/OR DISCLOSE YOUR CHAT SESSIONS, WHETHER VOICE OR TEXT, WITHOUT NOTICE TO YOU, AND YOU HEREBY CONSENT TO SUCH MONITORING, RECORDING, REVIEW, MODIFICATION AND/OR DISCLOSURE. Additionally, you acknowledge that Blizzard is under no obligation to monitor Chat, and you engage in Chat at your own risk.
Note the phrasing is slightly different as it gives a reason for disclosing personal information; makes me wonder if this was an oversight on Blizzard's part of the SC2 ToU.
4:23-4:31, we see that someone played 1v1 Dota. Is this foreshadowing of some sort of integrated dota? It doesn't say "Custom" next to it like the ones at the bottom...
As far as I can see, we are all going to buy WoL legitimately at release and after we get frustrated with Blizzard's ineptitude, we end up playing on whatever the Russians or Chinese will have cracked (despite Blizzard's holding back of LAN, which alienated us to begin with).
On May 24 2010 13:15 oBlade wrote: As far as I can see, we are all going to buy WoL legitimately at release and after we get frustrated with Blizzard's ineptitude, we end up playing on whatever the Russians or Chinese will have cracked (despite Blizzard's holding back of LAN, which alienated us to begin with).
There are ALOT of well thought out posts here on teamliquid that i really agree with and think Blizzard should read and take action based on them. However i know for certain that they won't and will not (at least in regards to Bnet2.0) because they do not HAVE to.
Just go look around the Battlenet forums for a few minutes. The level of stupidity there is fucking oppressing. Anyone with half a brain is instantly driven away the instant they post anything that isn't a 1 line bullshit troll post by the hordes of zombie consumer retards.
THESE are the people that blizzard cares about. These are the people Blizzard is making their game for and these are the people that will give Blizzard their money regardless. And let me tell you there are a fuckton more of them than us so... No blizzard does not give a shit at all about this competetive aspect of this game. They do not CARE about the actual fans. We might as well give up cause all of these long time fans of Starcraft have just been swept under the rug.
currently i dont see myself purchasing the game as is. i know many will, but to be frank ive already had friends cancel their pre orders because of the problems listed in the op.
no chat channels, cant watch replays online with friends, ladder is a boring joke, list goes on and on.
im just so bored and sick of blizzard, they made wow into a giant shit fest with arena and 25 man raids and all this bs, and sc2 so far hasnt impressed me that much. i like the game and i enjoy playing it with friends, but theres so many things that is missing.
I guess we have to let it go at some point, cause they could just not give us any games and close theyr doors... why dont they? cause its theyr JOB, they proly didnt choose this career to give nerds a reason to live but to make a living out of it. Proly 98% of guys working over there have simply noooo control on the game whatsoever and are not willing to drop the job cause he fears for how you will survive those voidrays, and the other 2% proly answer to the boss called `` $money$`` This is just life happening to something with high demand.
Gaming has never been a 'hardcore' hobby. Starcraft was never 'hardcore', a group in the community of players made it as such, and it's been very successful.
I am no fan of Bnet 2.0, but I don't hate it either. I'm sure they'll eventually add some form of chat function, and if not, then we've got forums such as this one, it's not as good but it'll do.
I imagine the ladder system will be reset every once in a while to allow people to get back up into the ladder instead of making a vain attempt at trying to win 500 times so he gets to the #1 spot. Maybe once every month?
And as others have said, you're not forced to use the Facebook integration, nor can your friends find out your facebook info.
what you're playing right now is the game that you will have in July
First phase of the beta ends soon, you mean, I don't think everything will get fixed, but they quite clearly know about it and will fix it sometime. Sooner preferably :\
On May 24 2010 13:26 Shrewmy wrote: I imagine the ladder system will be reset every once in a while to allow people to get back up into the ladder instead of making a vain attempt at trying to win 500 times so he gets to the #1 spot. Maybe once every month?
Yea, it's in the new patch "help/guide/tutorial" thing, on one of the tabs. It says the will reset ladder at least seasonally to level the playing field again. Just to confirm
On May 24 2010 03:58 Leeoku wrote: guys chill. this is why there is a beta for stuff like this
You need to read joolz's thread.
Just because it's beta doesn't mean it'll get magically fixed when the game is released. Also, release is TWO MONTHS AWAY. Bnet 2.0 still has SO many glitches and other shitty/nonexistent functions that really really needs changing.
The "it's only beta" argument worked like...2-3 months ago. Now, it's too late for it to "only be beta."
On May 24 2010 03:06 im a roc wrote: I believe that the quality of StarCraft 2 as a game is unimpeachable. I won’t speak to balance right now, as the development team still has a few months before release, but they have created a genuinely interesting set of game mechanics along with widely varied and diverse races that interact in a way that can keep someone interested in the game for years. There are constantly new strategies popping up that can revolutionize the way a certain match-up must be played. The game is fun. The game is interesting. The game has every potential to become just as big a success as its predecessor, if not even more so, unless Battle.net 2.0 keeps dragging it down. Greg Canessa has single handily brought about all of the technical flaws that make people question the potential of the game being a successful product.
I’m disenchanted. The Blizzard that I knew in my childhood that was incapable of producing an inferior product no longer exists. Battle.net 2.0 has proven to be unsuccessful at every turn. I would be completely satisfied if they just rolled back the entire system to the technologies of the original Battle.net with an easily accessible global ladder, chat channels, clan systems, and a matchmaking system that certainly had fewer complaints than this new garbage we need to put up with. I’m enraged. I had higher expectations than they delivered for, and I don’t believe that they can fix the service before release. Truly a letdown.
Oh, and by the way: Facebook Integration.
Need I say more?
i think these 2 paragraphs sum up my thoughts on this whole situation perfectly... i think as a GAME SC2 has potential to be as good as, possibly better than, sc1...
B.Net 2.0 as a concept, and from the initial ideas i saw posted on the bliz forums, could (should?) have been absolutely fantastic... bringing all the best bits from steam/xbox live/b.net 1.0 together to create some fatastic experience for gamers... instead we have, well, this... yes it's all pretty and everything, but seriously, it's functionality is seriously lacking
lol Facebook integration ftw. But they did put in /dnd mode so thats one step forward. I really dislike everything about bnet 2.0, the nonexistence of chatrooms and ranking system is really wack.
For those that said that this is just a beta, a lot of games fuctioned much better than this during beta. Heroes of Newerth comes to mind.
On May 24 2010 04:01 Dawme wrote: Please stop with the "there is a beta for stuff like this" crap, it's WRONG. The beta as we know it ends in 7 days, what you're playing right now is the game that you will have in July, minus the drop stuff I hope. It has already been announced that we won't have chat channels, we won't have a good ladder, we won't have a real friends system, etc... this beta is here to make small adjustments be it technical or balance related and it's here ESPECIALLY to market and pre hype the game, like Blizzard does since a few games now. There won't be any revolutions between now and July.
