|
On May 25 2010 20:42 StarStruck wrote:
The question should be, "did he try inviting anyone on his friend list into the game", if he has any at all because then his statement would only be a half-truth.
Note: I cannot host or invite friends to any custom made games at the moment. -_-
Would be a lot easier if you quoted the post you are responding to.
Your issues might be related to the fact that Blizzard had to disable the map publishing system due to malfunction.
|
On May 25 2010 19:22 Eury wrote:Show nested quote +On May 25 2010 19:07 FrozenArbiter wrote:On May 25 2010 19:00 Eury wrote:On May 25 2010 18:51 Garrl wrote:
I was going to play SC2 UMS, but BW ladder once SC2 releases, but not now, after reading this thread. :\ Oh, and what hugely popular BlizzardActivision game doesn't allow any custom content? Modern Warfare 2. Call me crazy, but Activision really sound like they're imposing upon Blizzard now. SC 2 has better mod/map support than any previous Blizzard title. Take what you read on these forums with a grain of salt. There have been a lot sky is falling posts lately. By removing local hosting of maps (assuming this is their final solution, and not just a temporary beta state), they have effectively negated any advancements they made in other areas... negated, and more. That's your very subjective opinion though. I think for the vast majority local hosting of maps won't effect them. The benefits of the map publishing system outweighs the disadvantages for most users.
Those people who aren't affected by these limitations won't notice those improvements in mod support blizzard made over wc3 editor. Your attempt to refute Jinro's argument makes no sense.
And what is this vast majority you keep talking about in every topic. Who are those people? Do you keep them in basement and constantly poll them on their opinion on SC2?
What makes you think that your opinion - that happens to constantly contradict opinion of respected community members and of majority of tl.net users - represent the opinion of sc2 player base?
|
Russian Federation327 Posts
Actually Blizzards can be considered as monopoly, so they can do whatever they want. It is problem of game industry as the whole, it lacks good games (I can barely name few descent RTS for past 3-4 years). I'm sure, even if they add pop-up banners on bnet the sales of SCII still will be high. We haven't choice as well as any leverage to push blizzards. Just cross your fingers that they wasn't totally WoWed away.
|
I thought it was pretty obvious who I was responding to.
...
...
You.
And in reply to your last statement. No, I logged on right when the patch went up. I haven't been able to host or join my friends since the release of patch and tried a few times for the last few days. Therefore this is before they addressed the issue.
Not to mention, the constant freezing ingame. I haven't been able to play finish one game as of yet.
|
The fact is, is that Blizzard is not "catering to the casual player because they want to make money". The fact is, is that they are unwilling to provide basic, fundamental features to us because they want control. Total control.
I really couldn't have said this any better. Kudos on a great post.
|
|
|
I have a few things to add.
- Maps are sorted by popularity, with (currently) no way to sort them otherwise. There may never be. Or popularity sort may be the default way. This means your fledgeling new map will be on page 371 of the map list and will simply have nobody joining. And because nobody joins, it will never get more popular.
IN WAR3: maps were equal on the game screen. Just wait a while and people will join.
- The much hyped keyboard controls are unusable online due to some sort of built in lag far beyond the 150ms default lag. It takes about a second for your unit to respond. That Starcraft Ghost map at Blizzcon? The top down shooter? Both maps are completely impossible in the actual game, only if you test them locally in the editor. (Bonus fact: they said there would be mouse control, but no - you can't lock the camera to a unit or even move it under mouse control so it's useless)
IN WAR3: keyboard controls were clunky, but not in this way. Not in this way.
- Region locking for published maps! If you have an Euro account, you can only publish maps in Europe. To publish them elsewhere, you need to ...buy more accounts. Gee, I wonder why this would be.
Either they have nobody working there who cares about custom maps or they just want to create a walled garden so they can control everything and probably monetise the hell out of it at some point.
I'm sure Blizzard has some premium service in mind with way less restrictions when it comes to size and amount of files, but the default service is way too restricted.
Oh... oh... you may be right. That may the hell be it. The whole point is so they can sell expanded space, playability be damned (it ruined keyboard controls).
|
Good post, IskatuMesk. I've been waiting for a big post from you for quite some time, and I'm glad I wasn't disappointed. I agree with everything here.
|
It's silly seeing wciii have easier better working custom map playing system than 2010 game.
Sure it's still beta but you would think they would improve something old instead of make it this pile of shit.
|
Xanrae >
Jesus Christ and the Ladderday Saints. That's a whole lotta shit right there. Especially regionally locked maps.
Back in wc3 we played a map called "Map Tong Hop", which was a Chinese map I think. It was hilarious. But that would be published on the Asian server, no? We did get it from a forum, but most maps like this would be extremely hard if not impossible for us to obtain with this new, ridiculous system.
|
this is very true, blizzard needs to understand the consumers are in control, not them. I am reconsidering buying starcraft, just because of the the direction blizzard is taking with removing the most fundamental and basic features, for their own filthy rich pockets. I did not expect to see the 'WoW' Greedy Blizzard in SC, but apparently once they tasted that cash it spread to the SC developers as well. Disappointed is an understatement, and the once great Blizzard which cared about actual game quality and consumers is now just another greedy filth company after tasting success from WoW.
|
On May 24 2010 10:03 Azarkon wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2010 10:00 synapse wrote:
Took the time to read, and I completely agree. BNet 2.0 just isn't impressive - it seems as if they took 2 graphics designers and told them to create the BNet user interface ~.~ Isn't impressive? BNET 2.0 is one of the worst things that's happened to RTS games. Unless everything we're seeing right now is going to be completely revamped upon release, it's a clear win for Corporate America(tm) and a clear loss for gamers. Honestly, outside the ranking system and auto-matching based on rank, which isn't even that good (ICCUP showed how to do it right, already), what has BNET 2.0 added that is actually meaningful and useful? All I see are more and more attempts to control the community and the players, while distracting them with such "Microsoft 2.0" concepts like achievements and Facebook integration. I don't know. Maybe I'm missing something and it's all part of a grand plan that has yet to be unveiled, and which will make believers out of us all. But at this point I'm starting to doubt it.