Yes and after realese there will be all those things you mentionned. Some of u guys look like such assholes on the internet it's incredible. Sc also had a shitty ladder, shitty battlenet, no clansm unbalanced gameplay, cheap abuses and bugs, no replays at its realese guess what happened with it now
Ok, so we need to back track to 1998 instead of learning from what features and systems that have been working over the years? Just because a 12 year old game had flaws at release doesnt mean a game released today should have 12 year old flaws aswell.
Ok, so we need to back track to 1998 instead of learning from what features and systems that have been working over the years? Just because a 12 year old game had flaws at release doesnt mean a game released today should have 12 year old flaws aswell.
Why can't people see that SC's popularity was largely the product of timing, good luck, and the fans who FORCED those features work? Those were the days of Web 1.0 where the Internet was mostly for nerds, and doing shit on PC took some know-how. The simple fact that nerds love shit that isn't user-friendly because it makes them feel superior is a huge part of why SC1's difficulty (in both gameplay and interface) grew to be so loved. There's nothing wrong with that, but you can't expect a modern sequel to repeat the process. Chat channels were a nightmare for new players and and overall it felt like the learning curve to even get into the multiplayer was sky high, not to mention playing the game itself. "It worked" because of a culture and a circumstance -- it's just fortunate for them that this culture embraced every kind of technical challenge.
Now times have changed. Just as Web 2.0 has arrived, so has Bnet 2.0. They don't want to cater to the Web 1.0 insider-knowledge paradigm; they don't want the game to shut out new gamers who don't have the same tolerance for guesswork and learning curves. This may feel like a betrayal to all those noble nerds whose identities became intertwined with mastering the various 1.0 systems, but it's just the necessary step. What I'm saying is that the new Battle.net would "work" just as well as the old one if it had a similar culture surrounding it -- if people wanted to embrace the nuances, gimmicks, and challenges of the system it would be the same situation, and years later we would complain if they changed it again. The old system isn't inherently "better", it's just better suited to that culture. That's my two cents about the superiority of one to the other, anyway.
Ok, so we need to back track to 1998 instead of learning from what features and systems that have been working over the years? Just because a 12 year old game had flaws at release doesnt mean a game released today should have 12 year old flaws aswell.
Why can't people see that SC's popularity was largely the product of timing, good luck, and the fans who FORCED those features work? Those were the days of Web 1.0 where the Internet was mostly for nerds, and doing shit on PC took some know-how. The simple fact that nerds love shit that isn't user-friendly because it makes them feel superior is a huge part of why SC1's difficulty (in both gameplay and interface) grew to be so loved. There's nothing wrong with that, but you can't expect a modern sequel to repeat the process. Chat channels were a nightmare for new players and and overall it felt like the learning curve to even get into the multiplayer was sky high, not to mention playing the game itself. "It worked" because of a culture and a circumstance -- it's just fortunate for them that this culture embraced every kind of technical challenge.
Now times have changed. Just as Web 2.0 has arrived, so has Bnet 2.0. They don't want to cater to the Web 1.0 insider-knowledge paradigm; they don't want the game to shut out new gamers who don't have the same tolerance for guesswork and learning curves. This may feel like a betrayal to all those noble nerds whose identities became intertwined with mastering the various 1.0 systems, but it's just the necessary step. What I'm saying is that the new Battle.net would "work" just as well as the old one if it had a similar culture surrounding it -- if people wanted to embrace the nuances, gimmicks, and challenges of the system it would be the same situation, and years later we would complain if they changed it again. The old system isn't inherently "better", it's just better suited to that culture. That's my two cents about the superiority of one to the other, anyway.
There are no new nuances, Battle.net 2.0 is not "different" it's WORSE. It doesn't have "different" features, it has LESS features.
Chat channels: NO Online replays: NO Overall ladder rankings: NO Cross server playability: NO Clan Support: NO Customizable hotkeys: NO Automated Tournaments: NO Chat commands: NO
What do we get instead? Facebook: YES
Fucking awesome trade off if you ask me.
WC3 had an Auto-match-maker so let's not even mention that as a new feature.
If I want to message someone in game, I HAVE TO USE MY MOUSE. I have. to. use. my. mouse.
Do you have any idea how RETARDED this is? I could send whisper commands with my keyboard in fucking WARCRAFT 2.
Chat channels were a nightmare to get into in SC1? So the solution is to remove them completely, and replace them with nothing? HOW IS THAT A SOLUTION? "Yeah, it's pretty hard to learn how to use the internet, let's scrap all computers"?
So many times I've seen people come on ICCUP, and have some fairly simple questions, ask them in the public chat and have someone reply within 15 seconds. On bnet 2.0, good luck with that. If you don't have friends playing the game before you start, you are on your fucking own.
Battle.net 2.0 is a god damn desert, with the AMM as its sole oasis.
Ok, so we need to back track to 1998 instead of learning from what features and systems that have been working over the years? Just because a 12 year old game had flaws at release doesnt mean a game released today should have 12 year old flaws aswell.
Why can't people see that SC's popularity was largely the product of timing, good luck, and the fans who FORCED those features work? Those were the days of Web 1.0 where the Internet was mostly for nerds, and doing shit on PC took some know-how. The simple fact that nerds love shit that isn't user-friendly because it makes them feel superior is a huge part of why SC1's difficulty (in both gameplay and interface) grew to be so loved. There's nothing wrong with that, but you can't expect a modern sequel to repeat the process. Chat channels were a nightmare for new players and and overall it felt like the learning curve to even get into the multiplayer was sky high, not to mention playing the game itself. "It worked" because of a culture and a circumstance -- it's just fortunate for them that this culture embraced every kind of technical challenge.
Now times have changed. Just as Web 2.0 has arrived, so has Bnet 2.0. They don't want to cater to the Web 1.0 insider-knowledge paradigm; they don't want the game to shut out new gamers who don't have the same tolerance for guesswork and learning curves. This may feel like a betrayal to all those noble nerds whose identities became intertwined with mastering the various 1.0 systems, but it's just the necessary step. What I'm saying is that the new Battle.net would "work" just as well as the old one if it had a similar culture surrounding it -- if people wanted to embrace the nuances, gimmicks, and challenges of the system it would be the same situation, and years later we would complain if they changed it again. The old system isn't inherently "better", it's just better suited to that culture. That's my two cents about the superiority of one to the other, anyway.
Oh yes, chat channels and clan functionality are oh so complicated for new players to learn... Oh and so is local map hosting, that was obviously the most difficult and innaccessible thing in the universe for players... Oh wait.
Sorry to ask here... but are there any ways for me to provide feedback to blizzard? I have waited for SC2 for like... 7 years? And I don't really want this to happen. The whole release date thingy is so un-blizzard like, the Blizzard I remember is the one keep delaying games so games will be near to perfect when they are released. Maybe we can do something.... as a community and hopefully Blizzard will listen to us.
On May 24 2010 20:00 HaFnium wrote: Sorry to ask here... but are there any ways for me to provide feedback to blizzard? I have waited for SC2 for like... 7 years? And I don't really want this to happen. The whole release date thingy is so un-blizzard like, the Blizzard I remember is the one keep delaying games so games will be near to perfect when they are released. Maybe we can do something.... as a community and hopefully Blizzard will listen to us.
Totally agree with OP, I think we have all spent equal or more time in the channels and clan wars and that stuff than actually playing, and it is a big part of what made the game so complete and addictive.
On May 24 2010 20:00 HaFnium wrote: Sorry to ask here... but are there any ways for me to provide feedback to blizzard? I have waited for SC2 for like... 7 years? And I don't really want this to happen. The whole release date thingy is so un-blizzard like, the Blizzard I remember is the one keep delaying games so games will be near to perfect when they are released. Maybe we can do something.... as a community and hopefully Blizzard will listen to us.
Chat channels: NO Online replays: NO Overall ladder rankings: NO Cross server playability: NO Clan Support: NO Customizable hotkeys: NO Automated Tournaments: NO Chat commands: NO
What do we get instead? Facebook: YES
Chat channels: promised Online replays: promised Overall ladder rankings: Is this about the divisions? Because I assumed that Proleague was going to be the exceptional place where the "best" actually got ranked differently than everyone else. Perhaps that's where there'll be a single division for the best to compare and the rest have to settle. Wait and see. Cross server playability: promised Clan support: promised Customizable hotkeys: not yet Automated Tournaments: promised Chat commands: not yet
What I'm seeing here is a promising future. You do realize that back when they announced StarCraft 2 as a triology, they said that in the interest of actually being able to release the game within our lifetimes they were going to make it in installments and patch it as if it was WoW. Common sense tells us that they could have all of the stuff you ask for in the Beta if they wanted to delay the game, but they would rather get the core into the player's hands as soon as possible and simply bring it up to everyone's expectations in time. And since these features won't cost any extra money, I think this is a fine solution.
I'll grant that the Facebook implementation was an absolutely retarded and unnecessary feature that makes it seem like Blizzard has their head up their ass, but don't get distracted by it. At least wait until the last phase of the Beta before you get out your pitchforks and get mob justice. They've said the whole time that they'll be patching a ton of shit once the game goes "live". The fact that you can't enjoy these things now may suck, but I'm going to trust them. I see no reason not to.
On May 24 2010 20:00 HaFnium wrote: Sorry to ask here... but are there any ways for me to provide feedback to blizzard? I have waited for SC2 for like... 7 years? And I don't really want this to happen. The whole release date thingy is so un-blizzard like, the Blizzard I remember is the one keep delaying games so games will be near to perfect when they are released. Maybe we can do something.... as a community and hopefully Blizzard will listen to us.
Chat channels: NO Online replays: NO Overall ladder rankings: NO Cross server playability: NO Clan Support: NO Customizable hotkeys: NO Automated Tournaments: NO Chat commands: NO
What do we get instead? Facebook: YES
Chat channels: promised (A maybe) Online replays: promised (Another maybe that never happened in WC3 though it was "promised") Overall ladder rankings: Is this about the divisions? Because I assumed that Proleague was going to be the exceptional place where the "best" actually got ranked differently than everyone else. Perhaps that's where there'll be a single division for the best to compare and the rest have to settle. Wait and see. Cross server playability: promised (A definate no the last i heard) Clan support: promised (Another maybe, but isn't this something basic that should be in for release? really...) Customizable hotkeys: not yet Automated Tournaments: promised ( i sure hope so, the games practically released and they havent even tested it) Chat commands: not yet
What I'm seeing here is a promising future. You do realize that back when they announced StarCraft 2 as a triology, they said that in the interest of actually being able to release the game within our lifetimes they were going to make it in installments and patch it as if it was WoW. Common sense tells us that they could have all of the stuff you ask for in the Beta if they wanted to delay the game, but they would rather get the core into the player's hands as soon as possible and simply bring it up to everyone's expectations in time. And since these features won't cost any extra money, I think this is a fine solution.
I'll grant that the Facebook implementation was an absolutely retarded and unnecessary feature that makes it seem like Blizzard has their head up their ass, but don't get distracted by it. At least wait until the last phase of the Beta before you get out your pitchforks and get mob justice. They've said the whole time that they'll be patching a ton of shit once the game goes "live". The fact that you can't enjoy these things now may suck, but I'm going to trust them. I see no reason not to.
So no, and even if they are promised... these are basic features that should have been in on release. I mean they even said they delayed the game for over a year for BattleNet2.0 and they couldn't even scrap together chat channels in that time? BS its cause they don't want to do it and they probably won't change their mind either cause they are stubborn as fuck.
On May 24 2010 20:00 HaFnium wrote: Sorry to ask here... but are there any ways for me to provide feedback to blizzard? I have waited for SC2 for like... 7 years? And I don't really want this to happen. The whole release date thingy is so un-blizzard like, the Blizzard I remember is the one keep delaying games so games will be near to perfect when they are released. Maybe we can do something.... as a community and hopefully Blizzard will listen to us.
I admit, I'm running on faith here and there are things that worry me as well. Promises always carry the danger of being lies after all. But I think Blizzard knows how important SC2 is, and I think they'll do everything they can to make it awesome over time. I think they're compromising a lot of things for the sake of time, and the game won't be "Finished" until the whole trilogy is released.
Which means a painful waiting game... But for guys like me who love the single player and don't get too involved with multiplayer it won't be so bad. I agree that it's basic, but I think that's why it's illogical to think that it won't be included soon. Once the game goes live there will most likely be a shift in resources and priorities that will allow them to nail down some of these "basics". Who knows? This Canessa character rubs me the wrong way but I think of how they canceled StarCraft Ghost, and I think they still have standards and can still be trusted.
I hate people who love whining about battle.net 2.0.
Realize of course, that many of the complaints that peopel have are ALREADY being taken care of by blizzard, albeit at a later date, however, they are still going in possibly a little while after the release... so what? Aslong as we will have them eventually... it aint the end of the facking world. There are complicated mechanics and events that i'm quite sure you have literally no insight into, so it's no use complaining that way. Blizzard has always made preparations for their products to meet full expectations, if not now, then always a little further down the road. They surpass any game company in terms of quality skills and pure creativity, cut them some slack man...
Not wanting to implement things that they are AWARE that their dedicated fan base needs, is just pure nonsense. Of course they wanna do everything they can to please the costumer, but it's just not that simple and easy everytime.. and people need to take a fucking chill pill about it...
There we go
ps.
You know why the argument "It's still a beta" still holds up?
It's because it's actually true. In all honesty, they are more than likely to have internal play-testing and bug fixing teams with an entirely different battle.net 2.0 build preparing to implement on the live servers. So just because you don't see battle 2.0 in all its glory right now, doesn't nescessarily mean that they don't have a shitload of other stuff ready to implement before long.. we just haven't seen it yet. since it's no use implementing half baked shit.
On May 24 2010 20:00 HaFnium wrote: Sorry to ask here... but are there any ways for me to provide feedback to blizzard? I have waited for SC2 for like... 7 years? And I don't really want this to happen. The whole release date thingy is so un-blizzard like, the Blizzard I remember is the one keep delaying games so games will be near to perfect when they are released. Maybe we can do something.... as a community and hopefully Blizzard will listen to us.