/signed both of these posts(OP and this quote by Azarkon), 999million times.
The mesk must be honored for his great wisdom bestowed upon him!
|
I totally agree. Although I do not mod maps any longer, I used to do it as a hobby in WC3. The first thing I thought when I clicked on the "custom game" button in the SC2 Beta was "Oh, they must be using this silly layout in order to make it easier to find games to play for the beta while the map pool is still restricted." I simply did not see how custom maps would even be at all practical while this system was in use.
|
On May 24 2010 09:34 IskatuMesk wrote:+ Show Spoiler +
I don't care about "Casuals". That term isn't even used properly. Casuals are a stereotype Blizzard has employed so they can ignore the fanbase as a whole and strike up deals with Facebook. Everyone blames this on the "Casual" player but in reality we are all casual players unless we are those slanty-eyed heroes in booths throughout the OSL or WCG.
I am a Casual Player. I spend every waking moment of every day contributing to an overall overarching gameplan of modmaking and custom content, or working on my novel. I have been producing custom projects for 10 years. I am still a casual player because I am doing this for my own enjoyment and nothing more. The second you turn away from that and start thinking about your wallet instead of yourself you aren't casual anymore and you have lost sight about what this entire devotion is for.
The fact is, is that Blizzard is not "catering to the casual player because they want to make money". The fact is, is that they are unwilling to provide basic, fundamental features to us because they want control. Total control. I am sure that by release these restrictions will alleviate to a degree but I doubt local hosting, game names, some things CRITICAL to the growth and progression of custom content will ever make it in.
I want your babies.
This was to me a fantastic read IskatuMesk. The decisions Blizzard was making for Sc2 concerning custom maps, Ladder Divisions, and Battle.net confused me, but the word I was looking for was control.
|
So I was over at my friend's dorm today, and he was installing WoW. While updating to the latest patch or w/e, I caught a glimpse of the patch notes.
It was mentioned that they implemented some fancy new method of finding a raid or something, and basically people from different Realms (servers) could play together in the same dungeon. I was taken aback, why the fuck do they not implement this in SC2?
Also Iskatu you're my hero
|
The dungeon finder on WoW is still region limited and just to the servers in your battlegroup (server cluster), there just needs to be a gateway selection at login in SC2 and maps to be mirrored to other regions if they want to do it this way.
|
Wow that's amazing. Hopefully Blizzard hasn't closed their ears to people like you 
Keep fighting the good fight, best of luck to you
|
If I could just guess at why they aren't allowing local hosting, here are a couple thoughts:
- We all know that Blizzard plans to add in features that allow users to publish maps+mods for money(eventually). It'll be similar to the Apple App Store, where Blizzard takes a percentage of the profits. I bet they'll want you to purchase some sort of developer account/license, and with that, you'll get the ability to host much bigger maps+mods(and more of them), as well as the ability to charge for your content. Overall, I see this as a really cool, positive thing.
- Because the content is eventually going to be paid, it means they have to worry about PIRACY of maps and mods. This is why they don't want local hosting. They don't want you to be able to download a $2.99 map and then re-host it locally to other users.
I can see where they're going with this, and I like some of it, but everything just feels really... console-y instead of pc-y, which is a huge shame. They've got time to fix it though, eventually, so let's just see where this goes. Right now the 5 map 25mb limit is just plain RIDICULOUS though.
|
Is it true that they censored the word "come" like you say about "God", "suicide" and "blow"?
|
On May 31 2010 02:44 ElectricGrandpa wrote:
If I could just guess at why they aren't allowing local hosting, here are a couple thoughts:
- We all know that Blizzard plans to add in features that allow users to publish maps+mods for money(eventually). It'll be similar to the Apple App Store, where Blizzard takes a percentage of the profits. I bet they'll want you to purchase some sort of developer account/license, and with that, you'll get the ability to host much bigger maps+mods(and more of them), as well as the ability to charge for your content. Overall, I see this as a really cool, positive thing.
- Because the content is eventually going to be paid, it means they have to worry about PIRACY of maps and mods. This is why they don't want local hosting. They don't want you to be able to download a $2.99 map and then re-host it locally to other users.
I can see where they're going with this, and I like some of it, but everything just feels really... console-y instead of pc-y, which is a huge shame. They've got time to fix it though, eventually, so let's just see where this goes. Right now the 5 map 25mb limit is just plain RIDICULOUS though.
How is this a good thing? Blizzard is going to have their boots on the throats of devs... we've already seen they're willing to make ludicrous decisions like blocking a map with the word god IN THE CODE.
Also, what on earth makes you think a closed development environment is necessary to sell the maps? A) Android has no protection against piracy whatsoever and their app market is thriving. B) Blizzard is going to have to police the system for pirate maps just as much as they would with an open environment. There's nothing stopping you from changing the title and publishing a pay map as your own except blizz manually taking it down.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