I added in my support but i don't know why we even bother. The Blizzard forums are such a cesspool of trolls, idiots, and blind fanboys nothing of use ever gets discussed there. 90% of replys will be 1 line nonsense troll posts like "Its not done yet!" or "If you don't like it just leave" attitudes.
On May 24 2010 12:54 WaveofShadow wrote: I'm curious and will probably go and look into this myself, but do the current WoW ToS have any clauses like the one Ice is horribly disgusted with? Because if so, that means Blizzard could have already been selling our personal information away for almost 6 years already....yet I haven't heard of any similar complaints.
C. Blizzard may, with or without notice to you, disclose your Internet Protocol (IP) address(es), personal information, Chat logs, and other information about you and your activities: (a) in response to a request by law enforcement, a court order or other legal process; or (b) if Blizzard believes that doing so may protect your safety or the safety of others.
D. BLIZZARD MAY MONITOR, RECORD, REVIEW, MODIFY AND/OR DISCLOSE YOUR CHAT SESSIONS, WHETHER VOICE OR TEXT, WITHOUT NOTICE TO YOU, AND YOU HEREBY CONSENT TO SUCH MONITORING, RECORDING, REVIEW, MODIFICATION AND/OR DISCLOSURE. Additionally, you acknowledge that Blizzard is under no obligation to monitor Chat, and you engage in Chat at your own risk.
Note the phrasing is slightly different as it gives a reason for disclosing personal information; makes me wonder if this was an oversight on Blizzard's part of the SC2 ToU.
I think the worrying part is that it has this clause in while they have implemented facebook integration which no one asked for. I'm usually one who thinks people exaggerate about privacy invasion but this is ridiculous. It seems like we've come so far from just the concept of making a videogame that is fun and easy to play online, to any way to exploit the userbase possible.
At least it will no doubt be hacked, but its a real shame to have to split the userbase, and actual real LAN play might never be possible without some serious modifications to the game (even if bnet is hacked the game is still coded to require a server as host). I mean a game in 2010 with no LAN. Its frankly just bullshit.
On May 24 2010 21:52 infinity2k9 wrote: Also i think you're delusional if any of these features make it into final release. They are intentionally leaving things out, its a planned decision.
Exactly. Blizzard have made an insanely complicated ladder system, they have the best coders in the industry. It would take them a week, at the most, to implement chat, LAN, and all the other content we've had in video games for decades.
They are deliberately removing this content to minimize communication between players. Making you sign an agreement saying they can sell any of your information for any reason. They're essentially making it identical to an Xbox Live game made for 12-year old kids.
"We promise we will make BNET 2.0 as good as BNET 1.0 some day"
Ah Blizzard you continue to astound us...
So yah everyone in the community hates BNET 2.0. But right now Blizzard is listening to the web 2.0 crowd. They are focused on what the facebook and twitter crowds are saying primarily. So unless the community is dedicated enough to makes a statement on the channels of communication that Blizzards actually DOES have its ear to than all this is falling on deaf ears. We can just complain to each other in the dark about how much this sucks. Now if word of how much BNET 2.0 sucks started making its way around twitter space reaching all that population you can bet your keister Blizzard would start listening.
But we tried a twitter mass statement with the micro thing...we got like 11 people to retweet. So frankly its our own darn fault if we can be bothered to write wallotexts on TL but cant take a couple minutes to organize sign up for twitter and actually make a statement to Blizzard. We are a web 1.0 based community and if we cant learn to adapt than we cant be surprised when we arnt heard.
Chat channels: NO Online replays: NO Overall ladder rankings: NO Cross server playability: NO Clan Support: NO Customizable hotkeys: NO Automated Tournaments: NO Chat commands: NO
What do we get instead? Facebook: YES
Chat channels: promised Online replays: promised Overall ladder rankings: Is this about the divisions? Because I assumed that Proleague was going to be the exceptional place where the "best" actually got ranked differently than everyone else. Perhaps that's where there'll be a single division for the best to compare and the rest have to settle. Wait and see. Cross server playability: promised Clan support: promised Customizable hotkeys: not yet Automated Tournaments: promised Chat commands: not yet
What I'm seeing here is a promising future. You do realize that back when they announced StarCraft 2 as a triology, they said that in the interest of actually being able to release the game within our lifetimes they were going to make it in installments and patch it as if it was WoW. Common sense tells us that they could have all of the stuff you ask for in the Beta if they wanted to delay the game, but they would rather get the core into the player's hands as soon as possible and simply bring it up to everyone's expectations in time. And since these features won't cost any extra money, I think this is a fine solution.
I'll grant that the Facebook implementation was an absolutely retarded and unnecessary feature that makes it seem like Blizzard has their head up their ass, but don't get distracted by it. At least wait until the last phase of the Beta before you get out your pitchforks and get mob justice. They've said the whole time that they'll be patching a ton of shit once the game goes "live". The fact that you can't enjoy these things now may suck, but I'm going to trust them. I see no reason not to.
They said the single player was too big to put into one game, not battle.net.
Blizzard could put most of those features into the game TOMORROW if they wanted to.
Cross server playability? You know that the only thing you need to change to connect to a different server with any version of SC2, is replace a tiny .sc2data or whatever file in your SC2 directory. The only thing that stops anyone from playing multiple servers is that each account is locked to 1 region. THERE IS NO PHYSICAL PROBLEM.
Custom hotkeys? There were hacked together solutions for editing hotkeys a few days after the beta was released. People say the Facebook intergration probably took a weekend for 2 interns, well, I'm pretty sure a basic custom hotkey solution would be just as easy.
Overall ladder rankings - yes it's about the divisions, sort of. Divisions are fine, but we need an OVERALL view. Let's say I'm #1 in division 14 (I think that's where I was before last reset), I want to be able to see what that makes me on the entire server, without having to go to a 3rd party site like www.starcraftrankings.com The proleague is, as far as I understand, invite only and I'm sure it will be great, but if I was a competitive but not top 0.0001% player, I'd be pissed. Which, depending on how seriously I end up playing this game, is precisely what I might be.
Online replays for WC3: Promised since 2003. How's that one coming Blizzard? Not at all you say? Well fuck you then.
Clan Support has indeed been promised, but it makes you wonder - what have they been doing with Bnet 2.0? Have they really spent all this time to create a product that is FAR inferior to Bnet 1.0?
I trusted Blizzard, but what they have done with Battle.net 2.0 so far has seriously eroded that trust. I will not say anything stupid like "I'm not buying it", because I'd buy it just to play single player even if it didn't even have LAN, but I am saddened by this development =/
There was a time when I would trust Blizzard to ultimately do the right thing and make an outstanding product. When I would look at the sorry state of the beta Bnet and be confident that necessary features were being worked on. That even if it took months or years after release, Blizzard would produce something which reaffirmed my faith in them as an excellent company.
It's getting harder and harder to trust Blizzard to do the right thing.
(...) We also continue to polish a lot of UI elements that you guys aren’t seeing today(...). We’ve got improved profile functionality, we’ve got lots of little tweaks and fixes across Battle.net to sort of bring it up to speed. Once we go live we have patches planned in the future for things like tournament support, for things like obviously chat channels, lots and lots of little features to happen after we go live as well. We’re sorta viewing Battle.net as sort of a more of a living service in StarCraft II.(...)
Guys please, how many more times must you rage over the lack of something that BLIZZARD has repeatedly stated that there WILL be and there ARE working on, you're just not seeing everything right now that battle.net 2.0 has to offer...
I simply cannot understand all this sudden hatred towards Blizzard. You should pay them some respect, times have changed, but that doesn't mean they dont give a shit about us fans as a community. Sure we got facebook integration... How did that in any way surprise you? Any game released today practically follows in the footsteps of the web 2.0 generation.. it's just the times man... go with the flow and deal with it... we will have all the cool shit down the road.. in the meantime.. the beta is primarily aimed at balance and tweaks INSIDE the game itself, and not into battle.net
(...) We also continue to polish a lot of UI elements that you guys aren’t seeing today(...). We’ve got improved profile functionality, we’ve got lots of little tweaks and fixes across Battle.net to sort of bring it up to speed. Once we go live we have patches planned in the future for things like tournament support, for things like obviously chat channels, lots and lots of little features to happen after we go live as well. We’re sorta viewing Battle.net as sort of a more of a living service in StarCraft II.(...)
Guys please, how many more times must you rage over the lack of something that BLIZZARD has repeatedly stated that there WILL be and there ARE working on, you're just not seeing everything right now that battle.net 2.0 has to offer...
I simply cannot understand all this sudden hatred towards Blizzard. You should pay them some respect, times have changed, but that doesn't mean they dont give a shit about us fans as a community. Sure we got facebook integration... How did that in any way surprise you? Any game released today practically follows in the footsteps of the web 2.0 generation.. it's just the times man... go with the flow and deal with it... we will have all the cool shit down the road.. in the meantime.. the beta is primarily aimed at balance and tweaks INSIDE the game itself, and not into battle.net
There's three reasons why that doesn't appease us:
1) Why can't Blizzard just put chat channels in NOW rather than after release? It goes against Blizzard's philosophy of "it's done when it's done", and it gives a bad first impression to first-time players. I was turned off from Dawn of War 2 because of its online service and how empty it was without chat channels. I wouldn't be surprised if it happened with SC2 as well for some players.
2) There's no guarantee that Blizzard will add chat channels at all. Remember WC3 and online replays?
3) Blizzard promises something much better, but so far all of their "much better" alternatives have been universally worse than their Bnet 1.0 counterparts. That doesn't give us much faith.
times have changed, but that doesn't mean they[Blizzard] dont give a shit about us fans as a community
they do don't give a shit
simply by making BattleNet 2.0 this crappy while not putting things that could be put in maybe...a day (chat)
by making SC2 this noob friendly and this boring to watch(for someone who watched korean SC at least)(except when watching TLO)
by not helping KesPA at all in regards to the Intellectual property problem
by hiring Greg Kanessa
since WoW, Blizzard have shown they are now like any other game design studio, a money hungry entity trying to make a game that will sell, not a good game
times have changed, but that doesn't mean they[Blizzard] dont give a shit about us fans as a community
they do don't give a shit
simply by making BattleNet 2.0 this crappy while not putting things that could be put in maybe...a day (chat)
by making SC2 this noob friendly and this boring to watch(for someone who watched korean SC at least)(except when watching TLO)
by not helping KesPA at all in regards to the Intellectual property problem
by hiring Greg Kanessa
since WoW, Blizzard have shown they are now like any other game design studio, a money hungry entity trying to make a game that will sell, not a good game
(...) We also continue to polish a lot of UI elements that you guys aren’t seeing today(...). We’ve got improved profile functionality, we’ve got lots of little tweaks and fixes across Battle.net to sort of bring it up to speed. Once we go live we have patches planned in the future for things like tournament support, for things like obviously chat channels, lots and lots of little features to happen after we go live as well. We’re sorta viewing Battle.net as sort of a more of a living service in StarCraft II.(...)
Guys please, how many more times must you rage over the lack of something that BLIZZARD has repeatedly stated that there WILL be and there ARE working on, you're just not seeing everything right now that battle.net 2.0 has to offer...
I simply cannot understand all this sudden hatred towards Blizzard. You should pay them some respect, times have changed, but that doesn't mean they dont give a shit about us fans as a community. Sure we got facebook integration... How did that in any way surprise you? Any game released today practically follows in the footsteps of the web 2.0 generation.. it's just the times man... go with the flow and deal with it... we will have all the cool shit down the road.. in the meantime.. the beta is primarily aimed at balance and tweaks INSIDE the game itself, and not into battle.net
There's three reasons why that doesn't appease us:
1) Why can't Blizzard just put chat channels in NOW rather than after release? It goes against Blizzard's philosophy of "it's done when it's done", and it gives a bad first impression to first-time players. I was turned off from Dawn of War 2 because of its online service and how empty it was without chat channels. I wouldn't be surprised if it happened with SC2 as well for some players.
2) There's no guarantee that Blizzard will add chat channels at all. Remember WC3 and online replays?
3) Blizzard promises something much better, but so far all of their "much better" alternatives have been universally worse than their Bnet 1.0 counterparts. That doesn't give us much faith.
I wouldn't be nearly as irritated with Blizzard and their supposed "Triple Plus Plus Uber Brand New Super Deluxe Chat Channels" that they keep saying are so much better than the old ones if they would just tell us what some of their plans are. All they've said is that the old channels were hard to manage so they've got a great new system that they won't implement in release. Dumb. At least give us the old ones until you have something worked out, and tell the community about what the new plans are for the new system.
You all seem to think battlenet is there for our enjoyment. Of course that's what they're selling to us but the primary goal is piracy control and preventing game reselling. Achievements, ladders and so on are only the smoke screen that will make us accept online single player game or no lan multiplayer. The smoke screen only needs to be as thick as to hide the main goal.
So yes, we lack all these feature that would achieve the officially stated goals of battlenet, but rest assured that it won't lack the features required to achieve its real goal.
There was nothing wrong with b.net 1.0. At least nothing wrong with the interface. There's no need to reinvent the wheel. All I need are chat channels, a friend list, and a profile that shows my record. They cant even give us channels. In my book this is a HUGE step backwards.
On May 25 2010 12:31 cark wrote: You all seem to think battlenet is there for our enjoyment. Of course that's what they're selling to us but the primary goal is piracy control and preventing game reselling. Achievements, ladders and so on are only the smoke screen that will make us accept online single player game or no lan multiplayer. The smoke screen only needs to be as thick as to hide the main goal.
So yes, we lack all these feature that would achieve the officially stated goals of battlenet, but rest assured that it won't lack the features required to achieve its real goal.
Cark
I don't see how the lack of chat channels limits piracy.
On May 25 2010 12:42 fathead wrote:I don't see how the lack of chat channels limits piracy.
That's my point, why should they put chat channels in while their lack doesn't limit piracy ? (tho I think these will eventually be added some way or another, there just is no rush)
Putting my neck out here. InfiniteIce is obviously not trolling, what kind of policy is this?
Can someone please explain to me why Blizzard would silence someone for informing their customers about a contract they have to sign in order to use their product? I'm studying law in Europe, and I believe that if enough people complain about this it could cause legal problems for Blizzard. I believe that's the reason why they're banning their customers from exchaning meaningful information.
This potential customer of Blizzard, was informing fellow potential customers of a contact they will sign in the future. The content of this contract is irrelevant, as far as I know spreading the contents of a contract on a forum for people who have already signed that contract is perfectly legal. I'm sure Blizzard have the legal right to call that "trolling" and ban them from the information forum open to their customers, but companies do have ethical obligations to their customers.
If enough people complain about this contract and Blizzard's attempt at silencing their customers, I can imagine that it could constitute a lawsuit. TL.net can do anything they want, but I'm surprised that they aren't picking the users' side.
On May 25 2010 18:46 Perfect Balance wrote: If enough people complain about this contract and Blizzard's attempt at silencing their customers, I can imagine that it could constitute a lawsuit.
I'm interested in how in your world that would constitute for a lawsuit. You don't have to agree with the EULA, or ToS, by just not buying the product.
No one if forcing you to this, I really don't see how you would have a case.
On May 25 2010 18:46 Perfect Balance wrote: If enough people complain about this contract and Blizzard's attempt at silencing their customers, I can imagine that it could constitute a lawsuit.
I'm interested in how in your world that would constitute for a lawsuit. You don't have to agree with the EULA, or ToS, by just not buying the product.
No one if forcing you to this, I really don't see how you would have a case.
If a company actively works to prevent its customers from reading a contract they will sign or have signed, it does. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you need to register on Blizzards website and sign the contract to be on that forum. Not that it's a prerequisite for my concern.
On May 25 2010 18:46 Perfect Balance wrote: If enough people complain about this contract and Blizzard's attempt at silencing their customers, I can imagine that it could constitute a lawsuit.
I'm interested in how in your world that would constitute for a lawsuit. You don't have to agree with the EULA, or ToS, by just not buying the product.
No one if forcing you to this, I really don't see how you would have a case.
If a company actively works to prevent its customers from reading a contract they will sign or have signed, it does. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you need to register on Blizzards website and sign the contract to be on that forum. Not that it's a prerequisite for my concern.
How is Blizzard trying to hide the terms of service or the EULA? You need to accept the EULA/ToS whenever you install and start the game for the first time. If you don't agree with those terms you can get a refund instead.
On May 24 2010 04:38 Cade)Flayer wrote: WC3 BNet: - Clans - Chat channels - Excellent ladder system (at release, it got ruined years later unfortunately probably by the same people doing BNet 2.0) - Can save custom games and come back to them later - Can join any regions server with 1 cdkey - Can make and name custom games rather than them just being anonymous - LAN - Can stream ingame (ie you can watch live games in real time in the game client, this feature is possible because of LAN capability)
BNet 2.0: - Facebook integration
I didn't play wc3, can anyone tell me the difference between it's bnet at the beginning and what it was changed into?
On May 25 2010 01:59 FrozenArbiter wrote: They said the single player was too big to put into one game, not battle.net.
True, but they have also said they plan to update the game/service like they do with World of Warcraft, with large content downloads and continued support. They kept releasing new maps, features and even entirely new units into WC3 years after release, and I think they take pride in how well they support their products after release. I see no reason to doubt that.
Blizzard could put most of those features into the game TOMORROW if they wanted to
Cross server playability? You know that the only thing you need to change to connect to a different server with any version of SC2, is replace a tiny .sc2data or whatever file in your SC2 directory. The only thing that stops anyone from playing multiple servers is that each account is locked to 1 region. THERE IS NO PHYSICAL PROBLEM.
Couldn't you make the argument that allowing people to switch servers would open the doorway to massive migrations of players from one server to another? And wouldn't this would mean a failure to truly stress test each region by itself? I realize it's not a time issue, but it may be a testing issue.
Custom hotkeys? There were hacked together solutions for editing hotkeys a few days after the beta was released. People say the Facebook intergration probably took a weekend for 2 interns, well, I'm pretty sure a basic custom hotkey solution would be just as easy.
Custom hotkeys have always been basic for PC games so I totally agree that it would be easy. But rather than having custom hotkeys, they obviously want to ask people and figure out some good "standard options" while they have the chance in Beta. Why not? That way when the game is released they'll have a good idea what people use, and thus make it simpler for new players. If they never open up customization I'll be surprised -- I can only assume they are withholding it for the sake of encouraging feedback and suggestions.
Overall ladder rankings - yes it's about the divisions, sort of. Divisions are fine, but we need an OVERALL view. Let's say I'm #1 in division 14 (I think that's where I was before last reset), I want to be able to see what that makes me on the entire server, without having to go to a 3rd party site like www.starcraftrankings.com The proleague is, as far as I understand, invite only and I'm sure it will be great, but if I was a competitive but not top 0.0001% player, I'd be pissed. Which, depending on how seriously I end up playing this game, is precisely what I might be.
I agree that the division system is lame as it is, for exactly the reasons you mention, but I also think that having one massive ladder is psychologically too intimidating. It's great for those few who manage to get to the top, but if you think of the promise of getting a high rank as a "carrot-and-stick" incentive to keep going, it's just not worth it for the average player. Leagues is a great idea in my opinion, but creating new divisions in order to limit the number of people you're pitted against is also a problem since it ruins the achievement. I think each League should have 3-5 divisions at the most, and at that point just expand the lists rather than making new divisions, while at the same time enabling and encouraging the top players from each division to test their skills against each other. This could be done in a number of ways.
Since I do honestly think that Blizzard is onto something interesting with leagues and divisions, I'm going to give them time to make it more interesting as it goes along, since it's a rather complicated and important balancing act to make the ladder feel right for both the regular newcomers and the hardcore vets.
Online replays for WC3: Promised since 2003. How's that one coming Blizzard? Not at all you say? Well fuck you then.
Unlike WC3 however, SC2 is being designed with e-sports in mind down the road, so I think it's more likely that they'll follow through with this around the same time that they get the Proleague, tournaments, clans and e-sports going. At the beginning it would make sense to focus on more immediate and prominent aspects, though, don't you agree?
I would really wager that Blizzard will release a series of major updates to Battle.net with certain themes, such as "Social", "E-sports", "Map editor", etc. and really focus on one aspect at a time, after launch, so that they can market (read: hype) each update and also guide the attention of more casual fans to things that they're doing, rather than scattering various updates together here and there with little fanfare. These big updates will almost be marketed as if they're "mini-expansions" and can be tested by people who opt in.
Clan Support has indeed been promised, but it makes you wonder - what have they been doing with Bnet 2.0? Have they really spent all this time to create a product that is FAR inferior to Bnet 1.0?
The fact that Blizzard set a solid release date and didn't just say "It's done when it's done" tells me that somebody made a hard decision to release the game as "incomplete" with the full knowledge that they'll still implement the same features they always planned to have, with the same timetable that they planned to do it before, except now the game is going to be live in the mean time. If you had to choose between having the unfinished game now, or the complete game a year later, which would you rather have? I'd rather have the unfinished one now. (And yes, that is very likely the choice that Blizzard had to make.)
I trusted Blizzard, but what they have done with Battle.net 2.0 so far has seriously eroded that trust. I will not say anything stupid like "I'm not buying it", because I'd buy it just to play single player even if it didn't even have LAN, but I am saddened by this development =/
If you could learn to sympathize with the choices and challenges of Blizzard, perhaps your sadness would turn into something constructive and more optimistic. It's not ideal, but I thought it was going to be common knowledge that the "Full Game" is only going to be after the whole "Trilogy" is released, and Battle.net is part of that. It will continue to evolve until after the whole trilogy is out, I can pretty much guarantee you that.
Couldn't you make the argument that allowing people to switch servers would open the doorway to massive migrations of players from one server to another? And wouldn't this would mean a failure to truly stress test each region by itself? I realize it's not a time issue, but it may be a testing issue.
Region lock is fine for beta, region lock is not fine once the product has been released, yet they have said it will be there for the foreseeable future.
Unlike WC3 however, SC2 is being designed with e-sports in mind down the road, so I think it's more likely that they'll follow through with this around the same time that they get the Proleague, tournaments, clans and e-sports going. At the beginning it would make sense to focus on more immediate and prominent aspects, though, don't you agree?
I would, but they aren't doing that. They are implementing facebook. Seriously, if they had the choice between implementing chat channels and online replays, sure, chat channels everytime. But they aren't giving us even the basics :/
If you could learn to sympathize with the choices and challenges of Blizzard, perhaps your sadness would turn into something constructive and more optimistic. It's not ideal, but I thought it was going to be common knowledge that the "Full Game" is only going to be after the whole "Trilogy" is released, and Battle.net is part of that. It will continue to evolve until after the whole trilogy is out, I can pretty much guarantee you that.
There's a difference between "not the full game" and "barely playable" tho.
On May 24 2010 04:38 Cade)Flayer wrote: WC3 BNet: - Clans - Chat channels - Excellent ladder system (at release, it got ruined years later unfortunately probably by the same people doing BNet 2.0) - Can save custom games and come back to them later - Can join any regions server with 1 cdkey - Can make and name custom games rather than them just being anonymous - LAN - Can stream ingame (ie you can watch live games in real time in the game client, this feature is possible because of LAN capability)
BNet 2.0: - Facebook integration
I didn't play wc3, can anyone tell me the difference between it's bnet at the beginning and what it was changed into?
Eh, the in-game streaming in WC3 isn't a Blizzard product, it's a 3rd party tool.
Anyway, I think when WC3 was new it didn't have clan support or automated tournaments, and the automated matchmaking system was different. Some people like the new system, some people don't - I'm not sure what the details are exactly.
I don't think there were many other huge changes as far as features goes tho.
TBH, I think the Facebook interaction is kind of overrated in how much actual development time it takes. All it does is pull your friends' email addresses to see if any of them are battle.net email addresses with SC2 attached, and then sends them a RealID request if so. Aside from the interface elements, I'm pretty confident I could have put together the same thing in half a day's work, and I haven't done any real programming in months.
Not to say that they shouldn't be spending development time on more important things, I just don't think the Facebook interaction is really an indication of "they're spending development time on stuff we don't care about."
@ FA: The difference between the old WC3 AMM and the new one is: The old one really represented your skill level. If you were level 12 and you played an opponent with lv 16 you knew he's better. The game punished more for losses. You lost as many points for a loss as you gained for a win. You couldn't mass games and reach lv 35. You'd still be stuck on your lv 12 with 305-305 record instead of how it is now with some ridiculous lv 50. Edit: just to clarify some more: If you won vs a higher ranked opponent, you received of course more points than you would have vs a similarly skilled opponent. Same goes for losses. If you were lv 12 and lost to a lv 9 you lost more points than if it had been a lv 13 for exemple. When your win ratio went up so did your level. If I remember correctly, it also match you better vs similarly skilled opponents. If you were lv 12 you'd face ppl around lv 9-15. Very very rarely <9 and >16. The main issue with that AMM was the search time. When the pros climbed way up higher into the 25+'s or 30's they seldom had opponents. They searched for hours to find a suitable opponent to play. I'm talking 3h+ here for 1 single 1v1 game.
Take it as you may, IMO that system was a lot better than the grind we have now in TFT.
More on WC3: The retail battle.net had almost everything in it. I think the only things that weren't implemented on time were Tourneys. Later on they added some more commands. edit2: Yeah FA you're right, clans were implemented like 3-4 months after launch, cause I still remeber ppl with accounts like [WoG]Shady etc instead of Shady WoG
Right now I'd sell my soul to have WC3's B.net for SC2 instead of B.net 2.0 The only thing they improved upon is the /time command and the animated UI. Now you have a watch in your bottom right corner. In WC3 you had to type in /time, to check the time every time. The Animated UI probably wasted a few days of my life overall the time I played. You wasted 3s every time you want to join a custom game, just to see some chains moving up and down.
On May 24 2010 07:04 Sent wrote: There are achievements in every game nowadays and I don't see why you would expect there not to be in this one. Also all the of achievements don't require anything other than playing multiplayer and the single player. It has zero effect on your gameplay. It doesn't require you to "Win in under 4 minutes" or anything like that.
Hogging up my screen for 10-15 seconds for every achievement I get is really really annoying. I want a way to disable this pointless shit that I don't want to see.
Blizzard have shown they are now like any other game design studio, a money hungry entity trying to make a game that will sell, not a good game
I believe this statement pretty much sums up the situation. Whatever happened to a gaming company serving repeating customer?
Even as I look at the current position of World of Warcraft, its painfully obvious that Blizzard just comes up with uselessness to throw into that game so people will go to the store and buy the oh-so-needed expansion.
I love achievements they greatly expand the life of many console games I've played. However on PC it's not a big deal because not every PC game has them and to be honest I don't feel there is much effort put in the requirements of getting them. The SC2 ones are pretty boring, just win 5/10/25 games or so. I could do without them, but I don't mind a little bonus like that.
The elo: I have to say that I do like certain things in the current ladder system. I absolutely agree that it is very broken right now. But I do like generally the outline of the system. The ELO and whatnot. I've never used the scoring system behind it but I gather it is very old and very well done. The fact that it is riddled with bugs, doesn't have a global picture and really needs to just have a total server league page not withstanding, I like that over all feel of it.
Privacy: Its a joke to think that with companies like comcast, att, and advertising giants that we have any online privacy at all. Small time internet companies can even track your general location based of your ip and trace route so to think that any online security exists is laughable. Any security failings with facebook are the fault of your facebook security not blizzards using of that service and the terms and conditions are written in such a way to protect the end user. If they need to publish something to the authorities, use voice chat in evidence and what not they need to be free of liability, regardless if they would do such a thing. Breaking privacy concerns for monetary gain in anything but very general information would not be viable as a business model, furthermore any user based gain they could get is already gained by having your email address, so they have that already what need to collect any other information from you?
Chat/social/clan support: Where is the support for this? Totally agree with op and wish that I could see ANY hint that they will have any revolutionary gains in this category. I want in game clan wars. Or hell a clan ladder where you could select members to represent the clan like a bowling team total score. I want chat rooms that are secretive and fun to be a part of like op darkstorm was. I want the endless spam and heckling of general chat. But like has been stated I'm sure SOME of this will come back. But how will it be innovative and better when they aren't even testing the old uses? Where is the web 2.0 as another poster put it in the social concepts of battle.net? As mentioned this may be mega patched in. But a patch is like a band aid, it fixes something that is broken. Why is it broken? Totally agree.
With that being said, in a game like this, lag will always be around in one form or another and can't be completely defeated. So we appreciate any additional information you can provide on when, how, or the frequency in which you are experiencing lag. -Benzenn
Neat trick if you put both of them side by side you should be able to feel your blood pressure rise 40 points. Dont do it to long though or else it will cause retinal damage.
As a part of that, we feel like LAN is not necessary feature. -Sagaty
With that being said, in a game like this, lag will always be around in one form or another and can't be completely defeated. -Benzenn
On May 26 2010 06:30 Archerofaiur wrote: Another great responce from Blizzard. Its always fun trying to decide whether they have early onset dementia or are just straight up lying to you...
With that being said, in a game like this, lag will always be around in one form or another and can't be completely defeated. So we appreciate any additional information you can provide on when, how, or the frequency in which you are experiencing lag. -Benzenn
Neat trick if you put both of them side by side you should be able to feel your blood pressure rise 20 points.
As a part of that, we feel like LAN is not necessary feature. -Sagaty
With that being said, in a game like this, lag will always be around in one form or another and can't be completely defeated. -Benzenn
That's taken out of context. The OP that spawned that post was talking about how his 'lag' got progressively worse the more he kept playing.
On May 26 2010 06:36 Bibdy wrote: That's taken out of context. The OP that spawned that post was talking about how his 'lag' got progressively worse the more he kept playing.
Explain in what context the game having lag problems and LAN not being a nessisary feature arnt related.
Bnet 2.0 is an unbelievable joke. I still can't wrap my head around this impossible crap. Broodwar Bnet was better. Even War3 Bnet was better. What the heck happened to "improving the good things that worked and omitting the bad stuff".
And regarding the privacy stuff. I advise everybody to NOT use his real name neither in battle.net nor facebook or whereever.
On May 26 2010 06:36 Bibdy wrote: That's taken out of context. The OP that spawned that post was talking about how his 'lag' got progressively worse the more he kept playing.
Explain in what context the game having lag problems and LAN not being a nessisary feature arnt related.
Well for one, those two posts are completely unrelated, considering lag will always be present when playing through the internet.
For two, you're taking it out of context to make it seem like Blizzard are oblivious of the lag issues, when he was just responding to a poster who was talking about a completely different kind of lag problem. More of an FPS issues, most likely caused by his video card overheating, a driver issue, a memory leak or somesuch.
On May 26 2010 06:36 Bibdy wrote: That's taken out of context. The OP that spawned that post was talking about how his 'lag' got progressively worse the more he kept playing.
Explain in what context the game having lag problems and LAN not being a nessisary feature arnt related.
Well for one, those two posts are completely unrelated, considering lag will always be present when playing through the internet.
For two, you're taking it out of context to make it seem like Blizzard are oblivious of the lag issues, when he was just responding to a poster who was talking about a completely different kind of lag problem (most likely his video card overheating).
I think your missing the point. Your not making the connection between a game having lag problems and what a feature like lan offers.
On May 26 2010 06:36 Bibdy wrote: That's taken out of context. The OP that spawned that post was talking about how his 'lag' got progressively worse the more he kept playing.
Explain in what context the game having lag problems and LAN not being a nessisary feature arnt related.
Well for one, those two posts are completely unrelated, considering lag will always be present when playing through the internet.
For two, you're taking it out of context to make it seem like Blizzard are oblivious of the lag issues, when he was just responding to a poster who was talking about a completely different kind of lag problem (most likely his video card overheating).
I think your missing the point.
I see you're point, you're just doing it wrong.
You see LAN as a necessity in general, and because BNet is laggy right now you feel that's further evidence that LAN is necessary.
I feel its just further evidence they need to un-fuck what they broke in Patch 13 to fix the lag issues of BNet and hash out the LAN issue completely separately.
On May 26 2010 06:36 Bibdy wrote: That's taken out of context. The OP that spawned that post was talking about how his 'lag' got progressively worse the more he kept playing.
Explain in what context the game having lag problems and LAN not being a nessisary feature arnt related.
Well for one, those two posts are completely unrelated, considering lag will always be present when playing through the internet.
For two, you're taking it out of context to make it seem like Blizzard are oblivious of the lag issues, when he was just responding to a poster who was talking about a completely different kind of lag problem (most likely his video card overheating).
I think your missing the point.
I see you're point, you're just doing it wrong.
You see LAN as a necessity in general, and because BNet is laggy right now you feel that's further evidence that LAN is necessary.
I feel its just further evidence they need to un-fuck what they broke in Patch 13 to fix the lag issues of BNet and hash out the LAN issue completely separately.
On May 24 2010 03:32 Tef wrote: Did you even read the TL staff message?
We get it - Bnet is having some problems. Please stop making threads about it.
TL is getting littered with these low quality (whine/hate/imbalance) posts nowadays. Maybe I am used to the old BW forum standard.
You mean where there was next to no activity?
TL is supposed to be a StarCraft community. Bnet 2.0 issues are some of the biggest facing the StarCraft community right now. So it should come as no surprise when a bunch of topics concern just that. I personally don't mind as long as the posts are well thought out and written. This topic is.
On May 24 2010 03:32 Tef wrote: Did you even read the TL staff message?
We get it - Bnet is having some problems. Please stop making threads about it.
TL is getting littered with these low quality (whine/hate/imbalance) posts nowadays. Maybe I am used to the old BW forum standard.
You mean where there was next to no activity?
TL is supposed to be a StarCraft community. Bnet 2.0 issues are some of the biggest facing the StarCraft community right now. So it should come as no surprise when a bunch of topics concern just that. I personally don't mind as long as the posts are well thought out and written. This topic is.
Yah but its pointless. Blizzard knows how we feel and has all but given us the EA [censored].
So I decided to play a UMS by myself and what do you know, I've now got the drop-player screen up ... for myself pretty awesome that you can lag playing a game by yourself
EPT![[image loading]](http://img535.imageshack.us/img535/9186/azb9so.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img109.imageshack.us/img109/1213/battlenetavatars.jpg){kind=avatar}
![[image loading]](http://img202.imageshack.us/img202/2166/battlenetim.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img35.imageshack.us/img35/6474/38332655.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img686.imageshack.us/img686/1298/n1019347999302934985503.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/kQk61.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/ZUTgF.png)
![[image loading]](http://i49.tinypic.com/4q6gch.jpg)
